It's not so much the style...

Master Luo often says: "It's not so much the style, it's how you train".

As I often expound upon my students, there is no one, 'master', style. I always say that whatever style works best for you, is the best style. For example, I know of some taiji quan (tai chi chuan) practitioners who are extremely adept at street combat in the most practical and profound way. Most people think of taiji as an old person's, 'moving meditation'. No, no, no... Taiji is a very difficult set of concepts based on the principles of water, and in fact, is not so much a martial art, but rather, a set of ideas. Any style can be slowed down, said principles applied, and presto! Taiji. There are styles that are associated with taiji, and, as I have just said, none of them are superior to the others. It is merely improper training methods, a lack of understanding, and a disregard for what these arts were originally intended for that makes one appear superior to the others in the eyes of a particular person. Some of the greatest warriors/combatants I have ever touched hands with are/were taiji practitioners. Make no mistake, taiji is pure combat.

As we lose touch with our bodies with the increasing reliance on technology, health problems that were once non-existent, start to become more and more prevalent in our everyday lives. I attribute most modern day health issues to stress, fatigue, and psychological issues in general. So yes, the combat aspects of taiji have become almost obsolete, they are no longer important when compared to the need for just good old fashioned, 'healthiness'.

Most Chinese martial arts schools have begun to fall into this category. This is not a bad thing, but an unseen tragedy in my eyes. The average Chinese martial arts school is merely a program of light cardiovascular exercise, stretches, some basic conditioning, a hand full of street defense techniques (that are rarely touched upon, and often times, impractical to say the least), if you're lucky, and a bunch of hand and weapon forms, that, without the understanding of what they are used for, are nothing more than an ancient set of battlefield dance routines.

I currently teach one of the most brutal, and downright vicious, styles of martial arts, Chinese or otherwise, practiced today, 'White Eyebrow'. All of the attacks are to the eyes, throat, nerve centers on, and around the face, floating ribs, groin, and solar plexus. Now, if it is taught in the manner that most contemporary schools teach, none of this would be shown to the typical student. We could simply review the routines, never touch upon what they are used for, and it'll be nothing more than dance. The only difference between dance and martial arts is one simple thing, intent. When you are performing kung-fu, you must imagine what you are doing, you must visualize what is happening, you must wish it upon your imaginary opponent. Otherwise? Otherwise, it is simply WRONG. It is no longer kung-fu, it is dance. Nothing more, nothing less. This is the absolute truth.

When I watch someone perform a routine or set, I watch their eyes more often than not. I generally measure their true understanding by this method of observation. I respect physical ability, coordination and pure athleticism, who doesn't? But in the end? I don't care so much how flexible, strong or fast they are, I care if they UNDERSTAND what they are doing, their intent, their purpose. This is what makes good kung-fu. There is nothing wrong with waving your arms around and leaping about like a crazy person. I enjoy dance as much as the next person and I consider myself an amateur dance enthusiast with absolutely no shame at all. But that is NOT why I practice martial arts. Yes, it is true, I find Chinese martial arts (kung-fu) to be the most aesthetically pleasing of all of the asian martial arts, and, yes, this is a factor as far as me deciding to dedicate myself to a life long study of these particular arts, but it is a tiny and unimportant factor. Chinese martial arts just, 'work', for me. Straight up, straight down. I fell in love with them the moment I saw them. The training methods I have been exposed to just make perfect sense to me in every possible way, and if they didn't? I'd have abandoned them a long time ago. It's a shame so many Chinese martial 'dance' schools have taken the forefront. But, it was inevitable I suppose. The days of the scholar warrior are long gone, and I am one of the last of the, proverbial, 'Mohicans'.

Things change, this is the only thing that ever remains the same. Nothing ever stays the same except for this one principle, this is the only constant, and other than birth and death? The only guarantee we are ever granted. The need for swordsmanship is obsolete, the need for mastering the art of the spear or halberd is completely unnecessary. However, the need for being able to disarm someone with a knife, has not lost it's appeal, as it is still a threat in modern times. While the battlefield has changed beyond anything the ancient masters could have ever imagined, or even comprehend (for that matter), this does not mean that mastering the art of the blade, staff, or spear, is in fact, useless. These weapons develop hand-eye coordination, reflexes, muscular/tendon/ligament conditioning not found in other exercises, practical hand strength, callousing, and a form of self expression not found in, 'empty hand', routines. After practicing with a certain weapon for long periods of time, the practitioner no longer finds the weapon to be a tool, but rather, an extension of their own body, and in turn, their mind, spirit, and soul. It is no different than when someone has a particular car, pair of jeans, or hat that just suits them in a way that they cannot describe with mere words. It becomes a part of their personality to such an extent, that even others cannot imagine them without it.

In the end, styles are perfect, people are not. Some styles favor re-directive techniques that open their opponent to further attack, while others rely completely on offense, relentlessly assaulting their enemy until they are defeated, incapacitated, or flee. None of these styles, ideas, or approaches are, 'wrong', or, 'better', it's just that they happen to work better for some people than others. Often times, it is nothing more than a personality thing. Some people tend to be more passive and non-confrontational, while others, (like myself) tend to be hyper aggressive, high energy and more, 'take it to their chin'. The way you train, the way you are taught, and the way you practice when you are alone is what makes your chosen style, 'the best'. I've seen schools that are focused only on killing, maiming, crippling and pure unadulterated combat. They do very little form or hand routine practice, but do not discard it completely, as they understand the importance of the coordination that is learned from this particular method of training. At the same time, I've encountered schools that are purely spiritual, practicing meditation, reciting Buddhist/Daoist scriptures, and even having to write papers on philosophy. But even they, still sparred, as they realize, in the end, it is still 'martial' arts that they practice. Like I said before, some the taiji practitioners I've known, start their class with an eight mile run, one hundred push ups, tons of conditioning, and then an hour of sparring. And on the opposite end of the spectrum, I've met students of the Northern Shaolin system, famous for hard combat and brutal conditioning, who do nothing more than stretch, practice breathing exercises, review empty hand routines and NEVER spar. You tell me who's training is, 'better'? I'd bet my money on the so called, 'moving meditation', taiji school. Not the, 'family fun moving yoga martial dance academy'.

"It's not so much the style, but how you train".