Determining Your Focus

[johnwang]

If I had to pick one art that I was going to practice instead of Tai Chi I would have a hard time choosing between any of the major styles -- hung gar, praying mantis, xingyi, etc.

I look at MA a bit differently. If I can knock/take down my opponent, I truly don't care what engine that I'm using.

Black cat or white cat, as long as it can catch rat, it's good cat.

How can anybody be able to prove that Taiji engine is better than (or equal to) other engines?

[windwalker]

How can anybody be able to prove that Taiji engine is better than (or equal to) other engines?

Some have tried different engines. I use what I call a taiji engine in my own work after researching it exclusively for some 10yr.

Now integrating it into my own format.

Interesting enough even though it doesn't look like taiji, many who I meet consider it as such. I do not.

[marvin8]

if you don't do what I said you can never go on to learn the rest of the art. Learning applications is nice, but you have to have the basic skills in order to use them. Otherwise you might as well just learn judo or some other martial art that doesn't require Tai Chi's fundamentals.

If your focus is to be a good

- fighter, Taiji path is not your only choice.
- Taiji master, Taiji path will be your only choice.

I don't think the OP's "focus" is to be a good Taiji master.

No, it's not. I suggest only that one decides what they want to be good at and teach and to be able to prove that against a fully resisting opponent in whatever format they choose. Push hands and sticky hands are not acceptable in this regard, as they are too limiting and do not represent realistic combat - nor should they, as they are training methods designed to drill specific skills.

I think you hit the nail on the head J. However there is a limit to how far you can cross-analogy different arts and I think we've reached that point by now. I do find it interesting to listen to how people talk about Tai Chi through the glasses of their own arts. Longfist, tongbei, xingyi, others -- all interesting -- but I would have to say Tai Chi shed it's direct roots to those arts a long time ago. When M says that push hands is too limiting and does not represent realistic combat, he is simply talking about Shanzaiwuan, and is not correct from a Tai Chi perspective. However, since his own art does things a different way, he is actually correct -- push hands is, in fact, too limiting to accommodate the way M does things in Shanzaiquan. This is not anyone's failure. It is a different approach to learning; a different way of thinking. I think a very rough analogy could be it's like starting to learn guitar via scales or chords. Actually you are learning the same thing but you are learning it in different ways.

The OP is comparing "push hands" with Shanzhaidao (a Chinese sabre art) in regards to "skill in fighting:" "I can't accept skill in those alone equating to skill in fighting. . . . but this approach also helps keep one from becoming delusional about one's own abilities. "

However, tai chi does not "equate" push hands "to skill in fighting." Push hands is only one stage of tai chi. Excerpts from "The Power of Internal Martial Arts and Chi: Combat Secrets of Tai Chi, Bagua and Hsing-i," https://www.energyarts.com/blog/bruce-f ... rtial-arts:

If you want to learn the four stages of learning tai chi as a martial art please keep reading . . .

Stage 2: Tai Chi Push Hands or Tui Shou

Push hands is not fighting itself, but is a two-person exercise that develops most of the skills and types of power practitioners will need in combat, both open-handed and with weapons. Normally, you first learn empty-handed and then later practice with a variety of weapons.

Stage 3: Transition Methods Between Push Hands and Sparring

Push hands is not fighting or even sparring. So you have to make the jump. There are three methods that get you from push hands to sparring . . .

Stage 4: Sparring and Actual Fighting . . .

Push hands, unarmed sparring and actual fighting does not equate to weapons training/sparring. "Normally, you first learn empty-handed and then later practice with a variety of weapons."

[Bao]

If a teacher starts incorporating a lot of striking then they should be able to hold their own against any type of fighter, not just wrestlers. Wrestling is a fairly safe way to test skill. Full on free-fighting less so. Do you see what I am getting at?

IME it's important to have a clear goal right from the beginning, i.e. practice it as a combat art. But you don't need to try to practice everything at the same time. Learning step by step is ok. But certain tools are still necessary to learn right from the beginning. Learning to paint without trying out brushes makes no sense.

And punching a bag or against a protection is IME a great relaxation practice. The impact will tell you how relaxed you are. And if you really understand to relax, you need to have good structure and root. So if you want to learn how to relax properly with good structure, actually hitting something is great practice. While hitting something your main goal should obviously be to practice "song".

Btw, Free fighting can be very good, but as it's practiced in general is overrated IMO. If you do a free format practice, you still need to work with the tools first so you have something to use.

[Bao]

Black cat or white cat, as long as it can catch rat, it's good cat.

Deng Xiaoping's catch-phrase in martial arts would rather be "If you win it doesn't matter how you win". Killing someone would be ok if you win. The problem is that we have laws and regulations in modern society. So you need to have some idea about morals and ethics to protect yourself.

How can anybody be able to prove that Taiji engine is better than (or equal to) other engines?

Why would you want to prove anything to someone else? It's about what is your own best engine and what you feel most comfortable with. I have tried many other engines and never felt comfortable with what can be found in other styles. My own choice is my own choice and no one else has anything to do with it. It's about my own prerequisites and about my own limitations.

[MaartenSFS]

Marvin8, you still don't get it, do you???

I was just listing examples of different types of fighting. Wrestling, sparring, fencing. All should be done against a fully resisting opponent (hence Tuishou does not count). Nowhere did I state that they produce the same skills. I only stated that there is overlap. Why do you think that I have both Shanzhaiquan AND Shanzhaidao systems?

Do try to keep up, okay??

[MaartenSFS]

If a teacher starts incorporating a lot of striking then they should be able to hold their own against any type of fighter, not just wrestlers. Wrestling is a fairly safe way to test skill. Full on free-fighting less so. Do you see what I am getting at?

IME it's important to have a clear goal right from the beginning, i.e. practice it as a combat art. But you don't need to try to practice everything at the same time. Learning step by step is ok. But certain tools are still necessary to learn right from the beginning. Learning to paint without trying out brushes makes no sense.

And punching a bag or against a protection is IME a great relaxation practice. The impact will tell you how relaxed you are. And if you really understand to relax, you need to have good structure and root. So if you want to learn how to relax properly with good structure, actually hitting something is great practice. While hitting something your main goal should obviously be to practice "song".

Btw, Free fighting can be very good, but as it's practiced in general is overrated IMO. If you do a free format practice, you still need to work with the tools first so you have something to use.

I agree that drilling is important, perhaps especially with complicated arts like Taijiquan, but free fighting is not overrated. It is the ultimate test to check whether you can really apply your skills. If you can't apply your skills in free fighting or at least wrestling then you have no business teaching. If an interpreter can't translate from one language into another and vice versa immediately in a highly dynamic situation then that person cannot be called an interpreter, nor a teacher of interpreting.

[Bao]

free fighting is not overrated. It is the ultimate test to check whether you can really apply your skills. If you can't apply your skills in free fighting or at least wrestling then you have no business teaching.

It’s absolutely overrated.

If you want to test your skills in free fight you need to first have skills to test. But then, are they skills to begin with if you can’t apply them in free fight? But if it’s free fight, how can you be sure you’ll get to test what you want to test?

Free fight? How do you know you can use your stuff for real, in a real situation even if you can use it in free fighting? Free fighting is regulated, you do it with friends under certain conditions. You can prepare for it, mentally and physically. Fighting is different.

It’s good to be well acquainted with free sparring. But still, free fighting is not more an ultimate skill test than applications practice. Honestly, if you believe you can fight because you do well in sparring, this is still a form of mental masturbation. You still know nothing about how you would react in a real situation. And even if you had fought ten or twenty street fights you could still be taken off guard and be facing something completely new.

Wanting to be able to fight is a childish dream. Who can fight? I can’t. No one can fight. Every situation is new, different and something completely else than from what you could be prepared for in your imagination. There is no ultimate test. There is no way to know if you could handle what could happen. Everyone who believe that they can fight are fooling themselves. There are a few who can. But they are mostly also the last people on earth who would want to fight. They understand the unpredictability of reality.

[MaartenSFS]

That's absolute hogwash. Of course you should work on having skills to use in free fighting. I did not state otherwise. Free fighting is as close to real fighting as we can get with relative safety. The reality of the situation is that real fighting is extremely dangerous and odds are that we will be severely injured or even die. But if we are fighting for our survival and/or the lives of our loved ones then any preparation could give us the edge. Full contact fighting against a fully resistant opponent is going to give us a much bigger edge than playing patty cakes. Being able to throw someone that is charging you will all of their might on the hard ground and knocking the wind out of them is going to give us a much bigger edge than pushing and pulling a complacent partner around a bit. That is the purpose of martial arts. You can keep deluding yourself, though, if you want to. Just call it Taiji Qigong.

[Bao]

...

[Bao]

“Full contact fighting against a fully resistant opponent” might give you the edge in real combat, it might not.

Have you went against someone full contact completely unprotected? Against a good boxer or perhaps a Thai Boxer, someone that out-weights you well? Full contact, no rules, fighting to knock each other down?

If not, you shouldn’t speak too much about “free” fighting. IMO.

[MaartenSFS]

Without protection there's not much of a difference between that and fighting. Of course I haven't. Have you? Perhaps you should follow your own advice.

[johnwang]

If you want to test your skills in free fight you need to first have skills to test.

Agree with you on this. This is why it's wrong to teach CMA form before anything else. You have not developed any MA skill yet. There is nothing to "polish" for.

I have seen someone who has trained CMA for 6 years that the way he sparred 6 years later was exactly the same as he sparred 6 years ago. What's the problem there?

You have to develop MA skill through partner drill before you can test your MA skill in sparring. If you have not developed anything, you have nothing to test for. This is why all my MA skill start from partner drill (develop). After that I can then

- test by sparring.
- polish by solo drill.
- enhance by weight equipment.

Between partner drill and free sparring, there should be something in between. For example. One can only win by "foot sweep" for each 2 minutes round. Test for 15 rounds and record the winner for that day. In that 15 rounds, the punch, kick, won't be counted. The students will be forced to use foot sweep no matter they like it or not.

[marvin8]

Marvin8, you still don't get it, do you???

I was just listing examples of different types of fighting. Wrestling, sparring, fencing. All should be done against a fully resisting opponent (hence Tuishou does not count). Nowhere did I state that they produce the same skills. I only stated that there is overlap. Why do you think that I have both Shanzhaiquan AND Shanzhaidao systems?

Do try to keep up, okay??

I "get" what you wrote. From the OP:

I believe that anyone that wants to teach martial arts should determine their focus, that is to specify what skill their students can expect to gain within a reasonable time frame and in what context they will be able to use it. The teacher should have this skill and be able to use it against a resisting opponent. Being great at sticky or push hands is just not going to cut it, if that's the end goal. I'm not against those training methods as a part of the partner training before it gets real, but I can't accept skill in those alone equating to skill in fighting. . . .

Tuishou as it should be practised is way too limiting, in my opinion, to be considered as fighting or wrestling . . .

I've decided, over the years, to focus on swordsmanship with the Chinese sabre and feel confident that anyone that comes to me will not walk away disappointed by my ability and will be 100% clear as to what they stand to gain under my tutelage.

My reply was in direct response to Appledog, "M says that push hands is too limiting and does not represent realistic combat, he is simply talking about Shanzaiwuan."

No, it's not. I suggest only that one decides what they want to be good at and teach and to be able to prove that against a fully resisting opponent in whatever format they choose. Push hands and sticky hands are not acceptable in this regard, as they are too limiting and do not represent realistic combat - nor should they, as they are training methods designed to drill specific skills.

. . . When M says that push hands is too limiting and does not represent realistic combat, he is simply talking about Shanzaiwuan, and is not correct from a Tai Chi perspective. However, since his own art does things a different way, he is actually correct -- push hands is, in fact, too limiting to accommodate the way M does things in Shanzaiquan. This is not anyone's failure. It is a different approach to learning; a different way of thinking. I think a very rough analogy could be it's like starting to learn guitar via scales or chords. Actually you are learning the same thing but you are learning it in different ways.

The OP is comparing "push hands" with Shanzhaidao (a Chinese sabre art) in regards to "skill in fighting:" "I can't accept skill in those alone equating to skill in fighting. . . . but this approach also helps keep one from becoming delusional about one's own abilities. "

However, tai chi does not "equate" push hands "to skill in fighting." Push hands is only one stage of tai chi. Excerpts from "The Power of Internal Martial Arts and Chi: Combat Secrets of Tai Chi, Bagua and Hsing-i," https://www.energyarts.com/blog/bruce-f ... rtial-arts:

If you want to learn the four stages of learning tai chi as a martial art please keep reading . . .

Stage 2: Tai Chi Push Hands or Tui Shou

Push hands is not fighting itself, but is a two-person exercise that develops most of the skills and types of power practitioners will need in combat, both open-handed and with weapons. Normally, you first learn empty-handed and then later practice with a variety of weapons.

Stage 3: Transition Methods Between Push Hands and Sparring

Push hands is not fighting or even sparring. So you have to make the jump. There are three methods that get you from push hands to sparring . . .

Stage 4: Sparring and Actual Fighting . . .

Push hands, unarmed sparring and actual fighting does not equate to weapons training/sparring. "Normally, you first learn empty-handed and then later practice with a variety of weapons."

[Bao]

. Of course I haven't. Have you? Perhaps you should follow your own advice.

Of course not, I am not a moron. There's nothing to brag about, but I have done my share of real fighting when I was young and stupid. Every time very different from any kind of sparring situation, full contact or not. I've also done a whole deal of sparring. I can honestly say that I suck and that I cannot fight. Better to be humble and honest. It will help in the long run.

Between partner drill and free sparring, there should be something in between. For example. One can only win by "foot sweep" for each 2 minutes round. Test for 15 rounds and record the winner for that day. In that 15 rounds, the punch, kick, won't be counted. The students will be forced to use foot sweep no matter they like it or not.

Absolutely agree.
I like that Idea.
For the moment my old teacher play a throwing punches game in his class. The receiver can only use a limited set of defense methods and the other one try to punch through the guard. Another one I've played is that one can only use throws and takedowns, the other one can only defend. I like this idea of using a limited skill set and try to drill them in a detailed manner.