Talk:Chin Na

Untitled
I've put Praying Mantis back in. I've sparred with many of them, their Chin Na is awesome, and a huge part of their style, the praying mantis bug's arms seizing their victims the way they do. It is also a big part of the style I study, but it doesn't predominate, so I don't include T'ai Chi in the article, for example.Fire Star 19:47, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

I hope it's not in bad taste to mention one school, but everything I've heard about Yang puts him head and shoulders above anybody else. RussNelson 04:52, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I would have to agree with RussNelson. There should be a mention of Dr. Yang.

I'm not going to change it but the last line does look awkward and random. It feels like an advertisement although I am sure you did not intend for it to be so.69.181.82.210 06:34, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I will change it. While Yang's books are relatively famous in the West, to say that he is highly regarded by the international martial art community compared to other practitioners isn't necessarily accurate. Qin na is a style of training that is found in most Chinese martial arts, I train it and teach it myself. If anything, there should only be a listing of Yang's book here, Yang himself should more accurately be mentioned at the White Crane Kung Fu complex of articles. Fire Star 13:31, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Dr Yang was Black Belt's martial artist of the year one year, though I don't know what other languages and countries that is in The snare 07:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!
List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art

Legacy....
Put bluntly this confuses things a lot and is all unsourced. Yes many MA techniques travelled between Japan & China, but mention of Aikido & the gentle way (i.e. Judo) that are Gendai budo (i.e. 19/20th century arts) seems odd. Samari learning from monks sound far a bit ropey to go unsourced soundign alot like the Bodhidharma legend, and term slike "widley considerd the mother of" are just trouble. Ignoring the national anagoism between Japan & China, it is not widely known about & most people don't know the the differance between kendo & capoeira and in MA circles the is largely "MY art is the real original". I would stongly suspect that japanese & chinese techniques have linked origins but it also dose not allow for later development of arts.

In short, this needs sourcing & re-wording to be neutral. --Nate1481 12:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Chinese invented the Gi now? NO. Stop. The Keikogi was created by Kano in the late 19th century early 20th centuary after kodokan judo was developed form the existant jujutsu, impling that the Japanese only use sumo till the Chinese civilised them is simply wrong, I'm reverting on mass as filletering out the plausable and the quetionable bits from the simple factual errors will be a nightmare I don't have time for. --Nate1481 11:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

point by point
While I don't doubt that Japnese and Chines marial arts are interelated, but imply that "judo is dressed up chin na and Kano tried to hid it" is misleading an dsimply inacurate. I have tied ot provide a balanced version but at least please pay attenion to the tone and style changes I have made.--Nate1481 14:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Qinna features both standing and ground-based grappling techniques. Nowhere in the linked reference mentioned that Qinna features ground-based grappling techniques. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.213.18.215 (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Qin Na is also attributed in creating Judo ... and developed what eventually became today's Judo & Jiu Jitsu. Who, where? If joint locking techniques were shared between china and japan it is dose not mean they are just based on Chin Na. If you were looking here: (some is almost a direct quote) it qualifies it twice, saying "Many martial arts historians believe that it was Chinese wrestling that greatly influenced" not "Chin na created all Japanese arts"
 * Judo was developed from jujutsu practices that can be traced roughly to the late 17th - early 18th century Yes, developed from somthing that was develpoed form somthing else i.e. changed There were already techiniques and methods present and a 300 year disconnection for adaptation & improvement, also have you ever heard of Parrallel evolution?
 * Kitō-ryū, openly admitted that they were directly influenced by Chen Yuan-Yun, - Unsourced.
 * Kitō-ryū also accredited Chen Yuan-Yun for his contributions to the creation of "gi" techniques in their school. - The Judogi was developed by kano from kimono so how beople were learnign 'clothing' (literal translation) technickes then i don't know.
 *  The discovery of Qin Na's influence has caused many jiu jitsu/judo practitioners to research/adopt Qin Na techniques in order to make comparisons and expand their grappling knowledge. and This has caused many practitioners to research Qin Na and make comparisons. WHO? Name some. Or again it's UNSOURCED.
 * Many martial artists, practicing styles such as Judo (柔道 Ruo Dao), [Jujutsu]] (柔術道 Rou Shu Dao), Aikido (合氣道 He Qi Dao), and Acudo ryu (shaolin qinna)have started to realize that a portion of the things they learned originated from the Chinese martial art of Chin Na. ... (as stated in Yang Jwing-Ming's "Analysis of Shaolin Chin Na Instructor's Manual for all Martial styles"). - as Yang Jwing-Ming is a chin na instructor this is not a secondary source, I have lost count of the dubious origins I have read about by someone promoting there art. Up to Alexander the great introduced Bodhidharma to pankration and it all comes from there or Roman gladiators fighting with samauri and teaching them techniques, the first it I think you will agree are far fetched or and the second plain wrong (teh 1000 year gap being the give away). This claim needs secondary sources that art independent of the subject, to prove it is not just as dubious as, while it is more plausabel, it is far from certain.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chin Na. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070409124124/http://www.chenstyle.com/methods/techniques/tech3.html to http://www.chenstyle.com/methods/techniques/tech3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:34, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Chin Na is absolutely both a generic term AND its own artform.
Guys, no one "in martial arts" agrees.

However there seems to be a rampant misconception here that Chin Na is somehow only the term of a series of locks and related sub-techniques incorporated in other established artforms.

This is simply not true. Chin Na stands as its own form. I've had my son training in it for years in one of the few Chin Na schools in the country under a Grandmaster. It comes from a very deep and old history, and as a result, much of it can be found to be later subsumed into other forms. Chin Na in the form that my son studies under is using the original more than 300 techniques, and it is jaw-dropping to watch.Tgm1024 (talk) 15:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)