LaoDan wrote: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."
LaoDan wrote: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.
LaoDan wrote: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.
Niall Keane wrote: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.