Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Discuss sparring, training applications in a competition environment, or even in real-life (fighting, self-defence). Please no violence!
And stay on topic.

Moderators: Dvivid, Inga, nyang

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:25 am

Phalanxpursos wrote:.......... paradox means opposites.


paradox, n. something apparently absurd or incredible, yet may be true; a tenet contrary
to recieved opinions.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:32 am

In a way paradox being a form of contradiction entails opposites being at odds with one another, hence the absurdity. Sort of like the term "military intelligence" in the USA, they seem like opposites to me! (half kidding)

I think you are both right.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Monsoon » Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:47 am

If I may offer a simplistic opinion: in the early period of a young person learning a martial art there is likely (but not certainly) going to be an increased feeling of self-efficacy in difficult situations. This may or may not lead the individual into poor assessment of potential dangers. As one learns more, trains harder, gets older, I would like to believe that the pendulum swings the other way to a position where the individual is quite aware of what they are or are not capable of doing, but would vastly prefer to never be in a situation that requires their hard earned skills.

Similarly, there is a certain truth to the idea that inherently violent people rarely have the discipline to learn a martial art beyond their current capacity for mayhem.

Can you learn a martial art and be a pacifist? Of course you can! It would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise, yet even Gandhi advocated violence if that was one's last resort - so go figure! :shock:

Incidentally, paradoxes are neither good nor bad, but simply paradoxes.

Monsoon
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby wpgtaiji » Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:43 am

There is a white elephant in the internal arts. Some teachers attempt to mention it, but then they get scared and never get to the end of it. Others never approach it at all out of outright fear.

While there were a few remarkable people in history who had the skill to subdue an AGGRESSIVE attack that was ON (not an aggressive confrontation, still in the chattering stage, or a local, aggressive, but none life threatening situation) with a non-violent method, I would suggest that 1 or 2 if anyone in the WORLD today, in the martial arts scene can do that trick. I am most assured that not one single person (myself included) can do that from this forum (oh nuts, i offended EVERYONE again :( )

There is a common idea that Yin will defeat Yang, but is this really true? I wonder. Take a dude that knows what he is doing and take him to the point where he is willing to kill you. Do you really think that "non-violent" self defence will do anything to help in that situation? For a try, get a good training partner to attack you with ONE rule: DONT STOP! No one hit methods, just keep attacking until either you or him are down (and give him the pads :) ).

My point is, the other side of that coin is, Yang overcomes Yin (and it has to, by law)! Personally, i prefer my teacher's idea: if you are attacked by Yang, be MORE yang than them. This literally turns their Yang into Yin! LOL It isnt easy, and i am not there yet in my training, but it makes a ton more sense than the alternative.

In the bible, there is a passage: "an eye for an eye". Yes, there are many trite sayings after this, but if we take the bible, it says that if someone wants our eye, we instead, give them theirs! :) (hey, im lutheran! I dont have a priest to correct me :) ) If we fail to deliver his eye (WHEN IT IS ON), then we have failed that person. He has put out a very definite cause, the effect is destruction. As a martial artist, we destroy to heal. That is our responsibility, our morality. But notice, i said ONLY when there is no other choice (as Ghandi said).

Now, if i am wrong, and you are one of those 2 people, my apologies.
wpgtaiji
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:41 pm

There is a common idea that Yin will defeat Yang, but is this really true?


I used to skateboard.
The ground is about as Yang as you can get.

When you fly towards it at very fast speed you have two basic options, be Yang too, or be Yin.
With being Yin you roll and the force is not met directly, you get up and walk away.

I've seen a lot of broken bones from Yang on Yang in this approach.

Rolling (essentially yielding and redirecting) when you hit the ground is not hard to learn or practice, rolling back a punch isn't much different, both take a few years of work with the real thing to get right. Too many in the taijiquan circles don't practice the real thing and so don't get it, but it is not that hard or elusive, it just takes time and dedication and bruises.

For a beginner it is absolutely right to use the Yang verses Yang approach, but that is essentially force on force and calling that taijiquan is like calling a duck a poodle. There is likewise no way that a beginner for something like skateboarding can be expected to fall safely and walk away. I guess that is why people train with wrist guards and helmets. Martial arts is not much different. In the end the Yang on Yang becomes limiting and prevents reaching the advanced stages of training, but it works well for those who don't know what they are doing.

My 2cents on that topic.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby wpgtaiji » Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:12 am

Josh Young wrote:I used to skateboard.
The ground is about as Yang as you can get.

When you fly towards it at very fast speed you have two basic options, be Yang too, or be Yin.
With being Yin you roll and the force is not met directly, you get up and walk away.

I've seen a lot of broken bones from Yang on Yang in this approach.


I would agree with this, except it has nothing to do with yin and yang. I know you think it does, but it shows no relationship. Yang vs Yang cannot happen. Yin and Yang are ALWAYS relative to each other. ALWAYS! I thought it was Dr Yang's books that talk about the scale, but i could be mistaken, but what is Yang vs one thing, may be YIN to something else. And in your example, you are comparing a flying body to the still earth. You are comparing a small human being to a massive earth. And all that changes at the moment of impact.

You MUST talk about what aspects you are comparing, otherwise your comparison is useless.

And again, you compare yang vs yang, without finishing the idea. It is NEVER yang vs yang. I wrote BE MORE YANG which turns their yang into YIN by comparison.

Yin and yang are not static. they are in a constant flux. This is how Erle taught every aspect of his art. Every movement we make (those of us who understand what he was teaching, becauses many dont have a clue) MUST have a change of yin to yang. This is how many of the subtle movements come out (sit back ready after Arn, for example). How many thousands of times i watch people DO that move, but there is rarely a correct change. Just so you know, there is no Sit back ready! It is a moment in the change from Arn to Fishes in 8 (or single whip for those who dont talk about this transition) where there is a change from yin to yang to yin.

Enough of the fundamentals of YIn and Yang. No wonder i am misunderstood! I assume people understand the roots, but it turns out, they only like the tree, and call the tree the roots...

LOL you made me nervous so i checked
wpgtaiji wrote:My point is, the other side of that coin is, Yang overcomes Yin (and it has to, by law)! Personally, i prefer my teacher's idea: if you are attacked by Yang, be MORE yang than them. This literally turns their Yang into Yin! LOL It isnt easy, and i am not there yet in my training, but it makes a ton more sense than the alternative.

there it is..
wpgtaiji
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:35 am

Yin and Yang are ALWAYS relative to each other.


I agree with this, for me it is all about force interaction.

However the example you give, of being more Yang then their Yang, for me is not valid and does not amount to making their Yang Yin in my view.

I just totally disagree with you and think you are saying that if you use force on force that if you use more force than the original force then the original force is or becomes Yin, which I disagree with.

For me what you share here goes against Yin/Yang being dynamic reciprocals that neutralize one another like +1 and -1. For me you are saying if you see a +1 then you become +2 and then that +1 is now yin, which I disagree with because the Yin reciprocal to +2 would be -2, simple adding a (+) value to one side does not make the other side the reciprocal inverse.

Hitting the ground is a dynamic interaction where two forces meet. It is a functional relationship but I don't think you understand it. I don't mind that you don't get it, I just wanted to share my own view to contrast yours, kind of like Yin for your Yang. :wink:
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby wpgtaiji » Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:03 pm

Josh i know you cant understsnd this! YOu have summarized our entire issue ! You think thst energy is static and it is hard to see that it changes in an instant! To help maybe realize that the physical action does not change in the yang attack. It is met by an infinitely MORE yang attack so RELATIVELY it is yin. This is how taiji works. You claim to understand yet argue fundamentals. I wonder why? I know thanks.

In understanding the numberline which is bigger +2 or + 1? The number does not have to be negative to be yin compared to a larger positive number. The fact is it is smaller which is a yin aspect! You really must have issues with -1 and -10!
wpgtaiji
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby caesar » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:45 pm

wpgtaiji...

It is so sad to see you insulting instead of just politely telling your views and opinions. Getting so mad and negative towards someone's opinions indicates of your fear that your views might have flaws. Why else be so negative towards somebody's else opinions? They are only opinions...they shouldn't harm you so deeply...to getyou so frustrated that you have to insult all the time.

What do you think you achieve by such attitude? If you think and claim martial arts (including yours) makes us better persons, then why spread negativity instead of constructive debate which would benefit the society more? Is it the same old song you say, that we wouldn't understand your ideas anyway? Then why report them here in the first place? Why not just ignore us dummies who really don't get the ying and yang and the true tai chi etc etc etc?

Peace...
caesar
 

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby wpgtaiji » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:03 pm

Mate, it puzzles me when you read anger in my post. I will look into that.

edit* i was ONLY refering to Josh. When i am quoting someone, i am REFERING to that person. It is interesting that people on here take specific statements as general comments about everyone! Read what i wrote:
wpgtaiji wrote:Josh i know you cant understsnd this!

What is interesting is that you read your name or anyone else.
wpgtaiji
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby pete5770 » Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:29 am

wpgtaiji wrote:Mate, it puzzles me when you read anger in my post. I will look into that.

edit* i was ONLY refering to Josh. When i am quoting someone, i am REFERING to that person. It is interesting that people on here take specific statements as general comments about everyone! Read what i wrote:
wpgtaiji wrote:Josh i know you cant understsnd this!

What is interesting is that you read your name or anyone else.


I think I'm going to side with Josh on the isue of whether the rest of us know "anything at all about Tai Chi and Yin / Yang". These things are theories at best and what works or what one person believes has no bearing on the other person. Many things work, and in many different ways. It's the old "more than one way to skin a cat(fish)" thing. If you believe in creationism / the bible and I believe in evolution / the big bang does it really matter, in our daily, lives which one really started it all? Nothing will change by us knowing either way.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:01 am

I think for many of us the idea that Yin/Yang theory relates to dynamic (ergo plastic as opposed to static) reciprocal inverses is unquestionable. Allow me to define these terms so there is no question as to what I mean:

dy·nam·ic
/dīˈnamik/
Adjective:
(of a process or system) Characterized by constant change, activity, or progress


re·cip·ro·cal
/riˈsiprəkəl/
Adjective:
Given, felt, or done in return: "a reciprocal comment or gesture".


inverses
plural of in·verse (Noun)
Noun:
Something that is the opposite or reverse of something else.
A reciprocal quantity, mathematical expression, geometric figure, etc., that is the result of inversion


So we can be clear that taijiquan is, in my opinion, a martial system which employs:
Constantly changing return of opposite energies.

It is like up and down, top and bottom, left and right.

Now if you have something that is right, having a position that is more right does make the initial position more left than the original, but the idea here is also that an axis exists, a pole if you will, which is implied in the very name Taiji itself, the name translates as indicating polarity (great ridge pole). Ergo opposites or inverses.

For many of us these are the basics, this is how taijiquan works. It is ok that it is not like this for you wpgtaiji, your input here is appreciated (your tone could be better though) as is your passion. I am just disagreeing with you, not fighting with you.

If you have a central axis, with left and right such as number line can have, then the position 1 is on the right side, no matter what positive number you add that number does not appear on the left side of the axis (0). It is unquestionable that 1 is to the left of 5, but that does not mean that 1 has become the reciprocal Yin to 5 being Yang. Taiji as a whole is not formed by relative values that are not inverse, because there is no return to 0 or stillness etc.

Yin Yang theory and taijiquan are well established. The idea is that softness can overcome hardness, the idea is not that one is always soft, but that one is dynamic. This is why the opponent and their moves are known by the term duifang, which can be translated as Counterpart.

Something that is Yang (hard) on a scale of softness and hardness does not become Yin (soft) because something else is More Yang (harder), it can be described as softer than the other harder thing, but that does not mean it is an inverse reciprocal of a dynamic nature.

Neutralization can be hard to understand for those outside of taijiquan. The number analogy works well, to neutralize a force bring it back to 0. You do not neutralize the force 1 by adding 5 to it. There are moves in taiji where to you make moves more yang by adding more Yang to them, such as when an opponent is moving in a direction and you add to their momentum, but this is not neutralization involving applying Yang to Yin energy.

It is true that using overwhelming attack methods on opponents (being more Yang than them) works well for beginners. Many who are highly skilled also use such methods, but that does not make them taiji. I have nothing wrong with the philosophy of using such methods in combat, I only do not believe that such methods fit Yin for Yang type theory, and do not believe that they are standard fare in taijiquan.

Taiji centers on Wuji, when yin and Yang meet they become 0,(wuji), they make a whole that balances. The idea that applying more Yang force to Yang has no harmony or balance in it, it does not neutralize or make a whole or return to 0 (wuji)


Being more Yang than the opponent is like the strong defeating the weak, the fast defeating the slow, it is a good theory but it is not taijiquan:
http://brennantranslation.wordpress.com ... hiyong-fa/
There are many other schools of boxing arts besides this one. Although the postures are different between them, they generally do not go beyond the strong bullying the weak and the slow yielding to the fast. The strong beating the weak and the slow submitting to the fast are both a matter of inherent natural ability and bear no relation to skill that is learned. Examine the skill of “four ounces moves a thousand pounds”, which is obviously not a victory obtained through strength. Or consider the sight of an old man repelling a group, which could not come from an aggressive speed.


The above is core theory of taijiquan. I know wpgtaiji that this is not how the WTBA works or what it teaches. I appreciate the ideas of the WTBA, but for me they are not taijiquan. They teach being stronger and faster in your attack as a way of defeating the opponent, overwhelming them with your attack. This is why the system was not called Taijiquan by its creator but was called Sudden Violence.
http://www.taijiworld.com/sudden-violence.html
Sudden Violence is an apt name for the eclectic martial arts or self-defence system that I now teach. It has come mainly from the Internal Martial Arts of Taijiquan and Baguazhang.

It certainly draws from taijiquan, but it is not taijiquan and it does not use taiji theory in a conventional way. I will admit I think a lot (not all) of that article is misconceived and entirely wrong. I'd like to stress that I share it here because it illustrates that Erle did not teach Taijiquan, did not call his system taijiquan, and you (Gord) coming here and sharing it as such is odd and against the very teachings of Erle, who got along very well with me, and I with him, I should add.

He WAS an animal which is why street fighters have so much power and aggression which far outweighs any logical 'martial arts' training you might have received.


This quote sums up the essence of Erle's Sudden Violence system. It sums up the idea being being more Yang in attack than your opponent, it is not that doing so is really taiji and achieves Wuji, but that it is highly effective (though not always). You telling us (and insulting for it) that this theory (attack like an animal) is really taiji (and the classic theory is not) is not very useful to you or anyone else.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Monsoon » Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:49 pm

I have to say I totally agree with Josh on this one. If one is going to counter yang with more yang then it is pointless to talk of yin. There is no yin/yang symbol - it's a yang/more yang symbol!

The fact that Mr Montaigue taught the principle of more yang overcomes yang speaks volumes about his real understanding of tai ji quan, although in the general public this approach is often what transpires in street fighting among unskilled but aggressive people.

Analogy: catch a ball. The ball is incoming and it is yang. The hand, when it receives the ball, starts off being yin and gradually reduces yin as the yang of the ball is reduced, until both yin and yang are eliminated and there is only equilibrium (wuji).

Hold your hand in yang and see what happens when the yang ball hits it - this is an elementary principle and simple to understand in this kind of pared down example, but a little harder to grasp in the complex interpersonal dynamics of a fight.

Monsoon

edited one time by Monsoon for some gratuitous spelling
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:36 pm

Monsoon wrote:The fact that Mr Montaigue taught the principle of more yang overcomes yang speaks volumes about his real understanding of tai ji quan, although in the general public this approach is often what transpires in street fighting among unskilled but aggressive people.


I believe his approach is practical, and that he had a rather good understanding of orthodox taijiquan, but that he did not base his system upon it but took a more... renegade (look up this word) direction with it. A person who knows knows his system does not necessarily know taijiquan, nor does a person who knows taijiquan know his system. There are many notable distinctions between the two, not worth elaborating upon in this thread, but suffice it to say, he was the only source of what he taught, you could not get his system anywhere else or from anyone else.

I also believe that in general, despite his emphasis upon overwhelming attack(s), he taught to avoid aggression although also to respond to it with it in martial or combat situations.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby John the Monkey mind » Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:54 am

Monsoon wrote:The fact that Mr Montaigue taught the principle of more yang overcomes yang speaks volumes about his real understanding of tai ji quan, although in the general public this approach is often what transpires in street fighting among unskilled but aggressive people.


Interestingly this is in line with the "art of war". When stronger attack from the front.
John the Monkey mind
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:15 am

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:11 am

The Art of War also contains material that is more in conformity with orthodox taijiquan theory:

“Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.”

“To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill”

“When the enemy is relaxed, make them toil. When full, starve them. When settled, make them move.”

Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Monsoon » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:27 pm

Disclaimer: People should read more carefully. I did not say that Mr Montaigue did not understand tai ji, but that his method spoke volumes about his understanding of tai ji. That people quickly jump in and assume that I was being negative about Mr Montaigue is rather interesting in itself.

@Josh, always gives me a good laugh when someone tells me - a native English speaker - to go and look up the definition of a word (see: renegade), especially when said word is somewhat ordinary and commonplace.

Anywho, I still think the ball analogy is a neat one.

Monsoon
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:41 pm

I had no idea what you were saying about Erle, but wanted to clarify my own position and I included the renegade definitions because he used that word himself in his own publications and advertizements after he was given it as a label.

Sorry if I gave another impression.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby wpgtaiji » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:14 pm

Josh Young wrote:http://brennantranslation.wordpress.com ... hiyong-fa/
There are many other schools of boxing arts besides this one. Although the postures are different between them, they generally do not go beyond the strong bullying the weak and the slow yielding to the fast. The strong beating the weak and the slow submitting to the fast are both a matter of inherent natural ability and bear no relation to skill that is learned. Examine the skill of “four ounces moves a thousand pounds”, which is obviously not a victory obtained through strength. Or consider the sight of an old man repelling a group, which could not come from an aggressive speed.


The above is core theory of taijiquan. I know wpgtaiji that this is not how the WTBA works or what it teaches. I appreciate the ideas of the WTBA, but for me they are not taijiquan. They teach being stronger and faster in your attack as a way of defeating the opponent, overwhelming them with your attack. This is why the system was not called Taijiquan by its creator but was called Sudden Violence.
http://www.taijiworld.com/sudden-violence.html
Sudden Violence is an apt name for the eclectic martial arts or self-defence system that I now teach. It has come mainly from the Internal Martial Arts of Taijiquan and Baguazhang.

It certainly draws from taijiquan, but it is not taijiquan and it does not use taiji theory in a conventional way. I will admit I think a lot (not all) of that article is misconceived and entirely wrong. I'd like to stress that I share it here because it illustrates that Erle did not teach Taijiquan, did not call his system taijiquan, and you (Gord) coming here and sharing it as such is odd and against the very teachings of Erle, who got along very well with me, and I with him, I should add.

k Josh, you have 2 misunderstandings here, and i am not sure where you get them.

1) 4 ounces is an integral part of what Erle taught! It is the reason for all that we do, and in fact, if you dont get that one idea, the push hands method that he taught wont work correctly.

2) sudden violence, if you look at that series, was done for a bloke who asked for JUST methods of fighting. It is application of Erle's fighting method, not taiji, not bagua. That series (one of MANY of the 400 plus dvds available through WTBA.. iirc it is only 12 dvds total), is not THE wtba method! In fact, if you do research into that topic, he says that the best way is to learn Taiji and bagua, and once you do, these methods are self evident. btw, he wanted to call it Reflex Violence (the title of the BOOK he did on this very topic), but there was some reason he didnt which at the moment, i dont recall (nor do i really care!)

This has always been my point Josh. Yes, you have a friend who is an instructor in WTBA. Yes, you work with him and watched a few vids. But it seems that you have made judgements based on partial information. It took Erle 8 DVD's to teach Old Yang style to the Max. He has about 50 others (not to mention the silk reeling series (at 9 dvds), and How we do it (at 7 or 8)) to teach all the aspects of that one form. And to make things even more difficult, he taught aspects on dvds that are unrelated, meaning, that on a bagua DVD you may find info on taiji! Some of his very best stuff are moments of tangents on other ideas.

The yin yang stuff, whatever!

with that, i bid you all adu! dvivid doesnt need me to fill up threads with my ignorance and negativity. Good luck all.
wpgtaiji
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:48 pm

Re: Responsibility, Avoid Aggression.

Postby Josh Young » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:53 pm

Well Gord, I disagree with you about everything but your last sentence.

No worries Mate.

I'll just point out this:
Sudden Violence is an apt name for the eclectic martial arts or self-defence system that I now teach. It has come mainly from the Internal Martial Arts of Taijiquan and Baguazhang.

It is his system, not the series, that he writes about in that line.
The WTBA method is his system. It is a good system.
It is not taijiquan in my opinion, but has lots of taijiquan content.

I'd also like to share that the quote about the few ounces deflecting a thousand lbs has two lines two it, but the second line is more obscure. If you look for it you can find it. It is like the way a millstone is turned, a millstone weighs hundreds to thousands of lbs, but the force that turns it is slight in comparison. It is about a form of leverage.

I am glad that given the last line you share you are taking responsibility to avoid aggression.
However your input here is welcome, as is your passion. Your tone and lack of original threads, (not one so far) doesn't make it seem like you want to be a part of this diverse martial arts community which is composed of many different individuals with many different perspectives and opinions. You are no more of an outsider than half of those who participate here. It isn't like we all have the same views by any means.

It is ok to disagree with people about things we are passionate about and not fight about that. There is no need for insults or personal attacks, people disagree and that makes life better and helps teach us.
Josh Young
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:03 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Sparring and Fighting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

©2013 YMAA | About YMAA | Privacy Policy |Terms of Use | Permissions | Contact Us