That is LINK. Some days you get the bear and somedays the bear gets you!

Just a thought I had, but I have tried to mention my main arguement as being TKF's moh system and PHS system don't have a "major flaw" so to speak. The flaw is in the fact that TKF does not allow their students to explore the vast world of Kung Fu outside TKF. In that sense the flaw is that TKF is incomplete. I have studied the Wing Chun system among others and I could easily say that Wing Chun is equally as incomplete as the Moh system. In some cases Wing Chun is worse as they do teach a few techniques that simply do not work when put to test on the mat on a resisting opponant. The principles in these lousy techniques do not hold up. Some techniques from Moh do not work when put on the mat with a resisting opponant however I have found the principles can be adapted to make them work far more than Wing Chun. Opponant on Chest for example is a foolish setup. Only cousins etc are likely to pin your wrists in just such a way. But ignoring that part of it and looking at the foot lock, bridge and cross unbalancing it can be adapted to any situation of being in the guard and still have very realistic results. Locking the foot being the crucial step that I have not seen anywhere outside moh. In Wing Chun they teach an armbar defence that doesn't work on someone who is resisting with tensed up legs. The principle makes sense but because of body position and realism it doesn't have anything to offer. It cannot be adapted to make it work. People complain about Moh knife defenses. I think they have value. I am unlikely to use a bell block to stop a direct thrust with a knife, however if I have practiced pulling someone into an elbow thousands of times followed by an arm break that is a good habit to have when caught off guard on the street. The sweeping an overhead stab one is a little more fishy but I was originally taught that as a lock with a panther fist strike to the throat which is a sound defence against a knife. Wing Chun knife defences are beyond rediculous. Catleap to avoid the attack and footsweep the opponant to the ground? Not going to happen IRL. SO, is Moh worse or better than Wing Chun? I think they both have something to offer. i think the real issue is TKF's "train here and only here" philosophy. Any school with such a philosophy is holding back their more advanced students. Perhaps having it say "Train here and only here for at least a year to acclimate the brain to Kung Fu before you search elsewhere for techniques of value" would be a wiser way of creating students. Perhaps the real problem is that TKF fears they will lose paying customers to other schools if they allow them to cross train? i honestly think their skills classes and KFC provide a greater developement routine than most other schools I have encountered. Sure sparring for an hour or grappling is a better workout but it is something ALOT of people are not comfortable with for a few years. The layout of a skills class is very good for all types of martial artists. BTW, I have had a great many students of Karate come through my doors. Some styles such as Shotokan are very rigid and linear, but others use cirlces and sweeping motions that are extremely similar to Hung Gar. Is Moh a form of Karate? In my opinion it is not. People will believe what they want to believe but I see more Kung Fu in Moh than I do Karate, and if it were karate it would not be a linear and direct form, but rather a circular and sweeping form of the Japanese arts. The entire "TKF is Karate, Simon used to call it Karate" arguement is rather silly. I bet at one time it was Karate. It was Kempo Karate which is strongly connected to the Chinese arts. Simon added in techniques from various Kung Fu styles making it even more Chinese in influence. So of the two arts it is far more Kung Fu. My 2 cents...

"Many scenarios exist and trust me when I tell you that I have found several in my time that the Moh system has no realistic defence against." Since the new studios opened I have been shown many applications which I had never seen before and which I would never have come up with myself. I'm sure you haven't explored every possible application in the Moh system either, since that's an impossible feat even for a master. So if you've found scenarios that the system is unable to deal with, I'm willing to bet that there are others who could come up with the needed applications. So is the Moh system complete? I don't think any style is totally complete, but I believe that Moh is more complete than most, and is complete enough for all practical situations. There has so far been nothing I could come up with that my current instructor cannot deal with quickly and effectively, without needing prior time to think about what he's going to do. Can everyone training the style do that? Of course not, but the same is true for any style. "My goal is to open the minds of TKF students and teachers alike so they will fix one of the last remaining problems and go cross train." You train other styles in order to broaden your experience by exposing yourself to a greater variety of attacks and defenses. I recognize the merit in what you do and I'm glad it's working for you, but it's not my way. With the current experience of instructors, we are now exposed to a much greater variety of applications than ever in the past. I'm satisfied with the mix that I'm getting. So while some wrestling would improve my grappling skills and some Tai Chi would improve my sticky hands and so on and so on, I would only be able to take up something else at the expense of my TKF training (simply because of a lack of time), and I would be spending my time focusing on something which I don't believe deserves so much emphasis. Same goes with the fancy motions which TKF is lacking. Yes, they may perhaps be effective in some situations, but learning them would be taking away from my time training other more effective, simpler, and more practical motions which I'm way more likely to need and use in a self-defense situation. Now, some of you might say, why not leave it as an option to cross-train if someone wants to? I think I have already answered that in previous posts by pointing out the dangers of cross-training. You spend years training at TKF to develop muscle memory for proper stances, blocks, strikes, etc. Then you jeopardize all of that by training a different system with contrary approaches. When it comes to actually applying the stuff in a real self defense situation, your muscle memory might confuse the styles and get you killed in an attempt to do a block or strike from one style out of an incompatible stance from another style. The job of TKF instructors would become much harder as they try to fight against all the bad (or incompatible) habits picked up in other systems. In some individual cases (perhaps yours, North), the cross-trainer might indeed benefit from the exposure to other styles. But on the whole, most cross-trainers would likely end up with an ineffective mish-mash of styles, getting good at none of them, and contaminating other students with whom they work. I think that most practitioners would be much wiser to remain with a single good style which they can work to perfect. "Perhaps having it say "Train here and only here for at least a year to acclimate the brain to Kung Fu before you search elsewhere for techniques of value" would be a wiser way of creating students." Are you kidding? A year is nothing. You're certainly better equipped to defend yourself after a year of training, but you need to be at least an experienced brown belt before you're starting to really understand the style and how it works and fits together. Judging from posts on this forum, some people claiming to have trained for many years still have no understanding of the fundamental concepts and potential of the system. "Perhaps the real problem is that TKF fears they will lose paying customers to other schools if they allow them to cross train?" I don't think so. If anything, it seems that a lot of people leave or do not join because of it. TKF has also turned people down because they wanted to cross-train. With the current level of instruction, cross-trainers would be much more likely to attract other students to our studio than leave themselves.

"People complain about Moh knife defenses." If they didn't work, former TKF instructor Mark Smith (Atkin) would not have received the Canadian National Police Association's Excellence Award last year for disarming and subduing a robber armed with 4 knives. If they didn't work, the current Edmonton chief would not be alive today to teach them. If they didn't work, GMS himself would have been dead decades ago and this forum would not now exist to discuss him and his style.

"TKF deliberately teaches the student forms where the moves are incorrect. These mix ups are designed to "hide knowledge"." Not sure what you're talking about. I've always found it fairly easy to extract good applications from forms. What exactly do you mean by moves being "incorrect"? "What was the first thing the "master" would tell the new PHS student? "Here is the TRUE way of punching...." and then demonstrate the inverted PHS punches." That's nonsense. If you were told that, it was only to impress you. PHS builds on the Moo Pai foundation. It's simply the next step in training and applying the style. The Moo Pai punches are in no way wrong, and can be applied extremely effectively. Just because Einstein's Theory of Relativity is more advanced than Newtonian physics, doesn't mean that Newtonian physics is obsolete. Each has its uses and applications. As Current Student pointed out, a person skilled in Moo Pai may be able to defeat someone in PHS. The reason that PHS members tend to be better than non-PHS is because they tend to have been training much longer, and not because they know something magical.

Some of you have brought up practical questions about the Moh style (such as why we don't bob and weave or why we lock in our breath), and I've replied with the reasons behind why we do so. Now it's your turn. Over the last few days I've been watching a bunch of video clips of various other martial arts styles. Even in the best of them there were many points which I didn't like, and which could be easily taken advantage of by someone proficient in the Moh style. 1.) Front kicks are done with the toes pointed. I don't care how many years you spend conditioning your toes, but if you kick full force and it gets blocked by a hip bone or knee, you're going to get them broken. 2.) Most of the kicks tend to be swinging with a nearly straight leg. These are slower, more telegraphed, easier to block, and don't have the distance or penetration of thrusting kicks. I see a lot of swinging front kicks to the head. Unless the opponent's body is bent forward, they're going to skip or glance off the chest. I'm not saying that all swinging kicks are useless, I'm just wondering why I don't see many thrusting kicks. 3.) Almost all the kicks seem to be to the head. That makes them slower, takes away from their reach, makes them easier to trap, jeopardizes your balance, and leaves you way more exposed to groin and leg strikes, throws, etc. 4.) I very rarely saw any sort of pull-back after a kick. Again, that leaves you much more exposed to groin strikes, catches, throws, and sweeps. 5.) Some styles were filled with fancy flying kicks and other acrobatics. If any of those were tried on a senior TKF member, the person throwing them would end up landing on his butt (at best) or on his head (at worst). They look great in the movies or in a form where you're not actually fighting, and are maybe good for developing leg strength and balance, but they are also very difficult to execute with any effectiveness, require a lot of energy and athletic ability, are easy to defend against, and leave the person doing them very vulnerable. 6.) Some styles seem to have way too much stepping and movement. On top of expending unnecessary energy, in many practical self-defense situations you may simply have nowhere to step, and if you don't know how to hold your ground and defend without running all over the place, you're lost! 7.) Most steps are done without proper groin protection such as bringing the knees together and having proper angles on the feet and knees. 8.) In many styles there is way too much leaning. If the practitioner tried that against someone who is good at locking, pulling, and unbalancing, he would end up off his feet in no time. 9.) Many of the motions are very exaggerated, with blocks extending way past the body. This is totally unnecessary, is a waste of time, and leaves you vulnerable while you're doing them. If you at least got a lot of power from the motions, that could be useful. But most of what I saw tended to be for aesthetic reasons and did little to increase power. 10.) Other styles were full of very crammed, in-tight hand motions. Though fast, they looked like they had very little power, especially against a bigger, powerful committed opponent. 11.) Some forms I saw were indeed very fancy and flowing, but most were full of repetition and looked like they had way less content (and were more boring to train) than some of the TKF forms.

"Not to mention applications that simply won't work in the real world." I'm wondering how many of you train with practical self defense in mind. Do you consider the factors that may make some of your techniques impractical on the street? Do you ever go, as we do, and try your defenses in the alley, wearing street clothes, with bad lighting, against multiple attackers, with loose gravel or ice under your feet, and obstacles such as curbs, fences, garbage cans, vehicles, and telephone poles in the way? Do you discuss and practice using all these obstacles to your advantage? Do you ever train, as we do, to defend yourself out of a car? What about against common thug weapons such as chains? Do you discuss common thug tactics and street attacks and how to deal with them? We do.

"You're perspective is limited to a bubble." "You miss the point of all of the comments that go against your grain and you won't look at them objectively." And you do? You think I'm in a bubble. But you're in your own bubble. You haven't stepped foot in a TKF studio in years, yet you think you know everything about the style, and the knowledge and skill of those who train and teach it. "I also had little to compare them to and now realize they were not as good as I originally thought." I only realized how good they actually were in the last year or so, and I've been around for a long time. Have you ever seen two masters or third-degree black belts spar each other full out? The speed, power, and intensity with which they fight is far above anything I've ever seen in other styles. Have you seen an instructor accidentally break a thick wooden staff with an arm block during a class while teaching a technique, and then doing it again on purpose to illustrate the point? I have. Has anyone here seen someone take a staff blow across their shin hard enough to shatter the staff into pieces, yet walk away without a bruise? I have. Really, I now see more impressive things during a skill class than I've seen in any class or demo for years before. When the instructor wants to demonstrate a technique or concept, he usually gets senior PHS, not junior instructors to attack him, and gets them to come with full power and speed, and often with whatever strike they want.

I will answer your questions from my perspective, I cannot speak for others. 1) Toes can be conditioned, yes they can still break from the force of a blow, however if one practices for years and can kick through boards with this style of strike they will be fine to strike an opponant. Shoes afford armor to the foot as well. The way I had it explained to me is that if you are wearing your street shoes a toe kick has more penetration and is a more effective kick. Training them on the bag to condion the foot is not just for the toes but to ensure your ankles are able to handle the stress of the blow from that striking situation. If you only practiced striking with the ball of the foot you would condition the ankle for that striking position. Though they are similar the ankle needs to be condiotned for toe kicks if you intend to use toe kicks. Moh does not use toe kicks. Alot of other arts do not as well. 2) I have seen both styles of kicks and have not encountered a school that teaches only the swinging kicks. Moh also teaches swinging kicks. Stiff swinging back kick, swinging kick to spine. These strike with the heel instead of the toes or ball of the foot. In my personal experience the front snapkick has been taught almost identical to TKF in each kung fu system I have studied. It's a staple move similar to horse stances existing in every style. 3) Kicks to the head are for body conditioning and strength developement but the only target I have ever heard mention of at that level is the throat. TKF teaches the high rising back kick to the throat as well so think of it in a similar light combined with the low stances in skills calsses to condiotn greater strength. Same principle. 4) on this one I have to say that the defensive postures after a strike are a strength of the Moh system. The Moh system seems to be very careful to avoid sweeps. Other styles are more reckless in their movements. It's one of the stylistic differences that i think makes Moh unique and worthwhile. I apply the Moh pullbacks to my movements in other styles when it is practical. For issues that i will mention when I answer question 6 it is sometimes not as practical. Otherwise, point for Moh on this one. 5) Your question sort of answers itself. Flying spinning kicks exist in the Moh system as well. Nobody is perticularily fond of them as a realistic combative practice but they do condition the body well and make for something challenging to overcome in ones personal training. having them in the forms gets the student to develope a crisper flying technique and work the cardio alot! Most TKF students simply neglect the flying spinning kicks, and as they do not exist in the forms they are a chore to practice while in a beautiful form they become a pleasure to practice. 6) True you may have nowhere to step in an elevator, car, or ice, but often you do have somewhere to step. This is one of the issues I find very important as a weakness of the Moh system. Trying to apply the Moh system against 5 attackers and defeat them all (Sparring scenario) is extrmeely hard using the shorter movments. When I apply the larger, faster and more mobile movements of other systems I have much better results in 5-1 sparring. In my experience the moment I stop moving I always get overwhelmed and defeated. Granted the attackers in such scenarios are trained it still happens. One way I used to think of it when I first had this realization was that I only have 3 useable limbs to block and strike with at any given time. 3 limbs cannot deal with 15 limbs so you have to use movement to fix the odds. Short distances travelled result in more than 1 attacker able to attack. Faster and more mobile movements make 15 vs 3 into 3 vs 3 vs 3 vs 3 vs etc. 1 attacker at a time. Moh makes good use of the way it does train, and affords great training for when space is limmited however it doesn't teach a student how to make proper use of space when such does exist. I honestly do not think I would emerge victorious if forced to fight 5 men in an elevator. In a backyard or family room however I would feel alot more comfortable. This is based on the results of sparring scenarios. 7) Most styles I have encountered teach a version of Tigers Hip or they make use of stances where the hips are not square except at the moment of striking. Indeed I see your point on this issue as it was something I noticed in Wing Chun as a huge weakness to the style. They often move forward in such a way as to expose the groin to potential damage from accidents. Bak Sil Lum and Traditional Shaolin use the hip to protect the groin, Baguazhang keeps the groin closed religiously. Hung Gar appears open to groin shots however I have not fully trained that style so I cannot say with certaintly. 8) I have not experienced leaning in any style other than Traditional Shaolin. Leaning is almost always bad I agree. In Traditional Shaolin it is used more for leaning away from the attacker to create deception. Essentually you wnat the attacker to think you are retreating when in fact you are attacking. This is a beautiful and useful part of that style. 9) I havenot encountered blocks going way passed the body. I have seen alot of sweeping motions with the arms similar to say, Lung I but never a block going way passed the body. I don't know what you were viewing so I cannot say but I would agree that blocks need never be overdone. 10) This is an area that is a weakness of Moh in my opinion. Power is not from the distance travelled during a strike but rather how the strike is delivered. Moh teaches the push pull but most if not all other styles I have studied taught silk reeling energy. In Kung Fu if you can simply place your fist on the opponants solar plexes the fight is soon over. See if you can get your hands on some footage of Bruce Lee doing the 1 inch punch. In reality not even a full inch is needed for this to have enough power to do severe damage. it is one thing you should look into though. You wouldn't want your teachers to teach you to pull your fist back "cocking" it if you will beofre a strike. Likewise you don't wan to limmit yourself to only mediocre styles of power generation. Small hand motions keep the torso safe while snaking the hand in for a finnishing strike. Moh is lacking in this perticular area of training. 11) Id on't know what forms you looked at. Some I have learned were indeed horribly boring (Wing Chun) with alot of repitition for conditioning. Most beginnner students need a ton of wrist conditioning to increase strength and flexability in that joint. If it repeats alot you can bet the teachers of that style know some powerful applications for it. Look at the hundreds of applications you can come up with for Calming the Ocean. I suppose the 18 Temple Motions could have the student do Calming the Ocean 15 times in a row then move on to the next part. TKF teaches application of movements in form very well. It is one of the strengths of the style as well. I personally believe this is because of the private instruction. So in the case of TKF there is no need for more than one movement of each type in the forms. Even still it exists however. Lung I again has the same motions repeated as many as 3 times. For the same reasons it is not useless in Lung I it is also not useless in other styles. You made note of my mention of 1 year before cross training. That would depend on the student of course but at a certain point a student learns fast and could handle more information. Not if they only practice 3 hours a week though. If I notice a student losing skill because his plate is too full then I tell them exactly what I feel. Namely that they need to focus on their foundation before adding to it. But I have found that the most dedicated students are able to absorb at a very fast rate once they stop "overthinking" the Kung Fu. In my experience it is generally less than a year for a dedicated student to achieve this state. Again it would depend on the student. It is impossible to give a set time for anything when it comes to training martial arts. As for the knife defences I think perhaps you missread me or were adding to my comment. I was stating the knife defences at TKF are worth knowing. I have seen alot of people complain about them in the past. I am not one of those people. The only thing I would/do add would be to have students spar where one has a knife and the other does not. Good questions, feel free to ask more if you have them. What styles were you looking at in the video clips you observed?

Point and Edge This is a post about Moh knife defenses during the early 1980’s. Training: It was during one KFC. Our instructor had us practice knife defenses. At first these attacks were prearranged. I was competent in my demonstration abilities. Then our instructor changed the drill. He had us attack in an unarranged order. My “attackers” all “killed” me several times. Finally, my instructor pulled me aside. He asked what I was doing. He brushed aside my explanation. “Just do what you regularly do”, he told me. So the next time I was “attacked”, I blocked and he dropped the wooden knife. The point of testimonial should be obvious. Fancy did not work in an unrehearsed situation. I never forgot. Reality: I once taught a transit driver for about 6 months. One night he was forced to defend a woman on his bus. When my student went to the aid of this woman, The guy tried to stab him in the abdomen. My student blocked, trapped and countered (several counters). The attacker went to jail, once he got out of the hospital. An investigating L.E.O. later commented, “I’d have shot him”. He considered the attack a life threatening event. I have read of the TKF instructor in Edmonton defending against the guy with 4 knives. I would very much like to hear from others who trained in Moh during different eras.

The problem with knife defenses from any system is you have to (1) train them a lot to become competent enough to use them. (2) gain a level of understanding of how the dynamics of a fight changes when a knife is introduced. (3) Have a high level of mental preparedness(training) so that even when highly trained, you don't freeze when you see the knife or get cut. (4) Related to point 1 learn enough techniques well enough that you are ready for the unexpected which will likely occur; at the same time don't try and learn so many that you arn't good at any of them.

Hello Current Student, I agree about what you have posted about knife defenses. I’m glad to see that you still train solid principles regarding knife defense. I was taught, A knife wielder has a “distinct and lethal advantage over the unarmed defender”. This is because he has a further reach with the knife than when he is bare handed. And he can inflict more damage with a knife than with bare hands. Also, reaching out to disarm him placed the unarmed defender at risk. I was taught to defend the inside of the limbs because this is where the main veins, arteries, etc, were. It was possible to live with a wound to the outside of a limb but less likely when that wound was to the inside of the limb. I was also taught to present the right side of the body and thus, keep the vital organs further from the knife. On the other hand, When it gets thick, reflexes kick in and what you train comes out.

RE.....
Vortexx: ""TKF deliberately teaches the student forms where the moves are incorrect. These mix ups are designed to "hide knowledge"." Not sure what you're talking about. I've always found it fairly easy to extract good applications from forms. What exactly do you mean by moves being "incorrect"? .........." Really? Do you think going into a cat stance for "calming the ocean" is a good idea? If so then you need to have someone really have a go at you. My point is this; if training needs to become reactionary then you shouldn't train in ways that don't contradict this. I know many examples of incorrect combinations in the kenpo forms 1 to 3 and the 18 Temple motions. You mention you see unusable fluff in other systems. You are correct. I would suggest Moh/ PHS is littered with it as well. You can make anything work in a lab setting and this is probably the thing that bothers me the most about martial arts in general, not just TKF. "What was the first thing the "master" would tell the new PHS student? "Here is the TRUE way of punching...." and then demonstrate the inverted PHS punches." That's nonsense. If you were told that, it was only to impress you. PHS builds on the Moo Pai foundation. It's simply the next step in training and applying the style......." Yes, I know PHS builds on Moo Pai, etc. I was in PHS for years. Maybe it was a sales pitch. Grasshopper and any other PHS member in Ontario can validate this because Sparrow said at the end of each initiation. "This is the true way to punch........" Maybe he was just caught up in the theatre of the moment. There's nothiing special about the "PHS stuff". They may has well teach the PHS high punch to a complete beginner at the same moment they teach them knife hand #1. Who cares? It's just not that good to wait that long for it. I agree with you on your point about fancy demo forms etc, which seems to be the state of play with Wushu these days. I think the operative word there is "demo" as a lot of kung fu has become more of a performing art these days. "6.) Some styles seem to have way too much stepping and movement. On top of expending unnecessary energy, in many practical self-defense situations you may simply have nowhere to step, and if you don't know how to hold your ground and defend without running all over the place, you're lost!" Actually that is exactly what I think is a problem with TKF. They teach stepping patterns that don't really work and are unnatural. It's an area the creates a lot of habits that need to be unlearned after you leave. "7.) Most steps are done without proper groin protection such as bringing the knees together and having proper angles on the feet and knees." If need to be constantly trying to protect your groin with your stepping then I'd say your angles are wrong. I completely understand what you're saying because I trained what you train. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. Is what you're training wrong? No. Is it fast or the best way to do things? "Compared to what" would be my next question. I'm glad to see you're looking at clips on the net or whatever as a point of comparison. Maybe you could send us some links or we should create a links page so we know what you're taling about. I agree, there is a lot of crap out there. On the same note there are some really good ones. The problem is that you probably won't understand the good ones when you see them and they are few and far between. I don't mean that as a slam against you or what you train. It's just that there are foundational aspects to TKF training that contradict the fundamentals in other styles. If I sent you and Cam or you and North a link to the same video clip there's a good chance you would dismiss it and Cam or North would "Holy crap...that's a real insight." "10.) Other styles were full of very crammed, in-tight hand motions. Though fast, they looked like they had very little power, especially against a bigger, powerful committed opponent......" Again, you need to give us some examples here. That may very well be the case. I can tell you though that this may also be case of not being able to understand what you're looking at and the theories and strategies of the style itself. What kind of power were they using? How can judge someone's power unless you touch it? What's your strategy in that case? Now we're getting into an area of discussion that needs to take place in person. "You're perspective is limited to a bubble." "You miss the point of all of the comments that go against your grain and you won't look at them objectively." And you do? You think I'm in a bubble. But you're in your own bubble. You haven't stepped foot in a TKF studio in years, yet you think you know everything about the style, and the knowledge and skill of those who train and teach it......" Are you telling me the system has changed entirely since I left a few years ago? I can say for sure it hasn't because of your answers to any points we make. That statement is just silly. My perspective is totally different now. I train one style as my primary style. My sifu has over 45 years experience in this style and all my lessons are taught by him in a class that is very one on one teaching. I do occasionally train with other styles when I have time and I'm always discussing martial practice with other very experienced martial artists/ teachers who train different styles as well. Are you out west or in Ontario? Just curious because apparently they opened a new studio in Oakville/Burl. that continues to teach the TKF version of kenpo.

RE
Vortexx, One more thing....and this really goes out to everyone (myself included. We all talk about the reality of martial arts, what works, what doesn't, and on and on. I've found that when you watch actual video clips of real fights, and there's plenty to be found on the net, you can quickly see what works and what doesn't. Geoff Thompson has some great videos called "Animal Day" , with ways to train for this kind of reality. It's interesting how even the most experienced martial artists forget everything they've learned in an effort to save their butt.