dspyrido wrote:If it is then how does this sort of thinking translate to a person who is very stable, throws very quick strikes that might land on the legs, torso, arms or head. I mention this because 99% of the time this concept is demonstrated on sloppy single motion punches and almost all arguments about it's use are that this can be applied at any point because at that point usually draw on an analogy of a balloon or ball. That is until the attacker picks them up by the legs....
IMO, a lots of TMA practice you see only deal with quite artificial ways of dealing with physical bodies and physical forces. Most people learn standard ways like: "IF a body moves in this way and IF the body has this kind of balance, then you apply force in this or that way. But only IF.... T'ai Chi Ch'uan is IMHO still a bit better than a lot of technical practice in many styles, because here you learn how to intuitively follow and feel directions of force, so there are no exact way or standard way to do something. Yet TTC practitioners forget psychology of reality, reactions, counter reactions and all sorts of implications of bad human behaviour.
----- And to some random OT rambling BS:
But how much do you want to learn or how much can you learn without putting yourself out there in real situations, dealing with all sorts of bad people and bad behaviour? What is the cost of learning and are you willing to pay?
I am already really tired of all this never ending repetitious "your shit is fake and won't work" shit. The most people who criticise traditional martial artists and their practice have just as a bad sense of reality as the people they criticise. And mostly they criticise traditional martial artists just to look better than they are. But OTOH, people who have lived surrounded with real violence, fighting and experienced real hardships of life, IME, seem to be people who are very open to traditional martial arts, genuinely fascinated and most willing to learn all that fake shit.
....Just IMHO as usual...