There's a similar issue in climbing, where gyms opened up much more diversity from trad climbing, where even an improvised dyno is met with head shakes by some! While tradition is important imo, the evolution and branching out are vital for the progression of any sport! So let's have different names for different styles and let everyone have fun!
It‘s not just about flips. I do parkour since 2006 and I know that this debate is very old indeed. Parkour, in its pure form is a discipline (and no sport btw) for mainly self-preservation reasons or to help other people in an emergency for example. Etre fort pour etre utile. If you want to learn more about those things and really dig deep travel to Lisses, Evry, Sarcelles, etc. Train with people like Chau Belle Dinh or other traceurs from the first hour. Totally worth it in my opinion. I like your movement btw.
From what i have seen and heard at the beggining of my pk journey i always tought that David Belle was a purist all the time but really he wasn´t he did flips from time to time and it is clear that he did enjoy and ejoys parkour to this day and he doesn´t just see it as a means of training
Hope you don't mind some constructive criticism on the message in this video. Nobody ever had a problem with people doing flips. Even parkour purists do flips when they want to. The issue was simply that "parkour" was the wrong name for that. "Parkour" was the name of a specific discipline, a method of training by trying to move yourself past obstacles. Then, some time later, various people who didn't understand what parkour was started using the word to describe describe their own, different, thing. This confused everyone, made it harder to educate people about Parkour, and generally resulted in parkour being portrayed in a more negative light because it appeared as though the parkour "community" couldn't agree on anything. The word "parkour" gradually lost all meaning as more and more people started using it for many completely different and contradictory things. This was a problem for everyone because suddenly there were no obviously right answers which meant no progress could be made on understanding anything. But it was particularly a problem for the practitioners of the original discipline, because the name they had been using for many years had been taken away from them and now meant something different. The profile and reputation that they had worked hard to achieve was now being exploited and ruined by other people. That problem has never been solved. The parkour community still looks like a bunch of idiots who can't agree, instead of what it actually is, which is a bunch of people who all want to use the same name to describe completely different things. People have just stopped talking about it because we don't know how to make progress. But we're going to have to sort it out at some point.
Glasgow was plauged with the "purists" to but they were what we would call push up guys who came to jams got everyone in lines like a fitness class and got oeiple to do push ups instead of training and having fun single handed they ruined and ended sat jans that had ran since 2006
I think the purists were running on a weak argument. I doubt I've ever seen any parkour that is actually about the most efficient way to get from point A to point B, because generally speaking just walking and using stairs and elevators is way quicker and less energy-consuming and injury-inducing than finding a line, prepping it for ages and then doing the elaborate ten yard move you´ve spent the last five hours concocting and training. So in no real sense is any parkour move the fastest or most efficient way to clear that distance. It's always been about finding some impressive move and executing it to look cool. Purists could try to deny that by not including flourishes like a flip at the end, but the bit you include in the video of your "purist" mate, he's vaulting over posts on a path, with ample space on either side to just run past those posts. What world record time is quicker? A 100 meters sprint, or the 100 meters hurdles? Why is he wasting energy on vaulting those little posts when he could just leg it past them and get to "point B" way quicker? Because it's doesn't look as impressive as vaulting those posts, that's why. It's certainly not an attempt to show Usain Bolt he's been getting it wrong all this time, and the only reason he still holds that pathetic little world record of his is that there weren't any posts on the olympic running track to vault. But I think this was the same era where parkour athletes actually pretended you could use parkour to cover huge distances. I recall a Top Gear episode where one of the guys did a `race` in a small hatchback against two parkour guys from one end of Liverpool to the other end. As if that would ever be thing. And that´s just one example of the way parkour tended to be presented. Like "there are these guys who just start running and randomly jumping off bridges and rooftops, the police or anyone will never catch them". I'm happy the sport has moved on from that land of make-believe and got honest about what it is: basically gymnastics performed out in the real world, and whilst wearing a hoodie. Which is cool enough in itself without all this nonsense about "efficient ways to get from point A to point B" or pretending to be real-life superheroes with infinite stamina and the ability to randomly decide to jump a massive roof gap because it just happens to be in your way while you're escaping the baddies. It's basically the same as with magicians. The trick in itself is impressive. The audience doesn't need to be duped that the magician on stage is doing actual magic.We know you're doing tricks, so just do the tricks, and we'll be impressed all the same, without being taken for idiots.
Good video! I personally respect a purist way more than a reckless freerunner with a "send it" mentality 🤷♂
Thanks! I completely understand that 👍🏻
14 years later, and lil autistic me finally undertands that those people were trying to offend me when they called me a purist lol
Nice PK history & journalism especially with relaxed session vibes & cool movements in background.
There's a similar issue in climbing, where gyms opened up much more diversity from trad climbing, where even an improvised dyno is met with head shakes by some! While tradition is important imo, the evolution and branching out are vital for the progression of any sport! So let's have different names for different styles and let everyone have fun!
It‘s not just about flips. I do parkour since 2006 and I know that this debate is very old indeed. Parkour, in its pure form is a discipline (and no sport btw) for mainly self-preservation reasons or to help other people in an emergency for example. Etre fort pour etre utile. If you want to learn more about those things and really dig deep travel to Lisses, Evry, Sarcelles, etc. Train with people like Chau Belle Dinh or other traceurs from the first hour. Totally worth it in my opinion. I like your movement btw.
From what i have seen and heard at the beggining of my pk journey i always tought that David Belle was a purist all the time but really he wasn´t he did flips from time to time and it is clear that he did enjoy and ejoys parkour to this day and he doesn´t just see it as a means of training
Hope you don't mind some constructive criticism on the message in this video.
Nobody ever had a problem with people doing flips. Even parkour purists do flips when they want to. The issue was simply that "parkour" was the wrong name for that.
"Parkour" was the name of a specific discipline, a method of training by trying to move yourself past obstacles. Then, some time later, various people who didn't understand what parkour was started using the word to describe describe their own, different, thing. This confused everyone, made it harder to educate people about Parkour, and generally resulted in parkour being portrayed in a more negative light because it appeared as though the parkour "community" couldn't agree on anything. The word "parkour" gradually lost all meaning as more and more people started using it for many completely different and contradictory things. This was a problem for everyone because suddenly there were no obviously right answers which meant no progress could be made on understanding anything. But it was particularly a problem for the practitioners of the original discipline, because the name they had been using for many years had been taken away from them and now meant something different. The profile and reputation that they had worked hard to achieve was now being exploited and ruined by other people.
That problem has never been solved. The parkour community still looks like a bunch of idiots who can't agree, instead of what it actually is, which is a bunch of people who all want to use the same name to describe completely different things. People have just stopped talking about it because we don't know how to make progress. But we're going to have to sort it out at some point.
Niceee!
Thanks!
Glasgow was plauged with the "purists" to but they were what we would call push up guys who came to jams got everyone in lines like a fitness class and got oeiple to do push ups instead of training and having fun single handed they ruined and ended sat jans that had ran since 2006
Vers good vidéo stunts are great
Thank you!
What is this video? 2:30
It's from Jump Britain
I think the purists were running on a weak argument. I doubt I've ever seen any parkour that is actually about the most efficient way to get from point A to point B, because generally speaking just walking and using stairs and elevators is way quicker and less energy-consuming and injury-inducing than finding a line, prepping it for ages and then doing the elaborate ten yard move you´ve spent the last five hours concocting and training.
So in no real sense is any parkour move the fastest or most efficient way to clear that distance. It's always been about finding some impressive move and executing it to look cool. Purists could try to deny that by not including flourishes like a flip at the end, but the bit you include in the video of your "purist" mate, he's vaulting over posts on a path, with ample space on either side to just run past those posts. What world record time is quicker? A 100 meters sprint, or the 100 meters hurdles? Why is he wasting energy on vaulting those little posts when he could just leg it past them and get to "point B" way quicker? Because it's doesn't look as impressive as vaulting those posts, that's why. It's certainly not an attempt to show Usain Bolt he's been getting it wrong all this time, and the only reason he still holds that pathetic little world record of his is that there weren't any posts on the olympic running track to vault.
But I think this was the same era where parkour athletes actually pretended you could use parkour to cover huge distances. I recall a Top Gear episode where one of the guys did a `race` in a small hatchback against two parkour guys from one end of Liverpool to the other end. As if that would ever be thing. And that´s just one example of the way parkour tended to be presented. Like "there are these guys who just start running and randomly jumping off bridges and rooftops, the police or anyone will never catch them".
I'm happy the sport has moved on from that land of make-believe and got honest about what it is: basically gymnastics performed out in the real world, and whilst wearing a hoodie. Which is cool enough in itself without all this nonsense about "efficient ways to get from point A to point B" or pretending to be real-life superheroes with infinite stamina and the ability to randomly decide to jump a massive roof gap because it just happens to be in your way while you're escaping the baddies. It's basically the same as with magicians. The trick in itself is impressive. The audience doesn't need to be duped that the magician on stage is doing actual magic.We know you're doing tricks, so just do the tricks, and we'll be impressed all the same, without being taken for idiots.