I'm thinking of studying martial arts. Which would be better to learn: "drunken monkey" or "drunken master"?
346638
6 pack nothen like like it
135200
There are a few things that you need to be aware of before going down this path. There are lots of people who will try to convince you that system X or system Y are the most effective, and that you can learn these systems in days or weeks. Not to put too fine a point on it, but these claims are utter horse poopoo. If you want to be skilled in a system, it is going to require some effort on your part. That being said, it is quite possible to become quite effective in relatively short order IF AND ONLY IF you are willing to put in the effort to get there. Also, before I go any further, please understand, I'm not saying these systems are better than others. Some systems have a different focus than others. That's not better, it is just different. Much like comparing apples and bananas, one isn't better than the other, they're just different.\n\nOk, with that out of the way, let's dig into the meat of your question. The first thing you need to decide is what is  it you want to get out of it? Are you looking to be able to protect yourself and others quickly and effectively? Or are you interested in competing in full contact fighting? Or are you just interested in doing it for yourself because it is something you think you'd enjoy? How you answer the above questions will dictate to some degree the best answer for you. \n\nIf you are strictly interested in effective self defense, there are some suggestions that I would make based on my personal experience. The Filipino systems of Kali, Escrima, and Arnis really hit the ground running, so to speak. They, along with the countless flavors of Indonesian Pencak Silat (pronounced pent-jahk see-laht), and some of the Chinese systems such as Wing Chun, Chung-I Chuan, and San Soo, are very much focused on turning you into a multi-faceted fighter in relatively short order. I prefer these systems because they don't focus on just one particular area. They incorporate bare hand techniques, weapon techniques (sticks and daggers are particularly common), and grappling techniques. If you are interested in primarily bare hand techniques, you could also include Muay Thai (aka Thai boxing). The big difference between these systems and similar systems is their overall philosophy. One of the systems that I do personally is Taiji Quan. Very, very effective combat system. However, the guiding philosophy is that they expect that you'll be studying Taiji for the rest of your life. As a result, though you do become extremely effective in combat, it comes with time and isn't a major focus from the start. The systems I mention above, though, focus on making you at least competent in as short of a time as possible. \n\nIf you are interested in full contact fighting, then I would recommend going in the direction of something like Shootfighting or Brazillian Jiujitsu (aka Gracie Jiujistu). I've known people who practiced both of these styles and can attest to the fact that they became relatively skilled rather quickly. The big distinction between these styles and the first group of styles that I mentioned is that the self defense oriented styles include many, many techniques that would be patently illegal in full contact fighting. \n\nI hope this provides some information that you will find useful. Again, I can't advise you strongly enough to avoid the systems that will tell you that they will teach you to become a whirlwind of death in 30 days or similar nonsense. Anything worth doing takes effort and practice, and if it was easy, everyone would do it. I've spent most of my life in the martial arts, and I wouldn't trade it for anything. It has been a great experience for me, and I hope it will be for you, too. Good luck!
860806
Ok... this is long... I actually got a pretty bad grade during college for writing a paper about this and unfortunately using too many websites for information.  There is a lot of misinformation on the web (I no longer trust anything i read unless it's from an encyclopedia or reputable source online. Definitely not a martial arts website)   There also is a lot of misinformation in books written by authors such as "Si Fu Bob" and "how I will teach you the secrets of Shaolin Kung fu".  Basically, your history professor is correct. If you read textbooks written by college professors on Chan/Zen and Bodhidharma... they think his association with Bodhidharma is legend.  Some even dispute his existence at all.  If you read books on martial arts history, they'll say that his association with bodhidharma for sure is legend and that the Shaolin monks most likely harbored retired soldiers who knew self defense.  The concise encyclopedia brittanica will state that chinese martial arts harkens back to the 18th century B.C.  Go to google scholar (it has a lot of books written for the general public also with some books written by academics) or JSTOR (which has a better reference of articles written by academics) and look up "bodhidharma" and "legend."  All books written by academics will state that he is a legend and his association with martial arts is that... the general books written by regular folks for regular folks like "how to learn martial arts in 20 days" are hit and miss...  Hopefully, you didn't make the same mistake that I made and failed a midterm paper based on reading websites for info!\nOh, I found this answer in another area about kalaripayattu...\n\n"As to kalaripayattu....\nThere is no association historically between kalaripayattu and shaolin kung fu or any other martial arts. This only came about recently and has been pushed strongly by practitioners of kalaripayattu as an association (i guess to try and generate interest in the art). Unfortunately, the general pracitioners of kalaripayattu are unwilling to admit (although Professor Zarilli's book "When the Body Becomes All Eyes: Paradigms, Discourses and Practices of Power in Kalarippayattu, a South Indian Martial Art (Hardcover and almost all other books on kalaripayattu reference this)" that the earliest suggested birth of kalaripayattu is around 11th-13th century a.d. and that the earliest proof of kalaripayattu was from portuguese records in the 16th century a.d. No credible records of kalaripayattu exist before this.\n\nThe association between indian martial arts and chinese martial arts is between the legend of Bodhidharma (an Indian or Central asian monk, depending on the legend you use) who founded the Shaolin temple. The rumor began in the 1600's A.D. and was written by a Chinese Taoist monk who did not like the Shaolin monks.... \n\nThe first open association of Bodhidharma and the Shaolin martial arts is made in the 17th century A.d. and it states in the text that Bodhidharma created the exercises that developed into Shaolin quan in a cave in China after staring at a wall for nine years without moving. Between the founding of the Shaolin temple (600A.D.) and 1600A.D. no association has ever been made about Bodhidharma and Shaolin Kung Fu. \n\nFrom this legend in the 1600's A.D., kalaripayattu practitioners today  and other people have been trying to push that maybe Bodhidharma was a kalaripayattu practioner. If he was a kalaripayattu practitioner, then that must mean that kalaripayattu was created in the 600A.D. and is the progenitor of Shaolin Kung Fu and hence all martial arts! Of course, this disregards the other martial arts traditions in china that go back to before Shaolin kung fu by a few centuries.\n\nThere is physical and written evidence in China that martial arts as practiced by the Shaolin monks predate the 6th century A.D. and that most martial arts in most
594119
You have a lot of heart. I also have nunchaku. I study\nJeet Kune Do. I Know that if you keep practicing you will\nmaster the nunchaku. bye young dragon!
1122221
Druken fist is not actually. done by drinking alcohol.The art gets its names from the jerky movements that look like the practitioner is intoxicated to the untrained eye.It is a very effective style because it atr first makes it look like the practitioner isuntrained. When the opponent finally catches on he still wont be able to touch the practitioner because the practitioner evades all the attacks by getting in some attacks of his own.As i said this is a very effective style.
863397
My favorite is Earth Bending, but then again, I do study Hung Gar.\n\nInterestingly enough, each nation represents a different Chinese martial art: Air - Xing Yi (pronounced "Sheeng Yee"), Water - Tai Chi Chuan, Fire - Northern Shaolin, and again, Earth - Hung Gar. Toph, though, does southern Mantis.
863722
I don't watch kung fu, but i found a link to one that may be it.  It's called Cripled Masters.\nhttp://www.stomptokyo.com/badmoviereport/reviews/C/crippled.html
123477
hi there, mehereintheeast.  I'm not sure exactly where you can take Chinese classes.  I took some Chinese a few years ago and the way I found a teacher was by going to the campus of a university and asking people who looked Chinese. (Amazingly, every person who I thought was Chinese was actually from China.)\n\nYou answered my question about Guru Rinpoche, and I have a few more questions about it.  Your answer implied that Buddhas are not monks.  Most forms of Buddhism consider Shakyamuni Buddha to have been a monk, and in the Pali texts, he refers to himself that way, as do his disciples.  Is there a different view in the Nyingma school?  In the present case, I am not calling only lamas monks, but all five levels of ordained practitioners as defined by Tibetan Buddhism. Also, is there any record of Padmasambhava having been ordained?  He trained at monasteries in India, but I don't think he was actually ordained.  And finally, have you had any contact with Tibetans, Nyingmapa or otherwise, who feel that his choice to have various female consorts prevents him from maintaining the status of being a monk?  I understand that some people there feel that way.\n\nThanks.
873148
I have to say that Aikido would be my choice, though it is a mostly defensive art. You can perform offensive moves, but they are usually in response to someone else's aggression and normally in order to incapacitate the opponent/halt the attack; which again, makes them defensive moves. \nThere are some rather intricate kill-tactics employed by practioners of Dim Mak, which follows a series of meridians that control the ebb and flow of the body's energy and if employed correctly, cause series injury leading to death, but I won't go into those here.
500981
I take two styles Wing Chung Kune and the Chin Na grappling system. Wing Chung is great for fighing it is mean to maim or kill the attacker. Chin Na is not a martial art it is a system. Both Chin Na and Wing Chung Kune are taught at both the nothern and souther Shaolin temples. I also like the older styles such as from the Hung Gar family (Tiger Crain is an example). I agree with what you said about the circular motion in Kung Fu i belive that Karate is far to ridged and do not belive it would hold up well against an experience Kung Fu practioner.
167844
This.. question.. I have never been so stumped before.. brain meling..\n\nOK if the fight was with a folding chair, I'd have to say Chan.\n\nBut if it was with belts, I'd say Lee.
277974
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung_fu\n\n\nHint: If you talk about Chuck Norris, you're bound to get an A!
549478
Bruce Lee is better 30 years ago.\n\nJet Li is better today.
1179222
you should study karate it uses all of your bodies weapons unlike boxing it only uses hands
982204
Trust me, you have not "out grown" anything. It is not possible to be such an expert you can no longer continue to progress and learn. If you don't hold at least a 6th degree and have been studying Kung Fu for a few decades you can not really claim to be an expert.\n\nAs to learning Judo, I encourage everyone to get experience outside their normal style. I can't reccommend one form over another, they're all great, and I think Judo would complement Kung Fu well. However, you may wish to consider Aikido instead, or in addition to, Judo, asyou may find it easier to adapt to the movements.
462358
martial arts is the study and application of combat.  there is a distinct difference between martial ARTS and martial WAYS.  martial ways refer to combat systems with practical applications studied in a non-dogmatic, direct transmission type of system where a teacher takes on a few students and passes on the knowledge and experience of both his own study and the study of his teachers.  martial ARTS refers to the use of combat and combat systems in either a demonstrative/non-application mode (think wu shu or, in one sense, pro wrestling) or in an attempt to achieve meditative awareness (all the combat systems that use "Do" in their names).\n\nthis distinction is important in the asian arts primarily because the distinction was codified after WWII.  the US occupation forbid the japanese from anything with military value.  to prevent the loss of centuries of tradition and history, the japanese reclassified their martial systems into religious/spiritual modes, which were allowed under the occupation.  korean arts followed this tradition (most especially with tae kwon do, which was basically created not as a martial art per se but as a way to teach moral values to the population).  the chinese are probably the least affected by this because so much of chinese martial arts is limited to very small groups.  wu shu is a series of standardized martial movements that have been synthesized from many different combat systems.  arts such as shaolin and tai chi have hundreds of variations based on the particular learnings of the teacher.  the most difficult part of chinese martial arts is tracing lineage holders properly.  since many chinese masters were illiterate and poor, research into their history is difficult at best.  it also holds all manner of traps for the student because any chinese "master" can claim to be the lineage holder of some obscure chinese art with no way to have their claim substantiated or repudiated.\n\n(as for the pro wrestling comment, I'm not denigrating those guys at all.  they may not be fighters in the classic sense of wrestlers but they are still highly capable athletes and most of them probably could kick ass in combat situations.)
114186
I can't decide between "Jingle Jangle" and "Bang-Shang-A-Lang."