99% of tai chi is fake

[Trick]

Seen as a bible was involved. .. jaysus feckin Christ!!! What's goin on?

The majority of the last couple of pages on this thread actually make sense???

Is there some hippy-fest going on down in tha bay area?

Turning the other cheek - maybe the bible teach some kind of fight tactics, lure an aggressor to believe he is going to have an easy time an so become sloppy? Or could the expression have something to do with evasiveness - Jesus the TAI-CHI guy

[johnwang]

I don't always use them to strike my opponent, but often to strike the arms.

It depends on how fast that your opponent may step in. If your opponent steps in

- slow, your right arm will hit on his punching arm. When this happen, your right arm is in a position to get his "reverse head lock".
- fast, your right forearm can hit on the back of his head.

The nice thing about the "stealing step' is you can use it to move yourself out of your opponent's striking path.

[LaoDan]

There are many valid, often conflicting, viewpoints expressed in this thread. To throw something else into the discussion, not all coaches are physically good at their sport, but that does not mean that they do not understand their sport. Most top level coaches (the 1% in their field) have never been in the 1% in their ability or performance of that sport, but their understanding of the sport is often superior to that of the 1% of performers.

It does matter that understanding of Taijiquan requires some amount of feeling someone better doing it. Since TJQ skills are often not intuitive, some things are difficult to gain an understanding of without having felt it. So, we tend to require our TJQ teachers to be superior fighters, but is that required to not be “fake”?

Can someone understand the “authentic” art without necessarily being a top fighter, or is superior fighting skill necessary to understand TJQ and prevent it from being “fake”?

Most of us likely know people who are much more skilled at TJQ than we are, but that we are also likely more skilled than most students. So, I may suck at this relative to some whom I have met and/or learned from, but relative to many individuals that practice this art, I am more skilled. Does that make my understanding or practice “fake”? If some practitioner personally recognizes that there are other practitioners that are much better than they are, does this mean that they do not understand the art? Is their transmission of the art then “fake”?

For those martial arts styles with ranking systems, are the teachings of those with rankings in the middle of their styles system “fake” and only the teachings of those with the top ranking “authentic”.

Is someone with “some skills” or one who is good at certain aspects of the art still considered as being “fake”, or can it be recognized that they can have a long way to go still, but that they are “getting” something from the art; something “authentic”?

What is the psychology behind the need to authenticate ones own teaching (lineage, etc.), while judging others to be inferior or “fake”? Why is this psychology so prevalent in TJQ?

[everything]

Why is this psychology so prevalent in TJQ?

I would change "psychology" to "question" and answer below.

Aside from self-delusion about training methods and pressure testing, if we characterize tjq (really any IMA) as roughly composed of:

technical/mechanical/relax/(qigong - in parentheses due to issues here)

problems arise because:
1. some people want to call the first 2 things "internal" while others call them "external". this leaves aside the criticisms about "missing pieces" which doesn't seem an argument about "fake".
2. most everyone who has done any "soft" arts or any sports realize the better practitioners are more relaxed in various techniques and movements in body and mind. probably no issue here.
3. for "qigong" relationship to above, there is seemingly no agreement. for some this aspect is essential to the above. for others, it is a fairytale/impossible/etc..
4. even though there is agreement there is some health aspect (whatever the mechanism), that may be totally unrelated to MA (most people do TJQ for health) ... (see self-delusion above). even if someone can do all 3, s/he may not be able to "fight" (see fairytale criticism) or can't do it the same looking way as in training.

[Niall Keane]

There are many valid, often conflicting, viewpoints expressed in this thread. To throw something else into the discussion, not all coaches are physically good at their sport, but that does not mean that they do not understand their sport. Most top level coaches (the 1% in their field) have never been in the 1% in their ability or performance of that sport, but their understanding of the sport is often superior to that of the 1% of performers....

But they are accepted as great coaches BECAUSE they can PRODUCE great athletes.

I already covered that btw.

However without producing good competent fighters a Tai Chi Coach has nothing but his "belief" that he's good.

There's no avoiding objective proof of some acceptable kind if one wants t be taken seriously in any field.... bar religion.

[MaartenSFS]

The difference is that middle-ranked martial artists don't open schools and claim to be masters of their art. A boxing coach would still have plenty of fighting experience.

[marvin8]

There are many valid, often conflicting, viewpoints expressed in this thread. To throw something else into the discussion, not all coaches are physically good at their sport, but that does not mean that they do not understand their sport. Most top level coaches (the 1% in their field) have never been in the 1% in their ability or performance of that sport, but their understanding of the sport is often superior to that of the 1% of performers.

There are many valid, often agreeing, viewpoints (e.g. Niall Keane, johnwang, MaartenSFS, Chen Xiao Wang, marvin8.) expressed in this thread, too.

"Top level coaches" have students that have success in their art in competition. By definition if his student(s) does not have success against opponents, the coach is not "top level."

It does matter that understanding of Taijiquan requires some amount of feeling someone better doing it. Since TJQ skills are often not intuitive, some things are difficult to gain an understanding of without having felt it. So, we tend to require our TJQ teachers to be superior fighters, but is that required to not be “fake”? Can someone understand the “authentic” art without necessarily being a top fighter, or is superior fighting skill necessary to understand TJQ and prevent it from being “fake”?

Per Chen Xiao Wang, it is not enough for a teacher to just have something to feel.

To be high level in Taiji, one needs to "understand" and show how to apply Taiji principles against an opponent, even if one loses. Otherwise, one is not high level.

What is the psychology behind the need to authenticate ones own teaching (lineage, etc.), while judging others to be inferior or “fake”? Why is this psychology so prevalent in TJQ?

Some teachers do not have a track record or the martial skill to show, against an opponent. Therefore, they rely on their lineage, etc. to try to "authenticate" and market their teaching.

However without producing good competent fighters a Tai Chi Coach has nothing but his "belief" that he's good.

There's no avoiding objective proof of some acceptable kind if one wants t be taken seriously in any field.... bar religion.

Yes, Taiji should not be exempt from this objectivity, even with it's claim of internal.

[johnwang]

some things are difficult to gain an understanding of without having felt it.

I have met many Taiji guys who has

- good Peng Jin,
- strong rooting,
- good yielding skill,
- ...

but when I ask that Taiji guy to punch on my shoulder as hard as he can (I want to feel his punching power), or try to take me down with his Taiji throw (I want to feel his take down skill), his ability just doesn't map into his offense skill. IMO, something wrong in his training.

[Appledog]

Hello, I'd like to maintain a 'cool post count' of 108 posts. This particular post has gone beyond that number and has therefore expired.

I'm sorry if you were looking for some old information but I'll do my best to answer you if you send me a DM with a question in it.

[Trick]

some things are difficult to gain an understanding of without having felt it.

I have met many Taiji guys who has

- good Peng Jin,
- strong rooting,
- good yielding skill,
- ...

but when I ask that Taiji guy to punch on my shoulder as hard as he can (I want to feel his punching power), or try to take me down with his Taiji throw (I want to feel his take down skill), his ability just doesn't map into his offense skill. IMO, something wrong in his training.

Are saying those Taiji guy's where not very easy for you to throw to the ground because of their strong rooting and good yielding skill ? And when you punched their shoulders, did you knock them down ? Or did they just tell you that you have ok punching power but you did not knock me down?

[LaoDan]

I essentially agree with people in distrusting subjectivity and favoring objective measures of understanding. I actually emphasize interactive work in my classes. I do not think that one can really understand TJQ without non-cooperative interactive practice.

I sometimes use an example from personal experience when explaining my perspective. A ~70 year old grandfather who competes in forms (Yang style) in China visited the USA for the birth of his granddaughter’s first child. When a friend and I met him, he knew that we were interested in push-hands and, although he had never done any, he looked up the basics online before we met him. His form was beautiful, but when we touched for push-hands he was unbalanced with minimal pressure, minimal changes.

To me, this means that even though his form makes it seem like he knew TJQ principles, solo form is a poor criterion for measuring understanding. He was one dimensional – great against the constant downward force of gravity, but unable to make his ability translate to irregular forces from other directions.

Since he did not claim any martial understanding or ability, I would NOT consider what he did as being fake, just low level, despite his skill in solo forms performance. However, IF he were to claim that what he did would, on its own, produce fighting skill, then it could be considered fake.

Still, I think there is some legitimate, though low level, understanding in the forms skills that he demonstrated, and there would likely be some health benefits in addition to the performance aspect that is the focus of his practice. But solo form performances are NOT a good measure of understanding, or skill in implementing those principles in interactive contexts.

If solo forms are unreliable measures of TJQ understanding, then what is? Many discussions have looked at push-hands competitions, and while they may be a better measure than solo forms, numerous problems have been pointed out concerning push-hands competitions.

Does this leave us with little else for evaluations other than actual fighting? There are also problems with this. We all know that there can be skilled fighters who know nothing of TJQ. So, then does it become a matter of seeing objective results (fighting) through a subjective lens (are they really using TJQ or are other influences involved)?

I do not know what would be good objective standards for TJQ skill, and I do not think that discussions like these can be resolved without some acknowledged objective measure for TJQ.

[johnwang]

Are saying those Taiji guy's where not very easy for you to throw to the ground because of their strong rooting and good yielding skill ? And when you punched their shoulders, did you knock them down ? Or did they just tell you that you have ok punching power but you did not knock me down?

Offense skill include

- knock down power, and
- take down skill.

IMO, The Taiji training over emphasize on "defense" and not emphasize on "offense" enough.

I asked them to punch on my shoulder. They never asked me to punch on their shoulder. You can't knock someone down by punching on his shoulder. What you can show to him is how much power that you can generate. When you apply that power on his head, that can be different.

Hard to be taken down is not the same as to have take down skill.

[everything]

I like those two.

Take down attack/defense can be tested in so many different grappling formats.

Knockdown can be done relatively safely with gear.

[johnwang]

Knockdown can be done relatively safely with gear.

I like my opponent to hold on a kicking shield, running toward me like a mad man. I try to use 1 kick (or 1 punch) to stop his forward movement and see whether his forward momentum can push me back, or my kick (or punch) can stop his momentum and push him back. That's very useful MA training.

[dspyrido]

Seems like there are 3 types of tc people. They are:

1. I only do it for health and have no idea how to apply this stuff.
2. I do it for martial arts and train like a martial artist. Yes I do the forms & some push hands but also break them down to do many repetitions of techniques, testing against others, weighted training and conditioning. Sweat & cardio is natural and something that happens as part of training.
3. I feel that the methods in #2 are beneath me and violate internal principles so I will do more longer solo form sequences, cooperative sticking, master the weapon form at a great peformance level and read lots of books on the topic so as to have an opinion based on what others have said. Can't sweat because it means I am not being internal enough. Cardio is the same.

Let me know if I got these groups wrong.