"I think he pieced together a martial arts system as best he could from the teachers he had available to him be it video, magazine or real life. There is nothing wrong with that." Nothing wrong at all, but he couldn't have done it without a solid prior base. (And if he did get that good from a book without a prior foundation, it makes him even more of a martial arts genius than otherwise.) "Of course Kempo is older than Moh Kempo." Older doesn't mean better. In any case, I don't think it really matters. Whenever, wherever, whatever he learned from whomever, he was certainly very good with it, and has trained many other highly skilled fighters since then. His personality and business decisions aside, no one who knew him back then ever contested his skill or the effectiveness of his system.

"Likewise to spar only against 1 style will have limmitations." I agree. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to spar outside of TKF. The effectiveness of Moh against other styles has been proved by countless individuals both in the past when Simon's schools competed, as well as today by other Moh schools and practitioners outside of the TKF framework. Now, if I could beat everybody at TKF, the next logical step would be to try to find more challenging opponents from other styles. But that's definitely not the case, not by a long shot.

Don't get me wrong, I still train Moh on a regular basis. I find it has it's good points. But I also train Wing Chun, Bak Sil Lum, Bagua, Modern Shaolin and Chin Na as well as a smidge of Hung Gar. I have had a chance to meet with a great many instructors and masters of these other styles. The Moh system is a martial art that stands on it's own 2 feet. It is the base that I have for my further education in the martial arts. Having such exposure I have drawn my own conclusions on why and how Moh is the way it is. Lung is nothing like Kempo which is nothing like The temple motions which is nothing like Hung etc. It is a patchwork within a style while most other styles are a logical progression. This minor patchwork gives the Moh students a glimmering of other styles and focuses on finding the multiple applications from these forms. It also includes a large number of techniques that are from all over the place as well. Flying spinning back kicks and Chinese Cross hardly seem to fit from the same style. Ultimately it works as a style but after so many years of practice and analysis a person becomes curious what else is out there. Whe I bothered to look at other styles I found some concepts complete absent in Moh that were extremely important to self defence. For example: What does Moh or TKF teach for multiple attackers? Breaking the circle, direction changes through cross stepping, continual movement and change of stance, using opponants as obsticals against other opponants, meaningful strikes to disable an attacker in a volly of 7 or so attacks to reduce chance of failure. Move away from attackers as you are destroying another attacker. If I missed anything feel free to point it out, but off the top of my head that seems to be the premis for that situation based on the Moh system. All of that is good stuff, it "can" work. I have used it many times in multiple attacker sparring. Almost all of those principles were done away with when I learned Bagua. The Bagua was far easier to use and ten times more effective in a multiple attacker scenario. The Moh system would still have some use in an Elevator but as my skill in Bagua improves I find the enclosure doesn't matter it is the principles of the movements and counters that make it better. Likewise I found the moderns Shaolin methods of dealing with multiple attackers were more effective, faster, commited but intelligently so. After studying other styles I find the Moh way to be slow. In many cases too slow which risks being dragged down by the attackers. For 1 on 1 situations the Moh system is concrete but it lacks the deceptivness of other styles. Open X with Hidden Leg is an example of the type of deceptiveness I speak of. It is not absent obviously but other styles make it a focus and have a great many tricks. More than false openings and more feasable ones at that. IMHO. It also has a severe lack of Chin Na training. Students of Kung Fu must be able to instincively break fingers, rake eyes or seize muscles in the right areas when placed into an unknown situation. To begin with the pads worn at TKF prevent a great many applicationsfrom being worked on, but ultimately they just are not taught anyhow. Tiger Locks are neat but they are a prelude to a true lock, not a lock in themselves as they lack the damage infliction when applied as they are. Sure you can Lock into the collar bone or neck with applications of Tiger Locks but still it is guesswork rather than training hundreds of well practiced and effective techniques that work on people of various sizes. I guess what I am trying to say with all of this is that the Moh system is valid. More valid than most other martial arts, however it isn't as refined and practiced as some of the Kung Fu available. How many instructors post here? How many sat in the office before a Skills class and simple made up an application then ran out and taught it. The logic that went into these applications was generally quickly thought out and practiced. The students take these things home with them as scripture on self defence but in reality it's all application of the style. Other styles have true techniques that have been practiced and refined. Moh belongs in the Kung Fu catagory. It should be respected as much as say Wing Chun, however it is not al ultimate art. Students who believe they are learning the best style that was tested and found to overcome all other styles are deluded. If TKF has truly changed one thing they may wish to do is let their students know that Moh is a single style that has limmitations. It is a hard strikers style with a focus on evasion and striking or bulldozering and striking. If a lockup occurs a Moh student should break off contact with wrist escapes ect and go with what they know. Also TKF needs to adopt iron training exercises. Iron Palm, body, grip etc. I think the failing is that TKF has to try and hold a style that is comfortable for people of all ages, fitness levels and levels of comfort with training. This inadvertantly waters down the style a great deal for the sake of business. This is fine as keeping a martial arts school open and making good profits off of it are extremely difficult in this society. TKF manages this better than most others. But it should constantly remind it's students that there are people out there who put themselves into much more dangerous situations in order to train and as such the TKF student should never have false confidence when it comes to real situations, specially where they could end up facing another trained opponant. Against untrained? Moh will tear them up in seconds. No question. But ask yourself Vortexx, would you feel comfortable with your own skills if you climbed into the ring with a Thai boxer who kicks banana trees to harden his body and has spent as many years as yourself training, most of it having to use full force to hurt someone before they hurt him? Has Moh made you superior to a Thai Boxer of comparable training? I sure hope you realize the truth of your own training.

Well in the scenario above I would say that the Thai Boxer would walk all over Vortexx. It wouldn't even be sporting.

"Lung is nothing like Kempo which is nothing like The temple motions which is nothing like Hung etc. It is a patchwork within a style while most other styles are a logical progression." I disagree. There are many similarities between the forms. Off the top of my head, just going through some of the Temple Motions: "Lifting the Branch" is in Kempo II and Kempo III. "Dividing the Storm" is in Lung I. "False Crane" is in Stick I. "Turning the Shield" is in Stick I. "Left Pointed Arrow" is in Stick I and Kempo III. "Twisted Willow" is in Stick I. "Pushing the Mountain" is in Lung I. "Sweeping Crane" is in Lung I and Kempo III. "Holding the Shield" is in Kempo II, Lung I, and Stick I. "Gentle Swans" is in Kempo II. "Poisonous Snakes" is in Kempo II and Hung I. "Turning Scissor" is in Kempo II. I'm sure there are many others, these are just the most obvious ones. There are also a million other similarities I can think of between Kempo and Hung, Kempo and Stick, Kempo and Lung, etc., but they're harder to describe because most of the motions don't have names. In addition, the way all the blocks, stances, stepping, etc. are done in all the forms is consistent, and I can list a million more similarities if I break the forms down into these basic motions. And that's even without going into the PHS. I think Moh only appears a patchwork to those who haven't taken the time to look deeper. Those who worked with it enough know that it's very consistent and cohesive. There are motions (such as the traditional bow stance) that you learn the very first day in the studio that have advanced applications you only start to put together after years of training as a brown or black belt or beyond.

"Flying spinning back kicks and Chinese Cross hardly seem to fit from the same style." One uses legs, the other uses arms. All it indicates is that the style is diverse. Apples and oranges are different, but they're still fruit, and go great together in a smoothie or fruit salad, even if they came from different trees. "Almost all of those principles were done away with when I learned Bagua. The Bagua was far easier to use and ten times more effective in a multiple attacker scenario." How does Bagua deal with multiple attackers? "After studying other styles I find the Moh way to be slow. In many cases too slow which risks being dragged down by the attackers." The Edmonton chief does periodic demonstrations where he has 5 or so black belt PHS members attack him with full speed and power simultaneously. They are told not to hold back, but come in with everything they've got, and not to stop until they feel they have been completely dealt with. "Slow" would be the last word on my mind to describe what ensues. Is Bagua or whatever else faster? It's possible, but I'll have my doubts until I see a good video clip or demo to prove it. "For 1 on 1 situations the Moh system is concrete but it lacks the deceptivness of other styles." That may be true. Moh focuses more on power and driving right through the opponent (especially with the tiger style). On the other hand, I know that many other systems telegraph their motions more (e.g. when kicking with the back leg from a stance with an open hip). "It also has a severe lack of Chin Na training. Students of Kung Fu must be able to instincively break fingers, rake eyes or seize muscles in the right areas when placed into an unknown situation. To begin with the pads worn at TKF prevent a great many applicationsfrom being worked on, but ultimately they just are not taught anyhow." Your info here is outdated. It was not taught in the past. It is taught now. In fact, we were "breaking" fingers just last club. Of course, we practice these things and similar applications without pads. "I guess what I am trying to say with all of this is that the Moh system is valid. More valid than most other martial arts, however it isn't as refined and practiced as some of the Kung Fu available." You may be right. I haven't seen every other style out there, and I haven't studied them in depth. All I can say is that from the videos, demos, advertisements, presentations, tournaments, etc. which I've seen so far, I haven't yet come across something I'd rather train. "How many sat in the office before a Skills class and simple made up an application then ran out and taught it. The logic that went into these applications was generally quickly thought out and practiced." When instructors are inexperienced, this is a problem. That's not the case anymore. There's a difference between what a 3 or 5 year instructor can come up with on the spot, versus someone who's been training for a couple of decades. "The students take these things home with them as scripture on self defence but in reality it's all application of the style." I agree. Self defense is about concepts, not specific applications. Doing something without knowing exactly why it works will only get you so far. The job of the instructors is to keep you on the right path, not to teach you every single specific technique you might need. It's kind of like Lego. If you know how all the pieces fit together, you can construct anything you want, without needing to be shown all the possible things (of which there is an infinite number) that can be constructed. The more you work with it, the better you become. "Other styles have true techniques that have been practiced and refined." Something that has been practiced and refined by hundreds of monks for centuries does not necessarily make it any better than something put together recently by one man. For example, Alexander the Great overturned the tried and tested science of combat, inventing his own system with which he overthrew armies greatly outnumbering his in strength and number. Olaf Simon had the advantage, when creating his own style, of analyzing everything from a very scientific perspective. His system has been tested on countless occasions. You yourself train many styles which have been practiced and refined for centuries. Most of the masters that trained each of these styles believed that their style was enough, and felt no need to merge it with other styles. But you contradict that by blending elements from multiple styles, to create a mix which has not been practiced and refined by anyone but you. "Students who believe they are learning the best style that was tested and found to overcome all other styles are deluded." I agree completely. No style can make that claim. "If TKF has truly changed one thing they may wish to do is let their students know that Moh is a single style that has limmitations." Of course every style has its limitations, and its focus. There's simply not enough time for anybody to get extremely good at absolutely everything. So you drop things you're not too likely to need, and focus on what you feel will be most useful, depending on what your goals are. If I felt that grappling was the most important thing, I'd take up BJJ or something similar. If I felt that the soft, redirectional style was my thing, I'd take up Tai Chi or Aikido. If I felt that no single style has the mix I'm looking for, perhaps I'd consider cross training. As it is, I'm satisfied with the focus that TKF has chosen. "It is a hard strikers style with a focus on evasion and striking or bulldozering and striking." You just described the panther/leopard and tiger aspects of the style, respectively. However, there's a lot more to snake, crane, and dragon, which has been mostly neglected in recent years, but which is still part of the system and is currently being taught much more than before. "the TKF student should never have false confidence when it comes to real situations, specially where they could end up facing another trained opponant." Agreed. Even more so when dealing with armed attackers. "But ask yourself Vortexx, would you feel comfortable with your own skills if you climbed into the ring with a Thai boxer who kicks banana trees to harden his body and has spent as many years as yourself training, most of it having to use full force to hurt someone before they hurt him?" No, I wouldn't feel comfortable, but only due to the training method, and not the style. If I trained Moh full contact with the same intensity and conditioning as a Thai boxer (kicking those banana trees with Moh rather than Thai kicks), then yes, I believe I would most likely have superior fighting ability. But I value my health more than that. And when I need a banana, I go to the supermarket rather than trying to kick the banana tree down. :) North, I'm glad that you have respect for the Moh style, and don't feel that your time at TKF has been wasted. I also truly believe that if you were to train there now, you would be surprised at how much is in the system which you didn't believe was there. In any case, it sounds like you have found a good mix of styles which work for you. I wish you luck in your training.

"The Edmonton chief does periodic demonstrations where he has 5 or so black belt PHS members attack him with full speed and power simultaneously. They are told not to hold back, but come in with everything they've got, and not to stop until they feel they have been completely dealt with. "Slow" would be the last word on my mind to describe what ensues. Is Bagua or whatever else faster? It's possible, but I'll have my doubts until I see a good video clip or demo to prove it. " - Vortexx HAHAHAHA! I would love to see him go against 5 Muay Thai practitioners at once if he is so good. I'd say it would only take one avg Muay Thai kick boxer to take him out. Instructor takes on 5 crappy black belts at once....just makes him the best crappy black belt! "There's a difference between what a 3 or 5 year instructor can come up with on the spot, versus someone who's been training for a couple of decades. " - Vortexx Yeah...but why do they need to make up moves on the spot? I never see them apply principles as opposed to move for specific move. "No, I wouldn't feel comfortable, but only due to the training method, and not the style. If I trained Moh full contact with the same intensity and conditioning as a Thai boxer " - Vortexx The point is right now if you walked in against a Thai boxer is that you would simply lose. You even freely admit that. Guess what....on the street why don't you ask him to come back in 3 weeks when you are properly conditioned. If your style was so good you should be able to beat him regardless of your conditioning. As it stands, the Thai boxer would probably take you out pretty quickly!

"The Edmonton chief does periodic demonstrations where he has 5 or so black belt PHS members attack him with full speed and power simultaneously. They are told not to hold back, but come in with everything they've got, and not to stop until they feel they have been completely dealt with. "Slow" would be the last word on my mind to describe what ensues." Vortexx - I knew your grip on reality was tenuous, but that is the most laughably ridiculous statement I've read on this board...! (...pauses to choke back laughter). That should do wonders for your credibility...! ROFL. Wow. I mean.... WOW! Okay, so in one simple statement you've revealed that 5 black belt PHS members are unable to overcome a single opponent...! Hilarious! You've also revealed the total and utter fantasy world that TKF exists in when it comes to realistic training. Wow.

Credentials 14 To all, In the old school, the rule was “lose a match and you lose you job”. I can see that the U.F.C. it is now much more enlightened. Lose two matches and you have to start from scratch. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbie_Lawler Then there are those who say Muay Thai has a well rounded curriculum. Well, mostly rounded…partial rounded…Maybe just plain crotchety :-O http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4XfmaJPeA4 Why bring this up, you ask? “Ancient Chinese Secret!” In Mo there are these things lumped together: “ Side Kick Catch(es) with Follow-up(s)”. Actually, there are many follow ups but it depends on the day you learn it. It also depends on whom you learn it from and how long they have been studying. You might say that unless you know the defense there is a “catch": to your side kick. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oujd54P3zhQ Regards, MrE2Me2

"I'd say it would only take one avg Muay Thai kick boxer to take him out." Having never met him, you haven't a clue what you're talking about. "Instructor takes on 5 crappy black belts at once....just makes him the best crappy black belt!" You obviously haven't seen any of the black belts in Edmonton. "Yeah...but why do they need to make up moves on the spot? I never see them apply principles as opposed to move for specific move." Huh? Not sure what you're trying to say here. After two decades of training the instructors know exactly what works and what doesn't. It's not like they're inventing brand new moves on the spot and just hoping they work. Everything they do is rooted in the underlying principles which interconnect all aspects of the system. The purpose of specific techniques is to illustrate these principles. If you haven't seen this, it's cause you haven't stepped foot into a studio for years. When you study Newton's laws of gravity, you practice by working through a bunch of specific problems. But being able to solve a number of specific problems is less important than understanding the fundamental laws which underlie them all. The purpose of practicing with specific problems is to help you understand how to apply the principles. "The point is right now if you walked in against a Thai boxer is that you would simply lose. You even freely admit that." Another example of how you consistently put words into people's mouths. I never said I would lose. I said I'd be uncomfortable. And we were talking about the ring. If we were to fight on the street, being able go for targets such as the groin, which most Thai boxers never train to protect, would give me an advantage. We certainly do condition ourselves at TKF, but not to the extent that Thai boxers do, because, like I said, I value my health, longevity, and well-being which I enjoy every day more than my ability to take a beating, which is not very likely to happen.

"Okay, so in one simple statement you've revealed that 5 black belt PHS members are unable to overcome a single opponent...! Hilarious!" The opponent happens to be a 3rd degree black belt with nearly two decades of training. It makes total sense for him to be able to defeat 5 single degrees. It speaks about the system and his ability, not theirs. I don't see what's so hilarious. "You've also revealed the total and utter fantasy world that TKF exists in when it comes to realistic training." What's so unrealistic about having to deal with 5 attackers coming in at full speed and power simultaneously, without holding back, coming in with everything they've got, and not stopping until they feel they have been completely dealt with? I think that's about as realistic as you can get without actually maiming and killing people.

RE 5 on 1
"Okay, so in one simple statement you've revealed that 5 black belt PHS members are unable to overcome a single opponent...! Hilarious!" The opponent happens to be a 3rd degree black belt with nearly two decades of training. It makes total sense for him to be able to defeat 5 single degrees. It speaks about the system and his ability, not theirs. I don't see what's so hilarious. "You've also revealed the total and utter fantasy world that TKF exists in when it comes to realistic training." What's so unrealistic about having to deal with 5 attackers coming in at full speed and power simultaneously, without holding back, coming in with everything they've got, and not stopping until they feel they have been completely dealt with? I think that's about as realistic as you can get without actually maiming and killing people." I've haven't posted in quite a while however this one deserves a response. DrunkenMonkey, You've seen the lab setting that is TKF. Are you surprised? Vortexx, I think you're stretching it here. I can tell you that teacher won't last 1 min if he was attacked by 2 of any of the people I train with these days, let alone 5. The standard kick/ punch lab attack that exemplifies TKF training is limited, to say the least. In a realistic situation that teacher would be PUMMELLED into submission with a realistic full power, full attack by 5 well-trainied attackers. Give your head a shake before you post.

"The opponent happens to be a 3rd degree black belt with nearly two decades of training. It makes total sense for him to be able to defeat 5 single degrees. It speaks about the system and his ability, not theirs. I don't see what's so hilarious. " - That is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard. Vortexx you make Temple supporters look absolutely foolish. I doubt your instructor could take on 3 black belts at the same time, never mind 5. I've trained with a World Champion in kickboxing, an instructor with a 3rd degree in Kung Fu and 5th degree in Jiu - jitsu, Grand Master with two 8th degrees in Filipino martial arts and I don't think any of them could take on 5 black belts simultaneously. I am pretty confident in saying that your instructor would not even be comparable to any of these guys.

"You've seen the lab setting that is TKF." You haven't been in the studios for years. You've seen nothing. "I can tell you that teacher won't last 1 min if he was attacked by 2 of any of the people I train with these days, let alone 5." You've never met him, and I haven't seen the people you train with, so this kind of comparison is simply ridiculous. Besides, I'm not talking about a fight that lasts 1 minute. I'm talking about something that's over in 20 seconds at most. "The standard kick/ punch lab attack that exemplifies TKF training is limited, to say the least." We train to defend against much more than the standard kick/punch lab attacks that you were used to. But you've never even seen the new studios, so you wouldn't know that. "In a realistic situation that teacher would be PUMMELLED into submission with a realistic full power, full attack by 5 well-trained attackers." Again, you've never seen him. This is simply your (uninformed) opinion. In the demo the defender has to maintain enough control not to seriously injure anyone (which can be a challenge since the attackers are coming in full speed and power). In a real defense situation, his job would actually be simpler because he wouldn't have to worry about holding back.

"I doubt your instructor could take on 3 black belts at the same time, never mind 5." If you'd know something about fighting multiple opponents, than you'd know that the most important concept is the ability to funnel them in so that you never have to deal with more than one or two attackers at once. If you've mastered this with 3 good attackers, it's not such a big jump to 5 or even 7. Your chance of getting hit, of course, increases, but if you're breathing properly and are conditioned enough to take a few punches, this should not slow you down. Mind you, I'm not talking about 10 minute sparring matches or anything. I'm talking about a fight which ends 10 to 20 seconds after it starts. The attackers are disabled on the first engagement, so that they don't usually get a second chance to come in (i.e. they're finished off the first time round). "I've trained with a World Champion in kickboxing, an instructor with a 3rd degree in Kung Fu and 5th degree in Jiu - jitsu, Grand Master with two 8th degrees in Filipino martial arts and I don't think any of them could take on 5 black belts simultaneously." You're simply pointing out the limitations of the styles these masters train. Most systems aren't specifically designed to deal with multiple opponents. Kickboxing is primarily geared towards one-on-one matches in the ring. Jiu-jitsu is primarily a grappling art and it's hard to deal with multiple attackers when you're on the ground. I don't know enough to comment about Filipino arts. Moh, on the other hand, was designed from the beginning to be effective against a number of opponents simultaneously. As far as the ranking goes, it varies greatly from system to system (and sometimes even within the system), so making a belt comparison between styles is misleading. We had a guy come in about a couple month ago who had a 2nd degree black belt in Taekwondo. He had been training for about 4 years, and was on a level with our green belts. Now, I'm not saying Taekwondo is necessarily bad or anything, but they do have a different ranking system from us. (They also train for a different purpose and with a different set of rules in mind.) "I am pretty confident in saying that your instructor would not even be comparable to any of these guys." Once more just pure speculation. You've never seen my instructor, I've never seen these other guys.