What do you consider as the best martial art in the world?

Originally posted by Badge01
It is an expression of Qi, but it is not 'the same' since Qi is considered a more encompassing term.

Also, it has nothing to do with 'Quantum effects' which are defined as only acting at the sub-atomic distance.

Anyone telling you that it is, is a charlatan and a fake. They use this term to avoid disclosing their ignorance because it is 'mysterious'.

That's a very limited statement defining quantum physics - without getting into concepts of remote action, superluminal and multipresent properties, the effect of the observer on the observed, 3G/Hilmer space/bohm pilot waves/feddback mechanisms and the applicability of the laws of thermodynamics depending on which dimension - I'll just repeat that knowing it intellectually might help get you there, or hinder you but it won't suffice on it's own.

The characteristic of the observer on the observed is the very characteristic that make experimantal quantum physics so difficult for scientists - because their training always emphasised objectivity. But when the field is affected by the observer, objectivity is not possible and the subjective elements must be an inclusive part of the theory.

We affect the world around us not just by our presence, actions and existence - but also by our thoughts, feelings and perceptions. It happens at a sub-atomic scale but remember that everything that materially exists is completely made from sub-atomic particles.

Learning how to use focus, intent and consciousness to affect matter IS only the secret to chi kung. Learning how to use it in everything else in life is only the secret to personal empowerment and self determination.

Experience of it is the only way to really identify it. It is not necessary to know how a car works to drive one - and if you don't believe the car will work, it's going to be more difficult to drive.

To cause a change in matter - say a break - it is not necessary that I affect every part of the block - I only need to affect the parts of the block that I want to seperate. I only need to affect the bonds between particles holding the block together in the place where I want it to seperate. If that occurs at the sub atomic level, then according to quantum physics - I can use the power of focus, intent and conciousness to effect that change.

It's more efficient use of energy as well. Why fell a tree with a hammer to when you can use an axe - and why use an axe when you can use a saw . . . . .

Originally posted by Badge01
Qi is a physical phenomenon and is explainable in physical and mechanical terms in regard to martial arts. It simply means 'breath/essence' in the Chinese interpretation. It's only given some 'mysterious' connotation by Westerners who don't understand it.

No, conventional physics has no way to explain it since it does not include the aspects of sentience and conciousness. Quantum physics however, does.

Originally posted by Badge01
If you want more information see the Neijia list which discusses all this in detail and has a lot of English educated Chinese participants and has been in existence for many years.

HTH.

Jings: (note some of these are are called 'jings' but many are just techniques which use the core strength of the Neijia arts.

Borrowing
Close-up
Cold
Controlling
Cutting
Deflecting
Distance
Drawing-up
Fine
Folding
Following
Inches
Interrupting
Listening
Neutralizing
Open-up
Rolling
Rubbing
Sinking
Spiral
Sticking
Twisting
Uprooting
Vibrating Bouncing
Vibrating


[edit on 24-6-2008 by Badge01]

Interesting how all those categories are qualitative characteristics isn't it.

Originally posted by Badge01
It is an expression of Qi, but it is not 'the same' since Qi is considered a more encompassing term.

Exactly. It encompasses the others - it is not seperate from them.



[edit on 24-6-2008 by News Junki

[edit on 24-6-2008 by News Junkie]

Anyway . . . .

In my humble opinion, a genuine teacher of internal arts will begin by teaching breathing based meditation and chi kung and integrate martial arts into it.

reply to post by News Junkie
As far as true Tai Chi only using the medical aspect, i have to strongly disagree. The first art i studied was Tai Chi, and my teacher was a little old chinese man who barely spoke english. He taught us to focus our Qi into our strikes to make up for strength (or lack of in the case of lighter built people). He taught us speed and agility are far more effective than strength. It may have just been the way he prefered, but he was a very un-orthodox teacher.

Originally posted by News Junkie
Anyway . . . .

In my humble opinion, a genuine teacher of internal arts will begin by teaching breathing based meditation and chi kung and integrate martial arts into it.

That is way anyone who knows what the hell they're doing would teach.

Originally posted by Anuubis
As far as true Tai Chi only using the medical aspect, i have to strongly disagree.

I don't necessarily disagree with you - it's just that I don't make such distinctions - to me chi is just what it is. From the 3 distinctions you made - the medical one is the only one that I recognise according to my experience.

Originally posted by Anuubis
The first art i studied was Tai Chi, and my teacher was a little old chinese man who barely spoke english. He taught us to focus our Qi into our strikes to make up for strength (or lack of in the case of lighter built people). He taught us speed and agility are far more effective than strength. It may have just been the way he prefered, but he was a very un-orthodox teacher.

Now you have my attention.

Did he teach you about circulating chi around your body, storing it, extending it beyond your body into the ground or into an object or weapon?

My own teacher was 2 years my junior and he started teaching me when I was 21. His teacher taught my teacher (and his brother) when they were in their teens. He was one of those people who it is really hard to tell his age - I suspect he was alot older than he looked. In turn, that guy learned it in Singapore after having already been a successful external fighter (he was stationed there as a soldier in the army). He retired from fighting after going 19 years undefeated. He only taught me teacher because my teacher would pester him endlessly whenever he was on guard duty at the local army base.

This soldier eventually left the army and the last time I spoke with him about martial arts he said he would like to teach his young son the Taiaha as a martial art. I asked why that particular weapon and he said because it involved the same quiet, calm state of mind.

Tai Chi was incorporated into our training - in fact the beginning of a training session or meditation almost always began by "chi-ing up". In this we would use the opening move of Tai Chi - raising arms in front of us and bringing towards the body - while drawing in Chi and seeking to attain what we called"the "quiet state".

We used alot of the Tai Chi footwork in what we did too. Turning on the heels and shifting weight completely off a foot before moving it - it was the basis of not telegraphing your moves and also being able to either repeat or retreat a move without shifting balance.

Alot of styles were incorporated into our training but the consistent thing was always the meditative state and the awareness and direction of chi.

I'm not referring to your teacher, we did run across many Tai Chi practitioners who performed all the moves beutifully but on further investigation found their knowledge to be rather shallow.

Sometimes a good teacher can teach you things without you even being aware of what you've learned. Sometimes they must wait for you to attain some particular skill before moving further. My experience has been that if they are genuine, they do not hold back their knowledge - if you are ready for it.

[edit on 24-6-2008 by News Junkie]

[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

reply to post by News Junkie


So have you learnt some Chinese styles?
I am a little wary of chinese medicine and acupunture, my experiences of it have been negative.
Its very interesting what you say. My martial training has been entirely through Japanese martial arts. Which do tend to focus on technique rather than meditation.

Originally posted by Dr X
So have you learnt some Chinese styles?

It would be more honest to say that I was taught techniques taken from various styles rather than styles in their entirety. Most of the techniques we used were conservative in movement - compact would be a better term. While we did practice some high kicking - most were aimed below the solar plexus. Standard type stuff using heel, ball of foot, instep, outside of foot and spearfoot.

Stances were varied depending on the style of opponent. With Eagle Claw moves we tended to use wide and low footwork. With other animal style moves like snake we tended to use narrower taller stances. For fighting a sport or tournament trained opponents cat stances and positioning/fighting offset from the opponents centreline was advantageous.

Then sometimes we'd combine mmoves from 2 different styles into one moves - e.g. a monkey fist to the teeth flicked over into a dragon claw clasping the lower lip with the index and middle fingers inside the lower lip and the thumb clamped up under the chin. This was a stun and hold technique - only to be followed by ripping the lip downward if the opponent wasn't subdued by the pain - in which case the nerve damage should be enough to render them unconcious.

We'd practice spear finger techniques (on gravel filled bags), designed to penetrate skin and muscle combined with clawing, gripping and ripping - e.g. grabbing hold of a floating rib is very effective in crowd situations when you don't want to draw attention to what you are doing - it's quite a paralysing hold and since it tends to spasm the diaphragm, the subject is usually unable to utter a sound.

Similarly for hand techniques to throat, clavicles, abdomen, groin etc.

Locks and holds were mainly from the Eagle Claw style.

Blocks were considered strikes and the intent was to break bones with the block.

Much of the training was conditioning for getting struck.

Many of the moves I don't know the names for or what style they may have originated from.

Then there were styles in which your state of mind dictated what you did. e.g. mind like the moon was an evasive style of hand movements where movements were crescent shaped - it was usually coupled with cat and L stances since they were quite effective for getting you off the centreline of sport style opponents. Most of them can't generate much power off their centreline. Another mindset was stone giant.

You can see from the couple of examples given above that this was most definitely not a sport or tournament oriented training. Some have made much of the value of full contact training, however I think you'll agree that would be very dangerous considering the techniques we were using.

So in the Tai Chi tradition, training under the "slow is fast" philosophy was implemented for much of the practice. You'ld gradually work it up to full speed.

Fight Psychology was thrown in - how to influence your opponents state of mind with subtle and not so subtle actions or non-actions.

Our objective was to disable the opponent within 1-3 seconds - not fight them. Important for fighting groups. Survival stuff.

Technique was not as important as integration of mind and body. The common theme after learning to meditate, sense and circulate chi, was to reach physical exhaustion - where your mind gives orders and your body protests. A very inefficient state of affairs as much energy is lost fighting this internal battle. You push on through and then your co-ordintation leaves you. If you manage to get through that by accepting the discomfort instead of resisting it, you enter a kind of dissociative state. Co-ordination returns but the discomfort becomes diminished - you're still aware of it, but it doesn't sap your energy and doesn't distract you. The world seems to slow down and movements become relaxed and effortless. . . . my teacher would say that this is when the real training began

[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

Originally posted by Dr XI am a little wary of chinese medicine and acupunture, my experiences of it have been negative.

My teacher used to say that if he was sick he'd look to Eastern medicine but if he was injured he'd look to Western medicine.

Again, alot of it is down to the practitioner. There are acupuncturists and then there are acupuncturists - just like there are doctors and then there are doctors.

Acupunture is only one level removed from the bottom rung in Chinese medicine. Here a site giving one opinion of that hierachy www.chinesemedicinesampler.com...

Originally posted by Dr X
Its very interesting what you say. My martial training has been entirely through Japanese martial arts. Which do tend to focus on technique rather than meditation.

There is no wrong way to get there, but there is a long way and short way.

There are probably very good cultural and historical reasons why there is this difference in what is taught and when - I could speculate but would probably tie myself up in knots doing so.

I would only add that there are far fewer people at the higher end of the arts than at the beginner end - so to a large extent, this knowledge has been lost to many of the styles - even many that would call themselves internal - due to a lack of practioners learning and teaching it.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

Some video clips for you . . . .

homepages.ihug.co.nz...

and a select break

homepages.ihug.co.nz...

BTW, this is not me - it is someone I learned from.


[edit on 25-6-2008 by News Junkie]

reply to post by News Junkie
He taught us to draw in the energy from everything around us, most importantly our opponent, and release it in our strikes. He taught very few kicks, but he emphasised palm strikes because it kept us closer to our foe and made it easier to draw all their energy so as to weaken them. I think it was because most styles have lots of kicks, like Tae Kwon Do, which has almost no hand strikes. He did incorporate some Tiger strikes and some grapple techniques from Mantis though.



[edit on 25-6-2008 by Anuubis]

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Anuubis]

Originally posted by News Junkie

Always? . . .

Others are revolted
I am unmoved
Gripped by desires
I am unmoved
Hearing the wisdom of sages
I am unmoved

I move only in my own way

Da Mo

[edit on 23-6-2008 by News Junkie]
To truly know the light, one must escape the dark.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Anuubis]

Im currently studying WunYuen which i personally beleive to be one of the best striking systems in the world that i have encounterd so far, as in ease of execution, learning and power generated from stikes. www.wunyuen.kungfu.net.au

Im also studying Hapkido and currently hold a First dan Blackbelt In a Freestlye Karate system called Toodokan, im searching for a good quality Jui Jitsu school at the moment. I have had one cage fight which i lost on decission (alot of people told me that i had won as i landed majority of my stikes, and defended most of his strikes and all submissions, the only reason he won was that he was more aggresive, with more take downs, i just wanted to bang away cause that was my major style, only in the last 60 secs of round 2 i got a bit angry and footy tackled this guy and dropped him on his head and mounted him, but couldnt get tapout!)

Im personally of the opion that there is no one great martial art system, alot of arts offer different systems, beleifs, opions, rules, lifestyle's etc.
And most of the time are very similar (evan though they like to think that they are unique) the human body can only move so many ways!
You aslo have to consider in which enviroment the style or system was created, is it an art of war, sport or personal protection? for example you wouldn't take olympic gold medalist in taekwondo, and place him against an Elite Forces (any millitary) soldier, No rules, kill or be killed!

So in answer to your question there is no best martial art, or sytem, only Best Martial Artist and appropriate response, force for given situation.

its not about whats the best...its about whats the best for you....alot of people everywhere and even in this thread state that _________ is the best when in reality, all martial arts are equal....a shaolin monk could be put up against a karate master and still there would be a 50 50 chance...id like also to throw in my favourite martial art which is AIKIDO....its not only a fighting system but also a philosophical mindset...we emphasize simple movements that utilize the opponents energy agaist them....our goal is not to hurt the opponent but to neutralize the situation before it escalates further....aikido is a very peaceful martial art.... youtube is a good place to see all these martial arts in action. i suggest getting a list of martial arts and seeing which one you like the best....

-normec(anon)

The best martial art to dat e is KaJuKenBo. It is a MMA (Mixed Martial Art).
for more info visit

www.kajukenbo.org...

www.kajukenbo.ca...

reply to post by citizen smith


That is no way an ecky thump master, but some pitiful imposter.
His hat is far too small, as shown by this rare picture of the Grand Master of Ecky Thump, Master William of Oddy: www.pbase.com...

I think the best martial art is Hojuku, the art of the long rifle.

reply to post by Northern Raider

A traditional Koryū school lists Hojutsu - The Art of Gunnery.

Like a Japanese Tea Ceremony it would include all aspects of building, firing and operation of the traditional flint-lock type of weapon. It's believed they copied the design from Portuguese explorers.

(A segue of interest is that little Portugal was about 100 years in advance of the rest of Europe in the development of sailing and oceanic exploration).

It was first started in the 1500s and in 1575 at the Battle of Nagashino were used by the peasants against the Samurai.

The battle featured in Tom Cruise's movie Last Samurai was based on the one in 1877, the Satsuma Rebellion led by Saigō Takamori, where the Imperial troops used Springfields and Mausers, probably surplus from the Civil War. (according to IMdB).

See link above:

At the beginning of the movie the Japanese soldiers that are trained by the Americans are using American made Model 1861 Springfield rifle muskets and British made Pattern 1853 Enfield rifle muskets

At the final battle however, the now better trained and better equipped army can be seen using Prussian made Gewehr 1871 bolt action Mausers, a single shot bolt action black powder cartridge rifle.

To compare and contrast, a very skilled flintlock user in the early Americas would be able to fire and reload his weapon in about 15 seconds.

en.wikipedia.org...

Here's a really interesting video showing a reinactment of Hojutsu.



Though this is a bit off the subject of 'best martial art', arguably, combat pistolcraft the modern incarnation of Hojutsu is a very effective martial discipline.

It involves recognizing the charatistics of a weapon, how to load, what the stopping power is, how the weapon works, how to draw and carry your weapon, and how to deal with an armed attacker.

One effective method is to prevent the attacker from accessing his weapon in the sheath. Another method that I pioneered is to define how to grapple with a gun, using brazilian jiu-jitsu.

There are three phases, including:
1. Accessing your weapon if taken down;
2. Wall grappling;
3. Weapon retention and draw prevention.

Hope this is of interest.

I practise the Yang 108 Tai Chi form and the lu chan.

I have also studied systema, bagua etc.

It is important to realise that martial arts are tools an individual uses to create their own system of self defense.

Tai chi, Karate etc are systems built to help one develop good movement, reation etc, these alone are not complete self defence systems.

A system of self defence must be developed by the individual alone.
One does this by drawing from the methods and techniques taught by martial art systems.