"Can't the art speak for itself? If so, then why rip off forms and claim it as their own?" I don't think TKF in general can be blamed for ripping off forms. In fact, most people blame it for just the opposite (having forms different from everybody else).

"TKF teaches the most universal, verstile style" That's nonsense. The current instructors would certainly never say that. Everybody with any sense at all knows that there's no such thing as the "best" style. It all depends on who you are and what your goals are. I believe TKF is versatile enough (the way it's taught now) for most practical street situations. I haven't encountered anything yet which a well-skilled Moh practitioner could not handle. "You are forbidden to train in other styles" Students are asked not to cross-train for some very good reasons (which I posted earlier). But we're certainly encouraged to view as much of other styles, demonstrations, and competitions as we wish. The current chiefs have no fear of students leaving because they're not likely to see something better than what they currently see in the studio.

To all, Follow this link and there is a picture of Olaf and Stan Lee. http://www.gingwu.com/founder.asp What is said on this link may also lead to a dispute. Said dispute being over which kung fu school was actually in Edmonton first. But let us leave that dispute for another time. The reason I posted this is because there has been more than one allegation made. The essence of the allegations on this thread concern whether Olaf was any good. I have posted this here because of that very reason. I put it to you this way: Here is a picture of Olaf and Stan. (Or do I have to spell it out?) ‘Nuff said! Regards, MrE2Me2

Does this picture prove that Olaf is any good? Looks like good old Stan is giving His Holiness a nice "little" groin shot.

One thing I found out that other masters in Edmonton do say about GMS was that he was very strong. Thats about the only positive thing I ever heard about him.

I jsut stumbled upon this thread. ... I thought this arguement was dead but i see ti is not. I will say my bit. Are there better schools than TKF? yes. Of course there are, and somewhere out there is a best school. it is not close for everyone. Is TKF utter useless crap? No. Everyone who walked through those doors and signed up made a choice to pay to learn something they did not know. Did TKF make them worse fighters? No. Did it teach them incorrectly? no. Did it fail to teach ground defence? No. Here's the one thing that people don't get. TKF teaches application of motion better than any school I have encountered. They also teach you a huge assortment of blocks, strikes and combinations. If you train it for years you will be able to defend against untrained attackers. I left TKF a long time ago. I have studied many styles of Kung Fu since and practiced with people form many styles including others who own schools and jujitsu black belts. TKF teaches you what you need to know to deal with situations. This is how all schools teach. Then they teach how to react faster and develope good habits. When someone cannot touch their toes the day they walk through the door you have to start somewhere! Where TKF failed in the time I was there and up until the most recent changes as far as i know, is that it didn't provide proper advanced training. The instructors were so used to skills classes they had an "orange belt or below" mindset. (Yes that was a rule for skills classes) From my new perspectives let me explain groundfighting at TKF. Opponant on chest. This one is actually a great technique. We start having a scenario where the wrists are pinned and you use counter leverage to roll your opponant, hooking his leg with your own foot to prevent him from sprawling to the side and preventing the role. With the concept of applications of techniques I have been able to use the movement principles of this technique to get out of any situation where an opponant is sitting on top of me. I have had a jujitsu black belt sit high on my chest, pin my shoulders with his knees and hug my arms in tight to the side of my body while he grabs my head. Prevent the sprawl by hooking one side, bridge the opposite hip and leg, over they go. Even when they are twice my weight. This technique has come under perhaps more fire than any other from anti-TKF people. It is actually one of the most useful techniques in the systme if you actually spend the time to stop hating it and study it. To many TKF brown belts who left were people who skimmed the book so to speak. Brown belt isn't even ready to start analyzing the style yet, you are still becoming proficient at doing the techniques. In 99% of cases if a brown belt is asked all the details of every technique in the system they will have forgotten entire techniques and hosts of other important information. Some had/have great skill but they very rarely can recall the fine details you need to truly begin to study the style. What are three important things to ensure something as simple as a flying front kick is successful? Name six important characteristics of a slide step? That sort of thing. Finally alot of brown belts are just plain lazy or have lost interest. I have seen 3rd degree brown belts asking for help with Hung forms because they haven't trained them in so many months. If anyone here hit a point where they had nothing to learn at TKF or they were learning too slowly and thus they left and trained elsewhere then congratulations, you did the right thing. When you entered the doors you needed to learn a few things, you paid, you trained, you accomplished your goal. I recently read about how the new TKF has some old instructors and PHS back training. I personally would never go back. I understand that style of kung fu and have seen it's uses and weaknesses. My studies are in a different place and I can honestly say I prefer it this way. I must however add that if I had not been an instructor for TKF and learned their system their way I likely would never have been able to learn the things I learn now as quickly. I wouldn't be able to extract applications form techniques in other styles as rapidly and creatively. I would say that 10 years at TKF better prepares someone to be a great martial artist than 10 years of Taekwondo or Karate. But it all depends on what kind of heart they train with. I can teach a beginner the most complex motions I know, but their front kicks will still suck until they log the hours practicing it. TKF and it's skill classes are great introductions to Kung Fu. It is the student who intends to never cross train or study outside TKF i am cautious about.

You make some very good points in there, North. I'm not sure I'd call brown belts lazy per se , although some certainly are. It's more that some fall into the trap of thinking that they are at a high level of understanding. Usually it's shortly later you find out you have a ton yet to learn.

North, it is fortunate that you didn't decide to train taijiquan. I have found that tkf has been detrimental to my current training. Whether it is stances, stepping, looseness or applications from"techniques" I have had lots of unlearning to do. I can honestly say that tkf had me pointed in exactly the wrong direction to what I now train. Now I realize that some Masters, like Sensei Kanazawa, have learned both Karate and later Taijiquan, I would not say that he has mastered taiji but has incorporated into his karate, to the point where it is hardly "traditional" shotokan. There are few teacher's of Sensei Kanazawa's calibre out there, I am not, nor I would suspect anyone at tkf, save for GMS! Maybe!

Indeed, I did mean perticular brown belts. Not all are equal after all. In point of fact I have trained Tai Chi, both before and after my TKF training. Hehe, you used that word I hate "unlearn." ;) I am of the opinion that you will find you didn't unlearn anything. You learned to do it differently which in essence means you learned something new. You may have had habits that made this difficult but that does not mean the techniques behind those habits is incorrect only the fact you had the habit in the first place. I am certain when you finnish your Tai Chi training you will find you revisit those old tkf techniques and see a completely different side to them. Here is one you can play with now perhaps. When you are doing push hands insert applications to hooking punches in your arm movements and see how your classmates respond. Move them sideways with a pull (hook) and then push. It is effective for uprooting most of the younger students. Pushhands with an instructor is just a test of concentration and fluidity imho. The moment you lose your focus even a little, bam you are stepping back. Anyhow I liked your message about Sensei Kanazawa, it makes me realize that generalizations like "TKF is better than Karate" should not be made. Every school is different even in other arts. Out of curiosity what style of Tai Chi are you studying?

Nice posts North, I generally agree with most of what you say, I particulairly liked your assesments regarding brown belt students (this would apply to any style): "To many TKF brown belts who left were people who skimmed the book so to speak. Brown belt isn't even ready to start analyzing the style yet, you are still becoming proficient at doing the techniques.... Some had/have great skill but they very rarely can recall the fine details you need to truly begin to study the style... Finally alot of brown belts are just plain lazy or have lost interest. I have seen 3rd degree brown belts asking for help with Hung forms because they haven't trained them in so many months..." Ironically it is mostly students who only achieved this level who really trash the Moh Kempo/ Pai hu Shih style, you don't see many Black belts or higher saying the style is crap... I can hear the drums beating already...

Unlearning or a change of habits, I guess both could apply. Take stepping, for example Moh style has you stepping on the balls of your feet while taijiquan has its stepping on the heels. Or arm motions, Moh seems to use a stiffer torso method in conjunction with the arm motions, in taijiquan all arm motions are initiated with the torso, the dan tien specifically. Not that Moh and taijiquan do not have very similar flight paths in what Ed Parker would call the "key motions". THe four "energies" of peng, lu, ji and an can be found in Moh techniques, well not the "energies" but rather the flight paths of these motions are similar. What is different is the "how" they are achieved! As for push hands, well I must admit my experience in that type of training is limited. I am currently trying to get more"song" in my training of the form. Song means loosenes or relaxed but not limp or floppy, you must have an understanding of the principal of "peng". I could start push hand training tomorrow but my teacher says that I am still a bit stiff in my upper body. This stiffness would make my push hand training more force against force,( taijiquan's cardinal sin). I am following my teacher's advice, mainly as I stressed to him that I wished a more "traditional " training experience. I study a sub style of Chen Taijiquan, Feng Zhiqiang would be considered the GM.

Alot of students have the stiffness of the upper body and you are correct, the moh system encourages it and makes good use of it. it is effective in bulldozer type movements such as crashing in from horse stance. It does impair fluidity of motion. (peng) I like your use of the word "song" it nicely explains a principle that comes up often. Tell a student to relax and they become too relaxed. Peng is important, extremely important. Something to try if you have not already: I have found most of the students I train who are too stiff don't need to relax the whole body per se, but rather just need to drop the shoulders. When you train make sure the shoulders are always dropped ala the opposite of a shrug. Even in Moh it would be a mistake to have the shoulders shrugged high, they must always be relaxed. It sounds like you are completely on the right path to making the most required breakthrough in your training atm. :) Congratulations on that. Once you learn to relax the upper body and find your "song" so to speak, you will start to see the differences in movement. Where I am at in my own training the difference in movment is the most important issue. I hate watching UFC and seeing people lumber towards each other with locked out legs and tiny little shuffle steps. They are aware of their spacial relation to their opponant and the targets they must strike but they don't seem to take advantage of positioning when standing. When they grapple they suddenly are proficient in making use of position and movement but on their feet, no. The UFC still has some evolution in standup fighting to go through.

Thanks for the kind words North. You are quite correct about the shoulder's, my teacher is on me just about every class with the typical RELAX! :wink: I spend about half my training on exercises just to help me relax; standing and various qi gong, some of which I posted in my training tips category. I share your feelings about the UFC stand up game. It's like everyone thinks that jui-jitsu is a ground game and has no standup. It seems to me that the mid-range in UFC is it's weak link, not that I'm a devoted UFC watcher, maybe some of the fighters excel at that, it's just that I've never seen it. THen again I'm not aware of any UFC fighters that have a taiji, baqua or xingyi background.

To all, On a slightly different note: One of the things that I was taught was that people trained, not styles. In essence, the man made the difference. And yet, I have learned from five different guys that all knew Moh Kempo. So I have revised my thinking somewhat. While it is the man that makes the art lively, the art must be there to begin with. It is simply not enough to bang away and depend upon one’s willingness to carry the day. Without a solid martial foundation and real fighting ability, no man can stay at it for long. Just look at the U.F.C., for example, the guys that are at the top are all trained in H2H. We may disagree on what constitutes “highly trained”. But I believe we’d all agree that trained in martial arts is widely diverse field, too. Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE