windwalker wrote:Bao wrote:Yup, catching, re-directing and add movement to a momentum, sometimes that's all there is and what is necessary. It can look so simple and impressive that many teachers claim that they do it with "Qi".
Its not so simple
...
Didn't say it was. I said that it
looks simple. Even if the main idea, or the main method, is indeed very simple, It's also about timing, following, leverage, angle of pressure and more. To make something look simplistic or effortless is in itself a skill.
I bet for most trying this the result would not be the same nor as impressive....
"Most people" haven't practiced these methods enough so it can look natural. "Anyone" could not make it, but I could certainly make it look just as good and anyone of my old classmates could. None of us would claim to use anything else than what I wrote above. No yi, no qi, no nothing else than a "simple" play with momentum and physics. But I guess, people just won´t accept how easy and simplistic certain things mostly are.
Whats up with the concern about what others claim to do, or how they explain it on a topic that's not about them...Is it a problem?
It is a problem for a person who see someone speaking about things like "qi" and want to learn how to use "qi", but discovers that what the teacher can teach is something else. He may feel fooled and stop paying. It´s more easy to get people if you mystify things. But it´s harder to keep them. If you are honest about what you do or teach, it´s sometimes harder to get students, but it´s easier to keep them. I don´t respect teachers who are deceptive or use tricks to get students. They might not care or not see it as a problem, but it´s very easy to get a bad reputation and it´s very hard to clean it of. So yes, it can absolutely be a problem, both for those who don´t teach what they promise and those who discovers that they don´t get what they think they are paying for.