Yang Style Question

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby C.J.W. on Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:48 pm

johnwang wrote:
RobP3 wrote: So how would Tai Chi deal with this?

In general, Taiji guys

- are afraid to take risk.
- don't want to commit.
- always want to take.
- are not willing to give.

IMO, the following clip shows the opposite of most Taiji guys will do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLgPpWD ... e=youtu.be


John, I think it's really funny (and ironic) that while you seem to love talk about Taiji so much, you have always been equally interested in proving that Taiji is deficient and ineffective compared to Shuaijiao. :P ;D

Good Taiji guys do not just push people away. They also hit, lock, throw, trap, and kick just like in any other arts, but using different ways to generate power and stability.

Wu style, in particular, is filled with throwing and Shuaijiao applications. Here are just two examples.





An application for Brush Knee Twist Step, which was meant to trap,"twist" and break the opponent's leg.
C.J.W.
Wuji
 
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:02 am

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby marvin8 on Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:59 pm

C.J.W. wrote:
johnwang wrote:
RobP3 wrote: So how would Tai Chi deal with this?

In general, Taiji guys

- are afraid to take risk.
- don't want to commit.
- always want to take.
- are not willing to give.

IMO, the following clip shows the opposite of most Taiji guys will do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLgPpWD ... e=youtu.be


John, I think it's really funny (and ironic) that while you seem to love talk about Taiji so much, you have always been equally interested in proving that Taiji is deficient and ineffective compared to Shuaijiao. :P ;D

Good Taiji guys do not just push people away. They also hit, lock, throw, trap, and kick just like in any other arts, but using different ways to generate power and stability.

Wu style, in particular, is filled with throwing and Shuaijiao applications. Here are just two examples.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ30swjVayw


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nwiCemzRDM
An application for Brush Knee Twist Step, which was meant to trap,"twist" and break the opponent's leg.


Here are some setups by "twitching." A simple change of direction. Opponent can be put on his heels (double weighted) by a twitch, then thrown.

Would anyone consider this the use of double weighting an opponent and controlling/finishing them?

BeyondGrappling
Published on Dec 4, 2015:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb5I66BJAPI

BeyondGrappling
Published on May 8, 2016:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbO68Aj38Uw

BeyondGrappling
Published on May 11, 2016:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eR-SQc_WvM
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby C.J.W. on Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:04 pm

johnwang wrote:To apply a throw,

1. Taji guys try to maintain their own balance.
2. SC guys don't mind to lose their balance as long as they can recover it afterward.
3. BJJ guys love to lose their balance and drag their opponent down.

1, 2, 3 are all correct. IMO, there is no such thing as right or wrong but "trade off".


SC guys don't mind losing their balance because once they fall, the game is stopped and they can both get up and start over again.

BJJ guys don't mind losing their balance and staying on the ground because they don't need to worry about someone kicking them in the head while they are down or whether the guy they are wrestling with is carrying a weapon.
C.J.W.
Wuji
 
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:02 am

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby I-mon on Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:11 pm

middleway wrote:
"Tai Chi" is not a person, it's an art practiced by different individuals. It deals with nothing.... It's impossible to generalise


SC guys who would be willing to sacrifice their own balance and how many BJJ guys who would want to take the fight to the floor.


Hope you can see the congnative dissonance here.

-lol-
User avatar
I-mon
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
Location: Australia

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby Bao on Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:36 pm

middleway wrote:
"Tai Chi" is not a person, it's an art practiced by different individuals. It deals with nothing.... It's impossible to generalise


SC guys who would be willing to sacrifice their own balance and how many BJJ guys who would want to take the fight to the floor.


Hope you can see the congnative dissonance here.


First I asked a question about SC and BJJ people.

Then I replied on a question about how “tai chi” would do in a certain situation. It’s impossible to generalize an answer for BJJ and SC people as well. But I didn’t, I asked a question. There’s no inconsistency, you just need understand what was asked and what was said.
Last edited by Bao on Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby johnwang on Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:40 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ30swjVayw

I'm much more interested in discussing concrete technique than to discuss abstract stuff such as "double weighted". Something is missing in this clip. He should guide his opponent's arm away from his moving path when he applies his technique.
I'm still allergy to "push".
johnwang
Great Old One
 
Posts: 8617
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:26 pm

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby middleway on Sun Jun 17, 2018 11:53 pm

First I asked a question about SC and BJJ people.


You framed that question against three generalisations, on the tactics of sc or bjj guys and then that sc and bjj are sports.

Then you proceeded to say it was impossible to generalise.

Question or not, you are applying one rule to tai chi and another to everything else.

I am simply looking for consistency in the argument.

Personally I think CAN generalise as I have said before. We don't worry about generalising in anything else, from scientific studies to the effectiveness of weight training protocols. When considering the effectiveness of a combative training system (tai chi, xing yi, mma) I don't see why we should approach it differently or at the individual level.
Last edited by middleway on Sun Jun 17, 2018 11:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"I am not servant to the method, the method is servant to me"
Me

My Blog: http://www.martialbody.com/Blog-Research
middleway
Wuji
 
Posts: 4518
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 2:25 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby Bao on Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:33 am

middleway wrote:You framed that question against three generalisations, on the tactics of sc or bjj guys and then that sc and bjj are sports.

Question or not, you are applying one rule to tai chi and another to everything else.
I am simply looking for consistency in the argument.


If you look at SC and BJJ they are developed as sports, practiced as sports and the practice focus on winning matches 1 against 1.
Tai Chi is also practiced as sports, but its history is more complicated. It was something developed mostly by military men and literati. Competition was not one of the main features that anyone of these persons had in mind. You can see a lot of influence from military strategy and thinking in the development of tai Chi. This might be simplified, but it's not overly generalised.

My point was not about BJJ or Sc people would do this or that. My point was that NO ONE (with a brain and self-respect) would give up his balance or want to go down to the floor if there was a brawl and glass lying on the floor. Not giving up your balance is common sense, but that common sense does not apply in sports competitions. It's an argument on why the idea is there in Tai Chi specifically. In BJJ and SC it's not. (No I don't say that ALL Tai Chi has it, I just say that in general it's usually there. And yes, there are variations and lineages in Tai Chi that don't care very much)

Personally I think CAN generalise as I have said before. We don't worry about generalising in anything else, from scientific studies to the effectiveness of weight training protocols. Nothing is based on the individual or the outlier, when considering the effectiveness of a combative training system (tai chi, xing yi, mma) I don't see why we should approach it differently or at the individual level.


I understand what you are saying, but still it's individuals that will perform what has been practiced and taught. Even if two people has studied and practiced exactly the same things, it still boils down to your own physical and mental capacities on the day you encounter something, how you can handle stress, if you had had a week of bad sleep, if your girlfriend just broke up etc.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby RobP3 on Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:50 am

True. So how would the fundamental tactics and strategies of what you consider a good Tai Chi practitioner deal with this? I mean, this is organised but it is "street", right?


Last edited by RobP3 on Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby Bao on Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:57 am

Sorry Rob, but I am smart enough to not try to answer that question. ;)

(I have no clue)

.... but probably no one with some sort of a brain wouldn't be in there in the first place ...
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby marvin8 on Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:32 am

Bao wrote:
johnwang wrote:To apply a throw,

1. Taji guys try to maintain their own balance.
2. SC guys don't mind to lose their balance as long as they can recover it afterward.
3. BJJ guys love to lose their balance and drag their opponent down.

1, 2, 3 are all correct. IMO, there is no such thing as right or wrong but "trade off".


If there is a brawl, many people involved and broken glass everywhere, let's see how many SC guys who would be willing to sacrifice their own balance and how many BJJ guys who would want to take the fight to the floor.

I agree. Also, an attacker can have a concealed knife, kick or punch.

There is "such a thing as wrong." It is wrong not to be defensively responsible. It is wrong "to lose your balance," when it is not necessary to "trade off."

By using a yin and a yang movement (50/50) to cause double weighting in opponent, reading, timing and attacking only when opponent is double weighted, you don't have to commit 100% and lose your balance.

Bao wrote:I don't claim that anything is better or worse. Sport is great, but still, practicing for sport and practicing for real life are two different things.

In both sport and real life, there is an attacker where double weighting, reading, timing, distance, etc. can determine the outcome of the fight. Sport can be a safe venue to develop these fighting skills that can be transferred to a real fight.
Last edited by marvin8 on Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby middleway on Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:49 am

HI Bao,

If you look at SC and BJJ they are developed as sports, practiced as sports and the practice focus on winning matches 1 against 1.


I think you might need to look at the history of these two arts a little more, BJJ was absolutely not a sport art for a large proportion of its early development. Further there are still huge amounts of BJJ instructors that do not even like the sporting aspect and do not teach it, they are entirely self defence focused. On any given day on the BJJ boards you can find this discussion, how sport has corrupted the original meaning of the art Helio and Carlos created. I agree they are focused on winning matches against 1 on 1, But i would argue so is Tai Chi in all its forms. The only 3 arts i have ever encountered that realistically look at multiple attackers are Silat, Ba gua and Systema.

It's an argument on why the idea is there in Tai Chi specifically. In BJJ and SC it's not.


I have fought many times in environements with broken glass on the floor. I didnt do BJJ at the time, but in my experience of the street style of BJJ it does NOT aim to take someone to the ground in street fighting in the way you would see in Sport fighting. Just yesterday i went to a seminar with Master Maricio Gomes, a Coral belt who is from the old school. The first 45 minutes of the seminar were standing locking, controls and wrist breaks and a take down where you end up in the dominant top position of knee on belly. Nothing he did was interested in rolling around on the floor like that seen in the sport of BJJ. This is one of the biggest misconception. Blanket statments about what BJJ or SC do without an understanding of either art is a mistake imo.

but still it's individuals that will perform what has been practiced and taught. Even if two people has studied and practiced exactly the same things, it still boils down to your own physical and mental capacities on the day you encounter something, how you can handle stress, if you had had a week of bad sleep, if your girlfriend just broke up etc.


I agree to an extent. But what can we accurately gain from discussions where everything collapses down to the level of the individual? with that approach we cannot talk about anything really, We cannot say which drugs work, we cannot say that jumping out of 8th floor windows will kill you (because some individuals survive), we cannot comment on the attributes arts like Tai Chi create, we cannot say what things are or are not because we have to take into account that the person performing may have had a bad night.

I think the above is a convenient argument for those times when a specific training method fails in an environement it is designed to succeed in, but is ignored the rest of the time.

Regardless thanks for the discussion.
Chris
Last edited by middleway on Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
"I am not servant to the method, the method is servant to me"
Me

My Blog: http://www.martialbody.com/Blog-Research
middleway
Wuji
 
Posts: 4518
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 2:25 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby GrahamB on Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:14 am

"If you look at SC and BJJ they are developed as sports, practiced as sports and the practice focus on winning matches 1 against 1. " - Bao.


That is simply not true.
"People in this country have had enough of experts" - Michael Gove, 2016
User avatar
GrahamB
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11369
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:30 pm

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby Bao on Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:26 am

marvin8 wrote:Sport can be a safe venue to develop these fighting skills that can be transferred to a real fight.


Agreed to some extent. But sports fighting, just like any kind of martal arts practice, can also lead to bad habits and a false sense of security.

middleway wrote:HI Bao,
I think you might need to look at the history of these two arts a little more, BJJ was absolutely not a sport art for a large proportion of its early development.
Further there are still huge amounts of BJJ instructors that do not even like the sporting aspect and do not teach it, they are entirely self defence focused. On any given day on the BJJ boards you can find this discussion, how sport has corrupted the original meaning of the art Helio and Carlos created.


You are correct, I have all too little knowledge to generalize BJJ to how most people around me are practicing it...

I agree they are focused on winning matches against 1 on 1, But i would argue so is Tai Chi in all its forms. The only 3 arts i have ever encountered that realistically look at multiple attackers are Silat, Ba gua and Systema.


Only met Tai Chi practitioners who had a realistic view on this, never saw any bagua practitioner doing something I thought look realistic. Just watch clips on the tubes, like Su Dong Chen. They just circle around their opponents and turn their backs to them. If you have several opponents, you need to first think about how you place yourself in space, or place them, so they are not spread out all over the place. Or "pile them up in one place" as my Tai Chi teacher jokingly expressed it.

Just yesterday i went to a seminar with Master Maricio Gomes, a Coral belt who is from the old school. The first 45 minutes of the seminar were standing locking, controls and wrist breaks and a take down where you end up in the dominant top position of knee on belly. Nothing he did was interested in rolling around on the floor like that seen in the sport of BJJ. This is one of the biggest misconception. Blanket statments about what BJJ or SC do without an understanding of either art is a mistake imo.


Thank you for enlighten me better about BJJ. Old School seems more complete than much other schools, but I might be mistaken

I agree to an extent. But what can we accurately gain from discussions where everything collapses down to the level of the individual? with that approach we cannot talk about anything really, We cannot say which drugs work, we cannot say that jumping out of 8th floor windows will kill you (because some individuals survive), we cannot comment on the attributes arts like Tai Chi create, we cannot say what things are or are not because we have to take into account that the person performing may have had a bad night.

I think the above is a convenient argument for those times when a specific training method fails in an environment it is designed to succeed in, but is ignored the rest of the time.


Yes, we can not gain anything if we only look at individual traits. Still, we know that most people kill themselves if they fall from the 8th floor. So some kind of argument can still be done for not accidentally committing suicide. But in general, we all all generalize too much. Most often probably just to get to the point as soon as possible.

Regardless thanks for the discussion.


Thank you. Always interesting to hear about peoples experiences from different arts. :)

/David
Last edited by Bao on Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:29 am, edited 2 times in total.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Yang Style Question

Postby Giles on Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:01 am

RobP3 wrote:True. So how would the fundamental tactics and strategies of what you consider a good Tai Chi practitioner deal with this? I mean, this is organised but it is "street", right?


It's taking place on a public thoroughfare and is certainly illegal by the laws of the land, but it seems pretty sporting to me:

Two teams of equal size, wearing clear team colours.
Only willing participants, all physically fit young male adults, no innocent bystanders caught up in event.
Start of contest at prearranged time and place, everyone ‘ready to go’ (no ambushes etc.).
No specific or improvised weapons, no throwing of projectiles.
No biting, intentional joint-breaking, fingers to eyes etc.
Desist striking an opponent when he is down and has ‘had enough’ (although this last factor may be open to a little interpretation). Meaning no stamping on heads, gratuitous breaking of limbs when defenceless, removal of eyes, scalping, beating to death (unless by accident) etc.
Once one party has established clear superiority, ‘carried the day’, then no massacring of the survivors (i.e. opponents who have admitted defeat but are still standing).
Comradely pat on the back for vanquished opponent who fought well, a bit of chat with the opposing team after end of play.

Apart from that, what approach to take? Like Bao says, best approach is not to be there in the first place. If you are there, then any sensible self-defence approach would involve keep moving, turning, don't fixate on any single opponent, strike, push or possibly throw when you have a chance and move again, and above all escape/run at the earliest opportunity. But that last one doesn't apply here, because it's a sporting contest ;)
Do not make the mistake of giving up the near in order to seek the far.
Giles
Huajing
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:19 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bao and 1 guest