the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

windwalker wrote:

Bao wrote: Solo practice is more or less just something you do because you can't always have a partner to work together with. IMHO.

Would not agree.

Historically solo practice has been the way.

It takes a lot of time working to build and develop the body/mind required to move in a certain way
with clear demonstrably skill sets that can not be gained by any other way.

Solo practice is the fondation, intended usage which some maybe refering to, is the test of whether ones practice accords
to what ever is being developed.

Have to agree with WW. And I’m surprised Bao wrote what he wrote. For quite many years now my practice mainly contain solo practice, those few times I have touched hands with someone(push hands) that has engaged in far more push hands practice than I I’m doing fine till very good almost great

Trick wrote:Have to agree with WW. And I’m surprised Bao wrote what he wrote. For quite many years now my practice mainly contain solo practice, those few times I have touched hands with someone(push hands) that has engaged in far more push hands practice than I I’m doing fine till very good almost great

Look at my answer above.

It’s about two different things. Now the subject was about keeping things “live”. I agree with WW. But without per year work, the solo practice is useless for practical application.

But partner practice should also maintain the integrity of the principles used in solo practice. Partner practice should focus on the same things and not be isolated from the basic principles and foundations. This is also what many do wrong. They don’t know how to incorporate the solo practice foundations in partner work.

I’m satisfied with that

For me >long form< was always something supplementary for the MA training,
so
I was shocked when heard, that by doing the form only, you may became versed in fighting...
but
I`m kinda of outsider for inner TJ circle,

Trick wrote:I’m satisfied with that

Me too.

[jumps back into box and pulls lid closed]

everything wrote: things like catching punches out of thin air that morph into wrist lock throws is mostly considered "dead" so forms based on such bad assumptions might be deemed dead. why continue those. might vary for different people.

Catching punches is not dead. it's still done in live pro fights to this very day.
It's part of Mayweather's defense system.

You just seem to be exaggerating it, making it seem out of place.
If you stop turning it into something impossible,
you'll see it's just a simple defense term like parry, block, cover, dodge, etc.

I've rarely done a good job of describing it without video.
So, Google it. You'll find some basics on the web.

And BTW, once you get the knack of it
You can catch a punch with different parts of the body.
Kinda like the body can become a hand.

Trip wrote:

everything wrote: things like catching punches out of thin air that morph into wrist lock throws is mostly considered "dead" so forms based on such bad assumptions might be deemed dead. why continue those. might vary for different people.

Catching punches is not dead. it's still done in live pro fights to this very day.
It's part of Mayweather's defense system.

You left out part of everything's sentence, "catching punches out of thin air that morph into wrist lock throws . . . " That's not "part of Mayweather's defense system."

Trip wrote:You just seem to be exaggerating it, making it seem out of place.

everything seems not to be "exaggerating it," but observing what, at times, has been demonstrated.

Trip wrote:If you stop turning it into something impossible,
you'll see it's just a simple defense term like parry, block, cover, dodge, etc.

I've rarely done a good job of describing it without video.
So, Google it. You'll find some basics on the web.

And BTW, once you get the knack of it
You can catch a punch with different parts of the body.
Kinda like the body can become a hand.

Right. But again, that's not what everything was talking about. If you have a video of someone live "catching punches out of thin air that morph into wrist lock throws," please post it.

Catching a punch @ :57 to 1:33:

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

Imo, it's not the "catch" part that people doubt, it's the "stick, adhere, connect, follow" stuff that is hard to see. The boxer's "catch" isn't really a tcc tactic. I.e., one would definitely avoid trying to stop a fist directly. But, if you're boxing, and the other guy is pawing or just "flicking" his jab, it certainly works and is used all the time. Parrying and deflection are integral parts of tcc striking. Ban lan chui is the obvious example, but they're there is Grasp Birds Tail.

It's too dangerous to generalize because there are too many variables. Let's say that it might be possible to grab a punch thrown by a drunk and wrap his arm behind his back. Sure, it's just not the same as saying it's possible to do on a sober, angry Mike Tyson or Manny Pacquiao. In reality, though, the former is much more likely to occur than the latter. So, ya might just be good to go.

marvin8 wrote: If you have a video of someone live "catching punches out of thin air that morph into wrist lock throws," please post it.

It seems to me that if you're not wearing gloves "catching" a punch on the flat of your hand is an incredibly stupid tactic. I mean it's okay for training, but those bones break pretty easy. Broken hands, wrists, and fingers are one of the most common Friday night injury in ERs thanks to people thinking they can street fight like boxers.

For catching a punch, I don't have a video, per se, but I have the technique.

Essentially, as I've explained before, the first step is to block the punch same side (my right to their right) forearm to forearm with palm facing you. This spoils the trajectory while not absorbing much of the energy of the punch. As it finishes, you follow and overturn your palm, cupping the forearm or making a hook hand. As they pull back, you slide down to the wrist and you've got rudimentary control. At that point you can pull them out to overextend and then attack with the other hand directly, or push their hand down to the dantien, inviting them to strike with the other side, which you can do the same thing to with your other hand, pinning the first hand with their second via your second, leaving them crossed up and you with a clear shot with a free hand.
.

EDIT: Like Steve says there are lots of variables, might not work in all cases, and other related techniques may be used instead, just giving a quick example.

At one time - living in Boston - I studied private lessons with Jwing Ming Yang
Chin Na. He was very strict about the lessons in that we would not progress further
if previous forms had not been mastered - treatment to correct injury - studying
related organs to channels - the health of which affect a persons susceptibility to
be controlled.
He NEVER taught to catch a punch. The technique is similar to John Wang explanation
in another thread of using hook then Peng to catch the leg. he would initiate by throwing the punch and then following up on the block to go for the joint lock.
For years I attempted the technique that Origami Itto describes and I came to the conclusion that I am too slow to make it work. Opponent always escaped as I was going for a split.

I think Bao is 100% correct.

Tai Chi and also Capoeria require that you play in tight.
If you get caught watching the movie you are dead.

roger hao wrote: For years I attempted the technique that Origami Itto describes and I came to the conclusion that I am too slow to make it work. Opponent always escaped as I was going for a split.

The secret is only fight people slower than you.

if there were a good "punch catch" technique that could be used reliably with high success, the striker vs. grappler debate in mma would be over by now. rousey wouldn't have lost to holm. couture would never have lost to liddell. perhaps even under boxing rules mayweather wouldn't have so easily dispatched mcgregor. and so on. that's really just meant to be an example. you can't be good at everything. rousey can't be as good at boxing as holm. mayweather can't have the same style as tyson did. some stuff may as well be "dead" as far as one person goes, especially if in general, observed, large data, some things are seen to not work. if jon jones or someone talented pulls it off, that still doesn't mean everyone else can likely do it reliably.

anyway, that's just the PREMISE of my statement. the main part is to take whatever you say is "live" and "internal" that. by and large, I'd guess that is exactly what you do. so not sure why you'd want to argue about it (other than that is fun or interesting in any case).

You've touched a point that others have already. I.e., don't bother comparing yourself or your art to those of champion professionals in their prime. Chuck Liddell knocked out tf out when he was younger, and got knocked tf out 15 years later. But, Chuck would still probably knock out every tcc, xingyi, or bagua practitioner living today --maybe ever. Even when we talk about the accomplishments of past tcc masters, we're often talking about exceptional professionals. The guys that everyone else admired and/or wanted to emulate.

Anyway, I was going to start a thread "How to fight using tcc" just to hear some ideas. For example, the issue of distance. It's generally agreed that, of the two categories, "long strike" and "short strike," that tcc is short strike. Supposedly, those categories were also related to regions. It was said that the ground in the North was harder, so the martial artists moved around more. Whereas, in the muddy South, techniques such as kicks and jumps were less viable. Just folklore, but it's interesting that both YCF and WCC left Beijing to set up shop in Shanghai at the same time.

Well, my main point is that there are three relevant distances that can actually be reduced to two. Either the opponent is within arm's reach, or he is not. I mean, that's why people distrust the idea of "no touch" martial arts. If the argument is that close means that tcc is a grappling art, fine. But, then everybody asks why we don't see it in the ufc. And, why are there so many obvious strikes and kicks, including back fists, chops, etc., if the art is primarily for grappling? Otoh, what's wrong with close range striking? There are elbows and knees, for ex.

Um, the thing is, there's always the other guy. If he's good, he also has a plan. He's not going to let himself get hit, and he's going to want to hit, grab, or throw you. Unfortunately, most of the tcc people who compete are just low-level. That's why it doesn't look the way tcc should. They don't have role models to show them the way, so they just do the best they can in the circumstances.