New Taiji teaching method

[Appledog]

Hello, I'd like to maintain a 'cool post count' of 108 posts. This particular post has gone beyond that number and has therefore expired.

I'm sorry if you were looking for some old information but I'll do my best to answer you if you send me a DM with a question in it.

[johnwang]

Why do you drill moves that have back-and-forth breaks in continuity (i.e. drill #1 or even #2 which is from tantui)? Won't that cause something like "Tennis elbow" due to the skip in continuity?

Don't understand what you are talking about. What has it to do with Tantui and tennis elbow?

[Appledog]

Hello, I'd like to maintain a 'cool post count' of 108 posts. This particular post has gone beyond that number and has therefore expired.

I'm sorry if you were looking for some old information but I'll do my best to answer you if you send me a DM with a question in it.

[windwalker]

Of course I am not here to judge *you* or your style, but I am actually genuinely curious because you posted these clips seemingly unconnected to anything else and in that context you would surely know they would be evaluated this way. Is it just because they're drills? Or do you practice them that way in the form too?

ya your not here to judge, so why are you?
and this clip, thoughts?


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

[Appledog]

Hello, I'd like to maintain a 'cool post count' of 108 posts. This particular post has gone beyond that number and has therefore expired.

I'm sorry if you were looking for some old information but I'll do my best to answer you if you send me a DM with a question in it.

[windwalker]

In China if you taught this kind of broken form I really don't think you would last long as a Tai Chi teacher. You just have to understand, there's nothing wrong with Xingyi, or Chaquan for that matter. It just isn't Tai Chi.

the form is only a tool, part of a method of practice.
It's not the point of practice.

Unfortunately some how this has become a way of judging the outcome with out seeing it
in use.

[Appledog]

Hello, I'd like to maintain a 'cool post count' of 108 posts. This particular post has gone beyond that number and has therefore expired.

I'm sorry if you were looking for some old information but I'll do my best to answer you if you send me a DM with a question in it.

[charles]

In the Kuo Lien Ying example it's clear that he has internal strength but is it Tai Chi? Visually, no. Not according to the classics. And since "those schools" so often say that the classics are in fact wrong, then by what standard can anyone use to judge tai chi? Including yourself when you're learning it, which I suppose is the real issue here (re: new teaching method).

One can't, really.

The discussion of "purity" of an art has come up periodically here - and on Empty Flower. "Purity" is an abstract ideal, often delineated by a set of theoretical principles. In reality, there is no purity of an individual in his or her practice of an art: purity is an abstract ideal that is never fully realized in actual practice. There are always discrepancies between the actual and the ideal.

Add to that the many interpretations that arise from each of the theoretical principles. For example, you mentioned the principle of not stopping and continuous flow. One interpretation is that that applies to an individual action, not between actions. Your interpretation appears to be that there should never be a stop of discontinuity ever from beginning to end - particularly as it relates to forms practice. Those are varying interpretations of that principle. Which is "right", which is "wrong"? Both, neither.

What one can do is to identify one's own goals for practice and then evaluate if an individual practitioner (i.e. teacher) is able to help one in one's journey to achieve that goal. The idea of trying to learn the one pure, one original version of an art is going to be a life-long act of frustration, a chasing of one's own tail, so to speak.

The question is, if you wanted to learn Tai Chi, would you care if you were being taught the internal strentgh of a completely different art? In some cases an incompatible art? For many westerners, many here included, this is like splitting hairs, they just don't care. That's because of our lack of appreciation for things like history and lineage that we just don't get as a culture, being only about 200 years old.

The art of "Tai Chi" (i.e. Taijiquan) is an abstract ideal. If one defines one's goal as, "Wanting to learn Tai Chi", rather than identifying a specific goal (or goals) that the practice will achieve, then it becomes largely a mind-game of trying to find "Tai Chi" and someone who can teach it to one. If one defines specific goals, then one seeks a practice that will help one achieve that goal. For example, if one's goal is, say, to improve balance, then finding a teacher who can teach a practice that improves balance would be the target. That practice might be "Tai Chi" or it might be something else. Similarly, if one's goal was to learn how to fight. Or some other goal. Taijiquan is a vehicle, a means to end. If one's goal is as vague as "learn Tai Chi", then nothing is adequate and everything is adequate to achieve that goal. It isn't about being unable to appreciate history or lineage. There are many "versions" of history and of "lineage". You pick which you want to believe.

In China if you taught this kind of broken form I really don't think you would last long as a Tai Chi teacher.

I suspect you would and I suspect many do. There's lots of "crap" Taijiquan in China, just as there is everywhere else. The definition of "crap" largely depends on the viewer, what he or she has been exposed to and his or her preferences and goals. The world is a place with few absolutes, few things that are entirely either black or white.

[johnwang]

But this kind of sudden stop and start is precisely what the taoists are complaining about when they say that new grass bends and old grass breaks.

I do agree that the "continuous motion" model is better on the joints than the "compressing and releasing" model is.

- The hook/uppercut are easier on the elbow/shoulder joints than the jab/cross are.
- The full body rotation MT roundhouse kick is easier on the knee/hip joints than the kick out and pull back karate roundhouse kick is.

This is why I do foot sweep, inner hook, outer hook, leg twist, leg lift, leg spring, ... solo drills more than front kick, side kick, ... I prefer to drill "1 step 1 hook punch" than "1 step 1 straight punch" for easier on my elbow/shoulder joints.

But if you consider 100% health, there will be no combat. To land your fist on your opponent's face is neither healthy for your hand, nor healthy for his face. There are some trade off between health and combat.

I have not got any tennis elbow yet. Does CXW have any tennis elbow? I don't know.

[johnwang]

Few days ago a friend of mine (he is 7 years younger than me) told me that when he punched/kicked, he just sent out arm/leg slowly without putting any power into it for the reason of easier on the joints. I told him I may start to do that when I'm 90. I'm not ready to give up all my combat training and replaced by health training yet.

I'm sure most of your guys are younger than me. It may be too early for your guys to think about 100% for health and 0% for combat. Again, To land your fist on your opponent's face is neither healthy for your hand, nor healthy for his face. But you still have to pay that price to develop your knock down ability in case one day you do have to use your CMA skill to save your family members life.

[yeniseri]

"Old" is "new", "new" is "old".

MY OLD WAY
1. Zhanzhuang
2. Individual posture training (basically repetitions of posture, etc)
3. Stringing them together as a whole.

NEW WAY
#3 only with a baduanjin warmup
"Diffcult posture I do have students repeat but no one seems to want #1 or #2.
Everything is fast no jibengong/yangsheng bullsit silence in posture.
I only do this with Beijing24shi taijiquan. All others I follow the alleged "Old Way" so that the maximum effort is gained. If student do not want to do at home, no big deal..

[johnwang]

new grass bends and old grass breaks. Old grass is stiff, it forces it's way upon the world, and the world breaks it.

We have discussed this so many times before. You can't soft your opponent to death. 100% softness is useless in combat. If "pure" Taiji means 100% softness with no combat value then I don't want to have anything to do with it.

[origami_itto]

It conceals hardness within softness. You gotta have the soft before you can get the hard.

[Steve James]

The problem with hard and soft is that they are always complementary. Too soft, no good: too hard, no good. This also has been repeated so much that it should be unnecessary to say. It's inherent in the idea of "taiji" and has to be essential to the practice of tcc (or any martial art that doesn't depend on the practitioner having more physical strength).

In the romantic past, people were told the story about Chang San Feng watching a crane fighting a snake. But, I"d say just make a list with all the good qualities of "softness" (such as flexibility) and all the good qualities of "hardness" (such as strength). Then do the same for the bad qualities of each (such as weakness and brittleness (break-ability). In tcc, (imo) the search is for incorporating all the good parts of both hardness and softness, and eliminating all the bad qualities.

[Steve James]

I have not got any tennis elbow yet. Does CXW have any tennis elbow? I don't know.

There was a story a while back that he had some knee problems, but I don't know if that's true. And, I don't think it's always possible to connect an injury to one specific cause. You can trip on stairs, in the bathtub, or on a rug, and sustain an injury. It could also simply be age related. But, I think it's valid to question whether what he's doing is good for the body, and why. Studies need to be done on "fa jin" separately.