Cross Training vs. Style Evolution
What's the difference between "cross training" and "style evolution"? Will you call that "evolution" if you change your Judo training from qi to no-gi?
If you train boxing, MT, wrestling, BJJ, and integrate those different skills into your own body, that's "cross training". If you select a major style such as wrestling and integrate boxing, MT, and BJJ into it by changing the basic wrestling training method, that's "style evolution" by my definition.
For example, if you use kick, punch, arm bridge, leg bite, downward separate hands to set up your "single leg", you train yourself this way, you also train others this way, you have brought something new into the wrestling system. You have just changed your sport wrestling into combat wrestling by integrating other combat elements into it. To me, that's "style evolution".
The difference between "cross training" and "style evolution" is whether you only care about yourself, or whether you also care about to "enhance" your major system by changing the basic training method. By using the TCMA term. you have just created some new forms (or introduce some new principles) into you evolved style for the future generation. If your style has 3 forms, why not create the 4th and 5th forms (or create a set of new drills) so the future generation can have much broad view of your originall style?
If the style of BJJ can be evolved from other system, all TCMA styles can be evolved in the 21th centry too. How hard will it be to integrate "single leg", "hip throw", "arm bar", "leg bar", ... into your current system by using your particular style technique to set up those moves?
Do you think we should keep our TCMA systems pure or should we "evolve"? What's your opinion on this?
1. evolution of a school/style
originally, it is called gate or men or school and not so much style.
each school has core practice, core principles,
then more and more stuff may be added on but compliment the core practice.
such as ba ji men
depending on the lineage, some added shaolin inner court boxing
some added pi gua, ---
some added jin gang 8 postures
over time, the school will incorporate so much material from outside
---
but do we practice all of them, probably not.
however, some good ideas or practices were borrowed or exist across many schools.
2. crossing training happens at 2 levels
a. exchange between or among schools, such as xing yi, ba gua, tai chi
b. individual practitioner brings along or add more from his prior experience
so at the school level or at the individual level.
I teach you this and you teach me that in exchange etc etc.
--
evolution of a school or style
usually over several generations of dedicated practitioners
many and many people contribute to it.
1. convergence, different things are summarized to the same ideas (practices and principles)
2. divergence or derivatives, from one idea we derive more practices--
it goes both ways.
---
All systems of martial arts must evolve, if not they become stagnant. Now take this example in regards to striking. Boxing is considered by many a very effective style of striking. There are four basic punches in boxing- jab, cross, hook, uppercut. There are variations of these and several different combinations, but these are the four basic strikes.
Pretty much all of these you should be able to find in any Kung Fu style, they may have a different name but they have the same mechanics. Now take into account the delivery system and how these techniques are trained in regards to their effectiveness. A boxer can throw a jab and crack someone with it because they have thrown it hundreds of times before on a heavy bag, on mitts, and while sparring someone. If the Kung Fu player has a similiar approach, he will be able to do the same. If he has spent more time posturing, punching air, and performing this jab while doing a form, chances are his delivery system and his ability to use it in a pressure situation went down significantly.
This would be an example I believe of style evolution if you want to call it that. The system already contains the technique, so it's not something added or newly learned, simply a change in delivery system or training method to make it more effective.
Now this can work also for other styles in comparison to Kung Fu. TCMA are for the most part very rooted systems, meaning stance training is an important foundation to build upon. Leg strength and transitioning ability is gained through proper stance training, and is very important for other styles, particurarly grappling. If I am clinched with an opponent and have under/over hook on their arms and they are pushing through and powering, dropping the weight into the front leg similiar to bow and arrow stance and upshifting your weight onto the underhooked arm will throw them off balance, allowing you to follow up with a throw or strike. The movement and dynamics of rooting is what is important, if you want to chop down a tree you start with the trunk, but if it is too strong it will stay uprooted.
I believe people are way into what they believe are "pure" systems, when in reality TCMA, just like all other systems of fighting, are systems put together from various techniques and "training methods" that were developed through trial and error and combat testing. The masters of old would have gladly learned new and improved training methods to deliver their techniques more effectively. Why some here in modern times can't or won't I will never know.
there are many examples of both cross training and evolution of a school.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm97SyXfyoQ
li rui dong incoporated some shaolin stuff (hard) and tai chi together. (also influenced by xing yi and ba gua)
they also practice jin gang 8 postures.
just like ba ji men.
however, ba ji men refined or added some different flavors to jin gang 8 postures.
---
you start with cross training, and when you teach your method, it becomes style evolution.
Quote:Originally Posted by Iron_Eagle_76All systems of martial arts must evolvemartial arts never evolves, only devolves. theres nothing new to learn, only things to relearn.
mma has reached the peak of human fighting knowledge in ten years.
Quote:Originally Posted by bawangmartial arts never evolves, only devolvesYou are wrong!
In the old days people fought with pillows and tickled each other with feathers. It is only nowadays that the Western MMA fighters use their deadly fists and their deadlier kicks, to hurt their opponents......
Don't you know anything about the "realistic" Western scientific fighting methods???
why you hate "western" fighting? you are from western world.
Quote:Originally Posted by bawangwhy you hate "western" fighting? you are from western world.Who said I "hate" Western fighting?
Who said I am from the Western World?
I only hate the Western ignorance of Eastern fighting methodologies.
for 400 years wing chun has not won even a single military entrance exam, out of over 300 winners. you are the one irgnorant about the east, since u chose the sh1ttiest fighting style in the world.
Quote:Originally Posted by bawangfor 400 years wing chun has not won even a single military entrance exam. the winners are all longfst.I am very happy for them.
over 300 winners. not one is wing chun.
Quote:Originally Posted by Hardwork108I only hate the Western ignorance of Eastern fighting methodologies.Yes, you have demonstrated your authoritative knowledge of "Eastern fighting methodologies".
Quote:Originally Posted by bawangover 300 winners. not one is wing chun.That makes me even happier.
What about Chow Gar, Pak Mei, Five Ancestor Fist, Fujian White Crane, Piquazhang, etc?