Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Chin Na
#1


Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#2
Most people have never heard of chin-na but it is an integral part of the martial arts. In the main I feel that the techniques are generally secondary ones, not the primary skills you would use in a fight but the little bits that enable control when your attacker is compromised. We train similar skills in Aikido. In Aikido again you mainly need the atemi to ensure the technique works, but unfortunately many schools don't teach the atemi.
Reply
#3
I trained with a guy for a short time who claimed to be an expert in Chinese martial arts. I asked him about chin-na as I'd heard about it, had studied HapKiDo for some time, but never done it. It was very similar to HapKiDo. Unfortunately the guy turned out to be a bit of a phony overall and I didn't get too far with him before leaving the class, but it was interesting to at least get a sampling.
Reply
#4


Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#5


Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#6
(08-26-2015, 09:08 PM)K-man Wrote: Most people have never heard of chin-na but it is an integral part of the martial arts. 

Agreed, and I think that for many arts, Chin Na would be the 'grandfather' of what they call their locking/controlling techniques.  Certainly in times past, China played a significant role in the development of other cultures grappling arts.  

Tim Cartmell is a pretty established authority on Chin Na and if one were to assign a title, he'd be a grandmaster.  From what I've read, he seems to be well respected in China by other Chin Na masters.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#7
Watching the video and the techniques being applied, the biggest aspect, at least from my perspective, is the use of strikes to open the entry for the throw or control aspect. I agree that China's MA's are the forerunner for just about all if not all of the modern day offerings. So I have to wonder, about certain venues of Hapkido or at least some particular individuals, who claim that a strike is not needed, if their training was correct. Yet I observe other masters of Hapkido that fully use strikes and I have even seen a picture of GM Choi, using what looks like a hammer fist strike on the attackers hand while demoing a wrist grab technique. This is the stuff that makes you go Hmmmmm!
Reply
#8
Well, Hapkido has a direct link to Aikido. In fact the names mean the same. From an Aikido perspective, all techniques either include atemi or come about as the result of a failed atemi. As I said before, these days most Aikido schools don't teach atemi at all and the belief is that you don't need it. To me that is total fallacy. Ueshiba was quoted as saying "Aikido is 70% atemi" and I have no reason to disbelieve him. I teach most of the Aikido techniques in my Karate classes and Krav classes. I stress the need to hit before attempting the locks or holds. Of course there are times when you can move seamlessly into a technique but that is more luck than design. I am fortunate to have an Aikido teacher who teaches atemi as routine although he is at a level where he can make techniques work without the strike. Mind you, that is after nearly 40 years of training.

Chin Na contains the same holds that you find in any jujutsu plus more. I have two books from Dr Yang, Jwing-Ming where he states Chin Na has over 700 techniques that would take more than 20 years to master. He also says that 70% of Chin Na comes from White Crane and of course that is basically the origin of my Goju Ryu. Further, when he discusses the five elements of Chin Na training, he talks of using the cavity strikes.

It is my belief, from studying Goju kata, that many of the concepts of Chin Na are in the kata.
Reply
#9
(09-17-2015, 03:31 PM)sidekick Wrote: Watching the video and the techniques being applied, the biggest aspect, at least from my perspective, is the use of strikes to open the entry for the throw or control aspect. I agree that China's MA's are the forerunner for just about all if not all of the modern day offerings. So I have to wonder, about certain venues of Hapkido or at least some particular individuals, who claim that a strike is not needed, if their training was correct. Yet I observe other masters of Hapkido that fully use strikes and I have even seen a picture of GM Choi, using what looks like a hammer fist strike on the attackers hand while demoing a wrist grab technique. This is the stuff that makes you go Hmmmmm!

And this is the difference between teaching from experience and teaching from theory.  Simply put, the bad guy under normal circumstances is NOT going to allow you to 'do' something to him, nor is he going to assist you as would a willing partner.  Thus it is going to be necessary, in most cases, to interrupt the bad guys O.O.D.A. loop in order to effectively 'do' something to him.  Keep in mind that there will be instances where a lock or throw or whatever can be immediately applied without a strike due to the circumstances, but this is the exception and not the rule. 

Teaching from theory is fine if at some point the teaching comes down from someone that had actual experience.  As an example, I watched an Aiki Jujutsu video years ago that had some good stuff, some interesting stuff and some pure crap.  There was one defense where the bad guy was reaching or punching the good guy.  GG did a simple gross motor skill deflection and then grasped the BG and spun him about one and a half times and then reversed direction and clothes lined him while sweeping.  End result was the BG on his butt.  Okay, it looked all fluid and cool.  As far as practical, not so much really.  One would need the room to successfully pull off this movement.  Try this between a couple of parked cars or some other tight space and you're out of gas as it isn't going to work and you'll actually put yourself in a worse spot than you began in.  Economy of motion as well as reality dictates that one can simply move directly to the end movement i.e. a gross motor defection and then a clothes line/sweep.  It is linear and requires no more space that what you already occupy.  And if you are in a tight space such as between two parked cars then the car acts as a big, heavy, immoveable object in which to sweep your attacker into.  But there is none of this spinning around nonsense that wastes time and requires space you may not have.  Now to be clear, the spinning does add to the power of the impact BUT it isn't practical 'on the street'.  Just like running across the room and leaping into the air with a kick will add power to your kick due to speed BUT it really isn't going to be pulled off in real life.  So it 'looks' good on paper, looks really cool in loose fitting clothing in the Dojo with plenty of room and a willing partner but isn't very applicable or practical in real life. 


K-man
Quote: It is my belief, from studying Goju kata, that many of the concepts of Chin Na are in the kata.

Which would make sense as many of the pioneers of the various styles of karate either studied directly in China or with/under someone that did.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#10


Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)