Tai Chi punch

[Niall Keane]

How is that not talking down to others?

- Taiji is good. Shaolin is bad.
- "Internal" is good. External is bad.
- "Push" is good. "Punch" is bad.
- Be able to feel Qi is good, very good. Not be able to feel Qi is bad, very bad.
- ...

If you don't believe in Qi, nobody will care about your opinion. Why are you still hanging around here?

The problem is, I didn't say that -- you did.

It's not talking down to others if you make a factual statement. Sinking your weight and rooting and using whole body power are hallmarks of any basic Shaolin style. It's nothing special. If that is neigong then how is (tai chi) different?

Notably someone brought up the Tai Chi classics, and claimed it doesn't mention chi circulation ("it never refers to a mysterious energy that travels around meridians.. meridians at never mentioned.") In fact, many articles from the Tai Chi classics mention the movement of chi. In "Song of the Thirteen Postures" we read, "The ch'i circulates throughout the body without hindrance." In Yang's 10 important points, we read "The body has meridians like the ground has ditches and trenches." This shows what? What am I to think about what he said? Am I to think he is some great Tai Chi master or that he doesn't know what he is talking about? There is nothing wrong with someone who doesn't understand Tai Chi theory or who has misunderstood (or simply not read) the classics. But don't you think that person should refrain from claiming that this stuff is equivalent to "the force" from Star Wars?

It's not just the classics either. Chen Xin's works, Chen Zhao-Pei's works, it's all in there. Here are many more articles by famous masters many of which mention chi; http://www.taiji-bg.com/en/articles.htm. You can read them for yourself. What is it exactly that you or others have failed to understand such that I need to be accused of making a diversion and selling imaginary jedi chi to kids?

It sure is a problem though, why some people can't find it, why some people fall into the wrong path, why some people choose one way over another. If you don't even believe chi exists and never look for it, then of course you would never find anything. It would be quite different if someone came to me and said "I did the qigong, I did the forms, and I did the breathing, for 3, 4 or 5 years, and I just didn't get it so I gave up because I got frustrated," and then said, what am I missing?" Big difference.

Good lad Apple... thanks for confirming EXACTLY what I said... the classics do not mention meridians (chi circulates is not a mention of meridians) but the flow of yin and yang . And like i said youll find it elsewhere but that this can be atributed to lack of modern medical / scientific awareness.
See meridians are a relatively new thing, as far as I'm aware a mistranslation by a French cartographer?
The "vessels" he was translating could be considered a primitive perspective on the cardio vascular and/ or nervous system.


But fair feckin play... way to dodge that question... "isn't it obvious?" .... well no it isnt actually, and if your idea of nei jia depends upon magic-chi then the onus is on you, who is making the extraordinary claim that science disputes and doesn't recognise, to prove your case.

I can accept a "chi" model to aid transmission of concept, however if youre claiming there is a such thing as an invisible energy called chi and although extensive scientific research could never find it and if you believe it has an effect, well then it is exactly that a belief only, a religion.... and we cannot be expected to take it seriously, unless you can offer some kind of real proof?

[Appledog]

Hello! I am editing this post to point out that users here cannot delete their own posts. I do not understand why users have the ability to edit their posts but not to delete their posts.

Originally I wanted to have a "cool post count" of 108, or something like that (something associated with Tai Chi) but that does not seem possible here.

[Niall Keane]

Good lad Apple... thanks for confirming EXACTLY what I said...

You didn't read what I wrote (likely in the same way you did not read any of the family manuals, Chen Xin's work, Chen Zhao-Pei's writings, etc).

I can accept a "chi" model to aid transmission of concept, however if youre claiming there is a such thing as an invisible energy called chi and although extensive scientific research could never find it and if you believe it has an effect, well then it is exactly that a belief only, a religion.... and we cannot be expected to take it seriously, unless you can offer some kind of real proof?

It's okay Niall. You separating yourself and myself along these lines saves me the trouble; I'm pretty sure what I do is correct and I am happy with the "company" I keep on this side of the line. If you don't like it, don't pay me for lessons. But please don't expect me or anyone to take your word for it in the face of all of the evidence I provided to you in the last post. This isn't a debate. The quantity and quality of articles I linked and referenced in my last post should have made you think twice. You are basically admitting you don't do tai chi at all. Why else would you go against pretty much every 'name' master out there on that site? Do you really expect us to believe you when you claim that none of them know the real tai chi -- but you do?

Don't you think that's a little arrogant on your part?

Good lad again Apple... that's called "appeal to authority", another classic fallacy.

I dont care either what YOUR pope says, I do not consider him infalable.

And as tai chi chuan derives it's name from a description of Yang Lu chan. .. it follows that the core classics are the 5 considered such in yang derived lineages... lun, ching, mental elucidation, song of..., figters song... and no mention of meridians...


Lots of practical advice however about connection, power generation, recovery, engagement, tactics and strategy...
solid advice sans voodoo.

Btw.. your "happiness that you are correct" means nothing...
likewise should you be happy that you can fly waving your arms about ... it's not exactly "an argument"? ..

if your definition of a tai chi punch requires magic, and you have the cheek to deride others who dont believe in said magic and you seek acceptance of your beliefs (you presented an opinion and appeal to "authority") surely you might consider substantiating such incredible opinion?

Or even dare to pen what you believe happens? Explain the magic jargon to us heathens?

Does a tai chi punch involve zapping the opponent with chi?

[RobP3]

Fajin doesn't need to be shown to be there.

Many years ago, I met a Taiji instructor. I asked him to punch me as hard as he could on my chest. He refused. I then asked him to punch as hard as he could on my shoulder. He still refused. I do believe I can take a full powerful punch on my shoulder even today. One day when I will have chance to meet our RSF members, I would like to ask you guys to punch on my shoulder with your 100% Taiji power (not XingYi, Bagus, long fist, Baji, ...) so I can feel.

Have you ever tried to punch on your training partner's shoulder with all the power that you can generate? It's a lot of fun.

Totally agree John. I had similar with a WC guy, a young lad who said if he hit me he "would probably kill me, as my Sifu said our punches are dangerous." To be fair, he did let me hit him. If you never hit anyone, isn't it a bit like playing air guitar then rocking up to a concert and expecting to be able to play?

[amor]

There are different ways to use connection and whole body movement.

There doesn't need to be any kind of disadvantage or problem as many strikes need body connection upon impact only. It can start disconnected and connect through foot and spine first when the fist make contact with the surface. If the connection is sudden, the strike might have a more explosive effect. The disadvantage with starting off or driving the fist with a connected body is that it's harder to get the right angle of the body on impact. If the line of the strike does not go straight into the body, the effect will be less. If you are already issuing the strike, it's harder to change with a connected structure and if you change it, you might lose the movement from the innitial connection.

Also, you can start off by storing movement/momentum. This is a bit different from just whole body connection only as there is a tension in the opposite direction of the strike. To use releasing energy you need to store the movement and release it first upon contact. To practice his kind of strike, it's better to start using connected movement. But later, the strik itself can be initially disconnected with the body and the tension releases when the body connects.

So you could use:

Whole body movement to drive the fist ("Body throws out fist".

Fist starts but connects with body upon contact ("body chase fist").

Fist driven by the body winding up and release.

Body winds up, but strike is initially disconnected. Body release tension upon contact.

You can also add to the power as well as stabilize the body upon contact by coordinating horizontal and vertical movements of the body. If the spine rises at the same time as the body moves forward and the waist twists, you have three different "vectors" or forces that cooperate together. You can add all of the different forces in the moment of impact or use one of these vectors to initially drive the strike and let the other ones follow up upon contact.

That's a lot to digest in one sitting, thanks, but I think you do have a point with your later statements in bold to with punching in taichi. But its difficult to analyse this all until one has connected the body.

[Appledog]

Hello! I am editing this post to point out that users here cannot delete their own posts. I do not understand why users have the ability to edit their posts but not to delete their posts.

Originally I wanted to have a "cool post count" of 108, or something like that (something associated with Tai Chi) but that does not seem possible here.

[windwalker]

There are different ways to use connection and whole body movement.

There doesn't need to be any kind of disadvantage or problem as many strikes need body connection upon impact only. It can start disconnected and connect through foot and spine first when the fist make contact with the surface. If the connection is sudden, the strike might have a more explosive effect. The disadvantage with starting off or driving the fist with a connected body is that it's harder to get the right angle of the body on impact. If the line of the strike does not go straight into the body, the effect will be less. If you are already issuing the strike, it's harder to change with a connected structure and if you change it, you might lose the movement from the innitial connection.

Also, you can start off by storing movement/momentum. This is a bit different from just whole body connection only as there is a tension in the opposite direction of the strike. To use releasing energy you need to store the movement and release it first upon contact. To practice his kind of strike, it's better to start using connected movement. But later, the strik itself can be initially disconnected with the body and the tension releases when the body connects.

So you could use:

Whole body movement to drive the fist ("Body throws out fist".

Fist starts but connects with body upon contact ("body chase fist").

Fist driven by the body winding up and release.

Body winds up, but strike is initially disconnected. Body release tension upon contact.

You can also add to the power as well as stabilize the body upon contact by coordinating horizontal and vertical movements of the body. If the spine rises at the same time as the body moves forward and the waist twists, you have three different "vectors" or forces that cooperate together. You can add all of the different forces in the moment of impact or use one of these vectors to initially drive the strike and let the other ones follow up upon contact.

That's a lot to digest in one sitting, thanks, but I think you do have a point with your later statements in bold to with punching in taichi. But its difficult to analyse this all until one has connected the body.

IMO/IME

All of what as been posted is really not a different method of doing anything, as it works in the same manor as

"the collision of a bat with a ball. A batter is able to transport energy from her to the softball by means of a bat. The batter applies a force to the bat, thus imparting energy to the bat in the form of kinetic energy. The bat then carries this energy to the softball and transports the energy to the softball upon collision"

In this case the "body" is being used to transport force to the fist "bat".

This is what is described and has been for most of the thread.

taiji or styles like taiji use a different method

"The bat must move from its starting location to the contact location in order to transport energy. In a wave phenomenon, energy can move from one location to another, yet the particles of matter in the medium return to their fixed position. A wave transports its energy without transporting matter."
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/w ... -is-a-Wave


"transports its energy without transporting matter" is why it does feel different for those that use this method. As has been posted before any point on the body, using this method can issue energy which is why for most taiji practitioners it makes little sense to focus on any one shape used.

The main difference is how the energy is transported.

taiji relies on 4 basic ideas to transport force, attaching, sticking, follow, release...regardless of shape.

[everything]

Thanks for trying to explain it, windwalker.

Qigong is used in "external" martial arts so "qi" is not something unique to IMA or even MA. It's difficult not just conceptually at first. Doing qigong on its own isn't going to give one some kind of magical power. On the flip side being good at "fighting" (however defined) doesn't require anyone to study qigong. So then unfortunately hardly anyone is interested in the intersection of the Venn diagram. When someone asks a BTDT type question, people are naturally going to argue from the part of the diagram they are familiar with. This is why I asked if anyone has actually experienced this supposed punch. It's tempting to say "I haven't felt X, so X doesn't exist" (which is not how science or any systematic gathering of knowledge and human experience actually works), but at least it could be accurate to say "we haven't felt X."

[RobP3]

I know Mikey Wright but not had a go on his "machine" yet, but he told me he had some interesting results working with boxers and others. This article is a bit... well it's not my kind of article, but it talks about Mikey and his work on measuring "strike power".

http://theselfdefenceexpert.com/systema/

Would be interesting to have a go on it at some point, but in the meantime we will keep hitting each other

[Steve James]

I know Mikey Wright but not had a go on his "machine" yet, but he told me he had some interesting results working with boxers and others. This article is a bit... well it's not my kind of article, but it talks about Mikey and his work on measuring "strike power".

http://theselfdefenceexpert.com/systema/

Would be interesting to have a go on it at some point, but in the meantime we will keep hitting each other

It'd be great to have a thread on "punching" or even "using a fist" that would be cooperative, but that's not the internet. So, in terms of comparing the Systema mechanics to most (?) of the traditional tcc style mechanics, there seem to be two main differences. And, this is only in terms of power generation. The first is the emphasis on physical looseness (not necessarily "relaxation"). It's closer to the tongbei whip action than to most tcc styles, including Chen style (fajin, eg). In terms of physical looseness, tcc punches seem much stiffer (even if "relaxed").

[Before the fireworks, remember it's about power generation. Wing chun straight line punching could be called stiff, but the usual complaint is that the strikes are not as powerful. That doesn't make them ineffective or that WC doesn't work. By "stiff", I'm talking about the physical form of a single strike. ]

Anyway, the second difference is the orientation of the arm combined with that of the striking surface. Tcc forms do utilize that "phoenix" fist location, but using both arms simultaneously. But, sure, there's no tcc law stating that one arm or part of a form can't be combined with another. Though, the tcc police will undoubtedly say so.

The systema style strike, imv, uses "whole body" and directs it efficiently. In terms of one-off striking, it could be more powerful than a boxer's punch. Though, an optimal comparison would use many subjects doing the various strikes. Of course, the punch might be even more powerful if done after a 360 spin . But, just once seemed more than sufficient to get someone sorted.

Hmm, if a tcc guy actually practices a casting punch or tongbei strike, will he still be able to say he does tcc? Will he be cast out of the tcc community?

[Niall Keane]

There are different ways to use connection and whole body movement.

There doesn't need to be any kind of disadvantage or problem as many strikes need body connection upon impact only. It can start disconnected and connect through foot and spine first when the fist make contact with the surface. If the connection is sudden, the strike might have a more explosive effect. The disadvantage with starting off or driving the fist with a connected body is that it's harder to get the right angle of the body on impact. If the line of the strike does not go straight into the body, the effect will be less. If you are already issuing the strike, it's harder to change with a connected structure and if you change it, you might lose the movement from the innitial connection.

Also, you can start off by storing movement/momentum. This is a bit different from just whole body connection only as there is a tension in the opposite direction of the strike. To use releasing energy you need to store the movement and release it first upon contact. To practice his kind of strike, it's better to start using connected movement. But later, the strik itself can be initially disconnected with the body and the tension releases when the body connects.

So you could use:

Whole body movement to drive the fist ("Body throws out fist".

Fist starts but connects with body upon contact ("body chase fist").

Fist driven by the body winding up and release.

Body winds up, but strike is initially disconnected. Body release tension upon contact.

You can also add to the power as well as stabilize the body upon contact by coordinating horizontal and vertical movements of the body. If the spine rises at the same time as the body moves forward and the waist twists, you have three different "vectors" or forces that cooperate together. You can add all of the different forces in the moment of impact or use one of these vectors to initially drive the strike and let the other ones follow up upon contact.

That's a lot to digest in one sitting, thanks, but I think you do have a point with your later statements in bold to with punching in taichi. But its difficult to analyse this all until one has connected the body.

IMO/IME

All of what as been posted is really not a different method of doing anything, as it works in the same manor as

"the collision of a bat with a ball. A batter is able to transport energy from her to the softball by means of a bat. The batter applies a force to the bat, thus imparting energy to the bat in the form of kinetic energy. The bat then carries this energy to the softball and transports the energy to the softball upon collision"

In this case the "body" is being used to transport force to the fist "bat".

This is what is described and has been for most of the thread.

taiji or styles like taiji use a different method

"The bat must move from its starting location to the contact location in order to transport energy. In a wave phenomenon, energy can move from one location to another, yet the particles of matter in the medium return to their fixed position. A wave transports its energy without transporting matter."
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/w ... -is-a-Wave


"transports its energy without transporting matter" is why it does feel different for those that use this method. As has been posted before any point on the body, using this method can issue energy which is why for most taiji practitioners it makes little sense to focus on any one shape used.

The main difference is how the energy is transported.

taiji relies on 4 basic ideas to transport force, attaching, sticking, follow, release...regardless of shape.

That real deep Windy!
So this nebulous energy is passed throgh matter without it moving... kinda like something has hit it from one side like newtons balls? Do you tap the floor real hard like and line up the bones and somehow remove synovial fluid between joints? (That pesky "non-newtonian" fluid)???

Stamping!!! It's stamping right???

Hey? ?? Don't tell me, don't tell me!!! it's intent right. The intent generates power in the root / leg and without a single muscle being used the mediclorians send a force wave that can be controled by non-moving hips and waist to be issued by a locked out arm hand and fingertips... just like the classics at?

Wave theroy? Wow! I haven't felt so excited since studing for my first science degree!!!

How blind I have been! I'm just a lowly kickboxer after all!

To think i actually fell for that cai lang speil... and used to accept such "gathering the wave" and using the dao of the opponent like wu tu nan wrote about too, anf like he said it was the highest skill of tcc!

What a fool I was... it's all about actually creating energy (or maybe theres m-theory involved so as not to break the law of conservation of energay???) And generating a magic wave that passes along stationery matter only to explode rupturing specific internal organs the yi has set its guns on!!

[Trick]

Fajin doesn't need to be shown to be there.

Many years ago, I met a Taiji instructor. I asked him to punch me as hard as he could on my chest. He refused. I then asked him to punch as hard as he could on my shoulder. He still refused. I do believe I can take a full powerful punch on my shoulder even today. One day when I will have chance to meet our RSF members, I would like to ask you guys to punch on my shoulder with your 100% Taiji power (not XingYi, Bagus, long fist, Baji, ...) so I can feel.

Have you ever tried to punch on your training partner's shoulder with all the power that you can generate? It's a lot of fun.

I remember in primary school we boys used to punch each other on the shoulders just as an annoying thing to do, if done very well and hit your 'friend' right on some nerve area (i think it is) on the shoulder it felt quite annoying and uncomfortable for him. Interesting is that the punch that was the most effective was a whipping kind of strike that came quite as natural to throw, same kind of strike i much much later came to practise in Tongbeiquan. But in Tongbeiquan the target of the strike is of course not the shoulders.

[johnwang]

This entire argument is based on talking down to others. TCC people rarely say that other arts are equal in any sense. Other arts usually say that tcc is not equal to theirs.

In RSF, you just don't see a long fist guy puts down a Baji guy, or a Baji guy puts down a preying mantis guy. You only see taiji guys put down external guys.

When I was 7, my "Taiji for health" teacher didn't teach me any "Taiji punch". When I was 11, my Lou Han brother in law taught me "1 step 3 punches". I just have to give my punching instruction to my external teacher.

[windwalker]

"johnwang"
In RSF, you just don't see a long fist guy puts down a Baji guy, or a Baji guy puts down a preying mantis guy. You only see taiji guys put down external guys.

Can you show where this is so,,,Of those I've met including myself the most they will say as I do is that the method is different,
which is better or not, depends on what one likes and level of skill.

All Chinese MA use internal principles, the "method" by which they are expressed is quit different.
The topic of the thread was about the distinctions between methods attempting to show what
the difference might be or is...

[Steve James]

You only see taiji guys put down external guys.

Well, maybe that's on RSF. But, really, taiji guys put down other taiji guys more than anything now. I understand why both sides take offense. And, unfortunately (or just boringly),it's because "both" sides seem to want to stress their superiority, or at least the non-superiority (and often inferiority) of the other. Imo, they could learn from each other. But, then that's considered cheating (by many).