Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

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

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby cloudz on Mon Dec 05, 2022 6:57 am

But the claim is not the same, nor is the explanation, nor the purpose.


This is where we see things differently.

Try a thought experiment..
If I took two respective 'silent' clips to a Doctor of Psychology and they know nothing about "the claims", nothing about the respective explanations and nothing about the purposes etc. make it as blind as possible so to speak. What do you think they would think about the experiences, responses and reactions (phenomenon) of the two sets of actors, not to mention the influence of the one leading them ?

That somehow they were psychologically fundamentally different things being seen to be going on ?
My sister is one, and I would vouch for her being an expert witness. She has been paid in the thousands to be one.
She really has next to no knowledge of these martial arts in the ways we do.

What do you think ?

But the fact is Rob, I'm not here to be anyones Judge or Jury.
Like I said mate,

Happy Training.
Last edited by cloudz on Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:09 am, edited 3 times in total.
Regards
George

London UK
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby RobP3 on Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:33 am

This is where we see things differently.

Because one is seeing and one is doing

Try a thought experiment..
If I took two respective 'silent' clips to a Doctor of Psychology and they know nothing about "the claims", nothing about the respective explanations and nothing about the purposes etc. make it as blind as possible so to speak. What do you think they would think about the experiences, responses and reactions (phenomenon) of the two sets of actors, not to mention the influence of the one leading them ?


Actors? So already we have a judgement built into the experiment :) This is the root of it, isn't it? That everyone is acting along, and none of us realise it, and people watching often get all offended by that, even angry in some cases. I'd say the explanation for both would by "psychological", which is how I keep trying to describe it, and you seem to agree and disagree at the same time

That somehow they were psychologically fundamentally different things being seen to be going on ?
My sister is one, and I would vouch for her being an expert witness. She has been paid in the thousands to be one.
She really has next to no knowledge of these martial arts in the ways we do.


Again, seeing what you think might be going on and experiencing are different things. I'm sure Apollo Robbins would have no trouble pickpocketing an experience psychologist. First you have to understand the purpose and context of what is going on. Everyone is aware of "going along with teacher," or also of frantically trying to resist what is happening, whether either of those be appropriate or not. We are seeing training clips, not demos of "powers."

I just saw this today, here's some extracts from a long article by a non_Ryabko Systema instructor. I think the biggest point he makes here is that there is no non-contact work because there is always contact on some level. Whereas a supposed beam of "energy" or similar presumably needs no contact whatsoever?

What does "non-contact in martial arts" look like from the outside within the scientific paradigm? One person is waving his arm, or not even waving, but making a barely perceptible body movement, and the other person falls or loses his balance. No SEEABLE force is seen by the normal eye.
It seems to be either a giveaway or a suggestion (mesmerism, hypnosis). In terms of the modern scientific paradigm, one's arm only moves because there is a chain of biochemical reactions going on inside one's body. This chain of biochemical reactions should not in any way airborne start biochemical reactions in the other body. It's the same with laughter or with tears-it's just chemistry, friends, according to science. Our feelings, you and I, are simply chemistry. Those who understand that together with water there is a risk of throwing the baby out, turn to the works of Pavlov and try to explain everything through the concept of "reflexes" and the "first signal system. Bernstein also made considerable efforts in this field.
Why so? The whole point is that the observer sees only the physical body and does not pay attention to the fact that there is something more subtle. If we see only the physical body, then "non-contact fighting" looks like this - either like quackery or the occult. Therefore, those who take only the physical body into the beam of their Attention can rightfully consider it either the result of:
Mutual agreement
Unconscious playing along
Suggestion (mesmerism, alpha-hypnosis)
Or manifestation of "unclean powers" (demons) from the invisible world (occultism)
But as soon as one approaches and establishes full body contact, everything for such people falls into place - here we see how one body affects another body - at the right angle and in the right vector.
Our mind calms down - everything once again fits into the framework of the given picture of the world.

First of all, as you have already seen, there is no no no-contact. There is always contact. But "contact" is not a Russian word. The more accurate Russian word here is resin. Influences such as knapping, reeking, or emptying are possible if one can enter or attach oneself to the consciousness of the other person. To do this, one has to be Alive and see Alive in the other person. If the person is "glazed" (inanimate, glazed over), then by inexperience you will slip by your influence from the other person.
What would you like to warn against? Such influences are not a magic wand in defeating the world around us. Often on the decoy "no-contact fighting" are led by those whose self-esteem is wounded and who dream secretly to become a magician and wizard. There is no magic and wizardry here. There is only pure mechanics and a vision of something more subtle than the physical body.
And for those who are going to use it in combat, it's important to understand that in combat against a tough fighter, the Rope, Incense and Desolation and other types of subtle effects will only be an add-on that gives some advantage - all this allows to throw off the balance, distract attention, make a lone fighter with earthly gravity and ultimately all come down to one thing - winning precious time (literally moments). This means that the art of fighting on a dense level must be mastered and constantly improved in it - achieving in it strength, power and ease.

At the level of Intent.
However, if the opponent sees everything as well as you do, then you need to work with him even more subtly. The next level is intention. Intent goes before images. By intention, you can determine what a person is really going to do, whether it's a fight or, say, a business. In business, sometimes it's the same as in combat. And just as in combat, it's important to read the other person's true intention. People are not what they seem. That's the first thing the old folks explain. The intention of the other person is transmitted to us as well. For example, if a person happens to be near us who has a strong intention for something, that intention is transmitted to us. Words can be empty and empty words will not lift a person to a feat. But the ability to see and manage our own intention, gives us the opportunity to encourage the other person to do anything.
Intention always has a direction - in time and space. Intention can be good and evil, it can be the intention of love. It can all be transferred to another person. Or even into another person. For example, it is possible to transfer to another person the intention of fear and then he will experience unaccountable horror and if there is proper power in the intention, then the person may even turn to flight. Or vice versa, you can give another person the intention of care, love and warmth and then that person trusts us.
And in combat, you can see the intent of the enemy - it spills out of him with "trunks". Between these trunks you can walk leisurely, and then not a single blow of the enemy can reach you. Any intention can also be extinguished. So you can stop a fight in the midst of it - at the level of intent.
It is also possible to induce your opponent to move where you want him to go - by rolling on him with your intention, for example, just by indicating the intention of one or another blow.
Last edited by RobP3 on Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:36 am, edited 2 times in total.
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby cloudz on Tue Dec 06, 2022 4:48 am

RobP3 wrote:
Because one is seeing and one is doing


I don't really get the point of that distinction. Are you doing what i am seeing or not ?
because if I am seeing one thing but you are doing another, that basically describes an illusion.

If you had simply accepted my choice or description when I said it, this might be easier than you are making it.
But why would I expect you to make it easy for me ? ;D

Actors? So already we have a judgement built into the experiment :) This is the root of it, isn't it? That everyone is acting along, and none of us realise it, and people watching often get all offended by that, even angry in some cases. I'd say the explanation for both would by "psychological", which is how I keep trying to describe it, and you seem to agree and disagree at the same time


Well yes, but actors isn't so much a judgement as quite a common figure of speech. I am glad you realise it. because for a moment you had me worried you weren't in on the illusion. The difference now with the other mob is that the denial of the basic mechanisms (principles of illusion) means they are deluded to what they are working with.

We agree that it's psychology now. But it's not common, as you earlier suggested, it's very much uncommon.

Take for example the famous Chi in the park clip that those American researchers took. The first of its kind really and was said to kick off the whole Chi empty force as a thing in the West. Those guys later came clean that they played along at the time.

Again, seeing what you think might be going on and experiencing are different things. I'm sure Apollo Robbins would have no trouble pickpocketing an experience psychologist. First you have to understand the purpose and context of what is going on. Everyone is aware of "going along with teacher," or also of frantically trying to resist what is happening, whether either of those be appropriate or not. We are seeing training clips, not demos of "powers."


Well MR talks about it as a skill in the clip segment I highlighted. Who else talks about it as a "skillset".. hmm
So whether it's branded skill or power is quite by the by. In either case it's mysterious and breaks the laws of physics.

I am saying this optical illusion is achieved in ways that map each other psychologically.
You said I was making assumptions and I went along with that. But the caveat is that i wouldn't say those things if I didn't believe they could be supported in some way



I just saw this today, here's some extracts from a long article by a non Ryabko Systema instructor. I think the biggest point he makes here is that there is no non-contact work because there is always contact on some level. Whereas a supposed beam of "energy" or similar presumably needs no contact whatsoever?


well it's definitely progress i think. Contact yes, we are talking about subconscious phycological contact in both cases. Earlier I used the terms communication and later information.

These other guys map that as "energy" essentially. It's telling that many of the exercises MR does in that clip around the drill are for all intents and purposes the kind of material found in Chinese arts. Similar things are being imparted principle wise. Putting feeling and awareness at the forefront. The things being communicated and how they are being done so are not psychologically different or work through our psychology as some radically different understanding that we have of the mind and body; and the things we know are possible; through known means.

I standby my assessment that it basically "works the same". I'll do my best to flesh this out at some point and get back to you. It's a genuine opinion and myself I'm curious how far the local basis of that extends into certain disciplines (common ground). I hope you can appreciate it's not a simple matter.
Last edited by cloudz on Tue Dec 06, 2022 4:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Regards
George

London UK
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby Giles on Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:57 am

Quote from Rob's quoting of a Russian Systema guy:

"Influences such as knapping, reeking, [???] or emptying are possible if one can enter or attach oneself to the consciousness of the other person. To do this, one has to be Alive and see Alive in the other person. If the person is "glazed" (inanimate, glazed over), then by inexperience you will slip by your influence from the other person."

So the bottom line is that a complex living system interacts with another complex living system. Two modern hominids, no less, with oodles of evolutionary and social conditioning, with emotions and (some) intellect also in the package. Beings that 'live and feel' not only the absolute present, but also in the past and often a second or two in the future as well. (In contrast to purely mechanical systems that are actually inanimate). The broad spectrum of inter-being interactions is in play, with no truly clear-cut boundary between 'touch' and 'no touch', and between the purely biomechanical and the influence of mind/brain/thought/perception/intent.

Quote from the old transmissions about Yang Luchan:

"Yáng replied that there were three types of people against whom his style was useless. When Zhāng asked what these types of people were, Yáng replied: "The bronze people, the iron people, and the wooden people. It's hard to fight with them, but with the rest it's easy."



PS. This is not waving the flag for "empty force" in its narrower sense.
Do not make the mistake of giving up the near in order to seek the far.
Giles
Wuji
 
Posts: 1352
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:19 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby windwalker on Tue Dec 06, 2022 9:07 am

Giles wrote:Quote from the old transmissions about Yang Luchan:

"Yáng replied that there were three types of people against whom his style was useless. When Zhāng asked what these types of people were, Yáng replied: "The bronze people, the iron people, and the wooden people. It's hard to fight with them, but with the rest it's easy."



PS. This is not waving the flag for "empty force" in its narrower sense.


good quote,,the context is quite interesting :)

the context ;)

Yang's first opportunity to meet the Chang family and demonstrate his martial art was during a banquet that hosted multiple martial arts teachers.
Chang thought little of Yang's ability due to his small build and decided that Yang did not "look" like a boxer.

Yang was served a very simple dinner and, as an insult, placed behind an ordinary martial artist preparing to demonstrate.

After Yang demonstrated his "Cotton Fist" style, Mr. Chang asked if it could actually defeat an opponent.
The question was a veiled insult since he had invited Yang on the basis of his reputation as a great fighter.

Yang answered that except for men of bronze, men of iron, and men of rock his Fist style could defeat men of flesh and blood.

http://shaolintemplemi.org/yang-luchan- ... chuan.html



Why do so many speak on things they don't do, can not do or have not interacted with...

might want to start with a simple idea

Empty force . 空力 "kong li" is not volley jin "凌空勁"
commonly refereed to as "empty force".
Jin in this case is not the same as the word force in English..

very basic and simple,,,,

the same can be understood with

意 Yi, translated as "intent" is not the same as the English use of the word intent...

Its different something that can be developed and used...
As is often repeated yi, leads the qi, qi motivates the body..

Most talk about it as with some of the things mentioned, many write about it, very few can do what they write about..

waving the flag,,,for "empty force" ;D

might be better to understand its only part of a greater whole...
whether touched or not the "process "
used is the same...

Rob, has given his reason for the differences, as Gorge pointed out the same could be said for those
who's practices "Chinese" in this case are questioned based on a different "theory" of use...

In this sense I see little difference,

good discussion btw... :)
Last edited by windwalker on Tue Dec 06, 2022 7:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 10544
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby RobP3 on Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:31 am

Giles wrote:Quote from Rob's quoting of a Russian Systema guy:


So the bottom line is that a complex living system interacts with another complex living system. Two modern hominids, no less, with oodles of evolutionary and social conditioning, with emotions and (some) intellect also in the package. Beings that 'live and feel' not only the absolute present, but also in the past and often a second or two in the future as well. (In contrast to purely mechanical systems that are actually inanimate). The broad spectrum of inter-being interactions is in play, with no truly clear-cut boundary between 'touch' and 'no touch', and between the purely biomechanical and the influence of mind/brain/thought/perception/intent.

Quote from the old transmissions about Yang Luchan:

"Yáng replied that there were three types of people against whom his style was useless. When Zhāng asked what these types of people were, Yáng replied: "The bronze people, the iron people, and the wooden people. It's hard to fight with them, but with the rest it's easy."



PS. This is not waving the flag for "empty force" in its narrower sense.


Interesting observation
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby Doc Stier on Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:45 am

Personal perception is viewed as reality by most people. Thus, they tend to not see things as they actually are, but rather as they themselves are. -shrug- ::)
"First in the Mind and then in the Body."
User avatar
Doc Stier
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5693
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:04 pm
Location: Woodcreek, TX

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby RobP3 on Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:48 am

I don't really get the point of that distinction. Are you doing what i am seeing or not ? because if I am seeing one thing but you are doing another, that basically describes an illusion.

Well is what you think you are seeing what I am actually doing? Of you were doing it too, wouldn’t that confirm or otherwise what you think you are seeing?

If you had simply accepted my choice or description when I said it, this might be easier than you are making it. But why would I expect you to make it easy for me ? ;D

It’s not about easy, it’s about you interpreting what you are seeing

Well yes, but actors isn't so much a judgement as quite a common figure of speech. I am glad you realise it. because for a moment you had me worried you weren't in on the illusion. The difference now with the other mob is that the denial of the basic mechanisms (principles of illusion) means they are deluded to what they are working with.

I never heard the term actors outside of movies. I still don’t get what you mean by illusion, when everything is being explained.

We agree that it's psychology now. But it's not common, as you earlier suggested, it's very much uncommon.

We use it every day

Take for example the famous Chi in the park clip that those American researchers took. The first of its kind really and was said to kick off the whole Chi empty force as a thing in the West. Those guys later came clean that they played along at the time.

Okay. But, again, that’s another group of people doing something else

Well MR talks about it as a skill in the clip segment I highlighted. Who else talks about it as a "skillset".. hmm So whether it's branded skill or power is quite by the by. In either case it's mysterious and breaks the laws of physics.

The skill is in applying an understanding of human psychology. I keep saying it isn’t special or mysterious lol. You must also think that penguins can break the laws of physics then ;D



I am saying this optical illusion is achieved in ways that map each other psychologically.

What is the illusion?

well it's definitely progress i think. Contact yes, we are talking about subconscious phycological contact in both cases. Earlier I used the terms communication and later information.


Yes

These other guys map that as "energy" essentially. It's telling that many of the exercises MR does in that clip around the drill are for all intents and purposes the kind of material found in Chinese arts.

Are they?

Similar things are being imparted principle wise. Putting feeling and awareness at the forefront. The things being communicated and how they are being done so are not psychologically different or work through our psychology as some radically different understanding that we have of the mind and body; and the things we know are possible; through known means.

Yes, it's psychology. Difference is how it is applied and the function.

I standby my assessment that it basically "works the same". I'll do my best to flesh this out at some point and get back to you. It's a genuine opinion and myself I'm curious how far the local basis of that extends into certain disciplines (common ground). I hope you can appreciate it's not a simple matter.

It works the same, in that both use psychology. The difference is in the explanation, the training and the purpose / function.
It isn’t, as I said this is a very deep subject

A few others thoughts on differences. One thing to bear in mind is that MR. VV, Soloviev etc are not martial artists. They are military / LEO professionals. They don’t have a lineage to uphold or a style to protect or preserve. Their work is born out of experience. Some roots lie in the proto spets units of WW2. A quote I heard when asked who the “masters” were got the reply “the ones who came back.” The Soviets put huge amounts of scientific research into all aspects of human capabilities, across the whole spectrum of applications. Some of that history is quite dark.
This, to me, leads to a huge difference in approach to how material is presented and taught, on many levels. And I am not saying that with the view that we are all some kind of SF ninja operators, it just a fact in the development of Systema – again, across a range of practices, including health. Indeed it’s ironic, though understandable, that 95% of the online talk about Systema is about a particular 5% of the practice.

Cheers
Rob
Last edited by RobP3 on Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby cloudz on Sat Aug 19, 2023 7:43 am

Hey

I noticed on Grahams Blog you did a explanation and comparison clip of "empty force" and no touch work.. I like it, gives a nice overview of the kind of 2 person work involved.

though I do have a bit of a different view on the distinctions. It's more to do with how they are framed and the terminology but It does make a little difference to how I view things in general. You may disagree of course. I can't really remember if i made this distinction before but it was the first thing that I thought of watching the clip. I read a bit about human senses after this thread; a particular book about the science.. we have 32 classified these days. So quite a wide sensorium there. This is Physiology rather than Psychology. So that definitely applies to your No Touch work IMO much more than your For me over use of the term Psychology.. for that anyway.. ;)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=32+senses& ... c70o0yhm_p


So I think Both Energy work and no touch/empty force are more Physiology based than Psychology.

The psychology of both I think are about "allowing" and "going with" the physiology received through the human senses. We discussed that part previously as the same thing that creates rapport; things like body language. In one or other there may be beliefs involved, depending on the individuals involved and their belief systems. But I think that works despite any belief system. So again more Physiology based. The Psychology part is the Unwillingness to break the Rapport - for whatever the reason. But it can be by the employment of awareness and Will I suppose - So yea that part is psychological for sure.

The Belief part of Psychology is more likely in Chinese Energy and sensitivity work In all Likely hood. A belief in energy; though as you point out, this in not groundless..

I think Chinese empty force does rely on the Chinese paradigm, but I think it is sometimes based more on the same control based idea behind Systema "no touch". As It's more martial based than purely "energy work".

Often those involved in "energy work" are not really martial Sifu even though they may wear the silks. I have seen martial guys produce the same effects after using contact work that gets the receiver into a fearful state of mind from receiving pain. This isn't the case in what i describe as "energy work".
So for me that is same as your "no touch"

Can both or either be useful?

Well they could, but I really don't think they are necessary or offer insight or benefits to other kinds of contact work.
Both would seem to be equally useful for training Sensitivity it seems.
The Martial aspect seems besides the point as both are "no touch" either way. Depending on the set up. Push hands is a martial exercise so if that's the basis then I don't see a huge difference. Some demonstrations are not. The belief part for me is ind of a red herring. I mean I believe in "energy".. lol. I just don't work with it or believe that work overcomes Physical energies. I think I talked about Subtle energies earlier in the thread.

Others mileage may vary

Here's Robs clip anyway, if you haven't seen it.
Last edited by cloudz on Sat Aug 19, 2023 8:33 am, edited 5 times in total.
Regards
George

London UK
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby cloudz on Sat Aug 19, 2023 8:47 am

I just want to add a note to the Hopping part.

I got into a few discussion on Mike Yuens group and did a little of his "Ji power training" from Gin Soon and YSC.

The keeping of the structure is a deliberate part used to develop structural connection and the power of the Triangular Force of Ji. It also acts as a defensive aspect where you retreat from greater force: think the way a cat jumps back maintaining structure.

Of course the whole "dancing Qi" parts from that school ARE ridiculous and odd and Mike certainly gave me the impression that was something that changed and developed later at the Gin Soon school after the type of people coming in changed a little and were less inclined for bitter training. In the early days it wasn't there. The Ji pushing can be done against a wall solo for example. Or two person. But it is really only a conditioning exercise. So the people doing it need to know that if they hop further than once or once and catch their footing, they are doing it of their own accord; as well as the first one of course. Yes relaxing dissipates but neither party gets to train this exercise as per what it is meant to develop. Which is firstly structure and force of a specific kind.

Mike is adamant this is the "Secret Sauce" of the famed Yang family power..
As well as the Ji being used in the posture holding and the idea permeates or is a foundation for everything else.

Just thought I would throw that in on that training, seeing as it is included in this clip.
I don't think it's really related to energy work or empty force/ no touch at all personally.

The best example of this kind of training for me is by Jim Uglow in the UK, there is quite a good clip online of him and one of his guys on youtube doing it.
You trained with him a fair bit I believe Rob. No hopping, Was the hopping part of Vincents stuff ?

Whilst in two person I have done it holding structure and letting it move me - before this training. I have never Hopped.
Both parties were aware it was a training exercise and no more than that.. I viewed it as a fa jin type exercise at the time, but that's changed a bit since.
Last edited by cloudz on Sat Aug 19, 2023 8:54 am, edited 2 times in total.
Regards
George

London UK
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby Fubo on Wed Aug 30, 2023 11:17 am

cloudz wrote:I just want to add a note to the Hopping part.

I got into a few discussion on Mike Yuens group and did a little of his "Ji power training" from Gin Soon and YSC.

The keeping of the structure is a deliberate part used to develop structural connection and the power of the Triangular Force of Ji. It also acts as a defensive aspect where you retreat from greater force: think the way a cat jumps back maintaining structure.

Of course the whole "dancing Qi" parts from that school ARE ridiculous and odd and Mike certainly gave me the impression that was something that changed and developed later at the Gin Soon school after the type of people coming in changed a little and were less inclined for bitter training. In the early days it wasn't there. The Ji pushing can be done against a wall solo for example. Or two person. But it is really only a conditioning exercise. So the people doing it need to know that if they hop further than once or once and catch their footing, they are doing it of their own accord; as well as the first one of course. Yes relaxing dissipates but neither party gets to train this exercise as per what it is meant to develop. Which is firstly structure and force of a specific kind.

Mike is adamant this is the "Secret Sauce" of the famed Yang family power..
As well as the Ji being used in the posture holding and the idea permeates or is a foundation for everything else.

Just thought I would throw that in on that training, seeing as it is included in this clip.
I don't think it's really related to energy work or empty force/ no touch at all personally.

The best example of this kind of training for me is by Jim Uglow in the UK, there is quite a good clip online of him and one of his guys on youtube doing it.
You trained with him a fair bit I believe Rob. No hopping, Was the hopping part of Vincents stuff ?

Whilst in two person I have done it holding structure and letting it move me - before this training. I have never Hopped.
Both parties were aware it was a training exercise and no more than that.. I viewed it as a fa jin type exercise at the time, but that's changed a bit since.



Not to get off topic, but I wanted to add something of my experience and understand of the yang family "pushing" exercise, the purpose and resulting reactions.

Interesting to hear about Mike Yuen, I've never met him, and have never trained in the Chu Gin Soon lineage, but I have trained with a few people in the YSC lineage. I have met teachers in that lineage who did the "empty force" stuff during "dynamic pushing hands", and while it "worked" on other students, it had no effect on me... I was told I just wasn't sensitive enough, but I found it to be just like how Rob described it, a produce of conditioning with one's own students. I will say that when there was physical contact, that training method was very good, and really enhanced one's development in all areas of the system.

My main teacher for a number of years in the YSC lineage was Ip Tai Tak, and he not only never did any "empty force" stuff, he also said that he did not believe in it. He said that some people from other branches of the YSC lineage would sometimes visit him, and try the "empty force" stuff on his students to no effect... make of that what you will. We did that "pushing" (Ip never called it "dynamic pushing hands") on ITT's small roof top class every session, against a concrete wall. Yes there was a slight "bounce" involved depending on how far you were from the wall (I don't like the term "hop", because it implies that the student is deliberately moving themselves), because as Cloud described, you were basically trying your best to maintain your structure throughout the push, to not only develop the structure through the pressure of the push being added to you, but to also have structure for when your back got pushed into the concrete wall... if you didn't maintain your structure when pushed, you were likely to get injured when you slammed into the wall (no mattresses or foam pads against the wall at his school). So, if you maintain your structure while being pushed, the natural reaction is to end up "bouncing" backwards, because our bodies are not ridged objects, out tendons and connective tissues have a rebounding effect when we pressurize them. Yes, we could have just relaxed, and the push would have done nothing, but then there would be little to no developmental value to the exercise. It's the difference between something like pushing a basketball and a floppy tree... if you push the basketball and there's some downward force, it's going to go back as an entire unit (because it won't collapse) and might bounce as the downward pressure if released upwards, but if you push a floppy tree, the tree is going to give way, and your force is going to be dissipated. I think people look at this exercise and miss the point... it's not about how the person being pushed is affected, but about what's being developed.

The YSC lineage spends a lot of time doing bitter zhan zhuang training, in addition to form, so there's a lot of lower body development. The "pushing" training is a way to tie the upper body into it, to add resistance to the upper body to further develop the arms and core within the framework and principles of the system. Rather than doing some training like a plank or push ups to add extra resistance, the pushing is just a much more task specific method, because it integrates the whole body in a way which enhances the body method of the YSC system... basically when you're receiving the pressure of a push into your body, you're not just working on maintaining your arm, shoulder, core structure, but you're learning how to redirect all the force coming at you into the ground, or projecting force from the ground upwards and through your arms and hands, while staying relaxed. It works a lot of things at the same time while remaining standing and relaxed, something bodyweight exercises on the ground can't really replicate, which is why it's a part of the system. There's nothing mystical about it, nor dies it train the student into being conditioned to be a robot... as long as the training isn't abused by the teacher and presented as something it's not.
Fubo
Wuji
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:13 pm

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby RobP3 on Thu Aug 31, 2023 5:57 am

cloudz wrote:Hey

I noticed on Grahams Blog you did a explanation and comparison clip of "empty force" and no touch work.. I like it, gives a nice overview of the kind of 2 person work involved.
though I do have a bit of a different view on the distinctions. It's more to do with how they are framed and the terminology but It does make a little difference to how I view things in general. You may disagree of course. I can't really remember if i made this distinction before but it was the first thing that I thought of watching the clip. I read a bit about human senses after this thread; a particular book about the science.. we have 32 classified these days. So quite a wide sensorium there. This is Physiology rather than Psychology. So that definitely applies to your No Touch work IMO much more than your For me over use of the term Psychology.. for that anyway.. ;)
So I think Both Energy work and no touch/empty force are more Physiology based than Psychology.

The psychology of both I think are about "allowing" and "going with" the physiology received through the human senses. We discussed that part previously as the same thing that creates rapport; things like body language. In one or other there may be beliefs involved, depending on the individuals involved and their belief systems. But I think that works despite any belief system. So again more Physiology based. The Psychology part is the Unwillingness to break the Rapport - for whatever the reason. But it can be by the employment of awareness and Will I suppose - So yea that part is psychological for sure.

The Belief part of Psychology is more likely in Chinese Energy and sensitivity work In all Likely hood. A belief in energy; though as you point out, this in not groundless..

I think Chinese empty force does rely on the Chinese paradigm, but I think it is sometimes based more on the same control based idea behind Systema "no touch". As It's more martial based than purely "energy work".

Often those involved in "energy work" are not really martial Sifu even though they may wear the silks. I have seen martial guys produce the same effects after using contact work that gets the receiver into a fearful state of mind from receiving pain. This isn't the case in what i describe as "energy work".
So for me that is same as your "no touch"

Can both or either be useful?

Well they could, but I really don't think they are necessary or offer insight or benefits to other kinds of contact work.
Both would seem to be equally useful for training Sensitivity it seems.
The Martial aspect seems besides the point as both are "no touch" either way. Depending on the set up. Push hands is a martial exercise so if that's the basis then I don't see a huge difference. Some demonstrations are not. The belief part for me is ind of a red herring. I mean I believe in "energy".. lol. I just don't work with it or believe that work overcomes Physical energies. I think I talked about Subtle energies earlier in the thread.

Others mileage may vary

Here's Robs clip anyway, if you haven't seen it.


Thanks. Sorry, don't really have time to go into this in depth here. And you told me off for talking too much on my last vlog ;D
It's a shot video so I'm painting in broad strokes. My basic distinction is - if you point a finger at me that emits some sort of force that physically moves me, regardless of what I think about it, or if I don't even see it - that's physical.

If you pointing your finger at me is a cue for me to flinch, spasm my muscles, jump, etc or if it presents a clear threat to me in some way, so I flinch, etc, that is psychological. Of course, as I said in a recent post, any separation is purely for ease of discussion / teaching / learning.

So, if empty force is an actual "real" thing, it should be able to move people, animals, objects with no reliance on their awareness of it happening. If there is a reliance on seeing the movement that produces the "force," it is psychological. Again, that's my basic view. Yes, we can get into intuition, lines of intent, pattern interrupt, flinch reaction, etc etc but each would take it's own longer video. I think I mention the idea of support in the clip in passing, again just one example of how to use no contact work.

Every time I've seen empty force demoed has been in a martial arts contact "you come in and attack me." I've seen various types of "energy work" but no-one there was claiming the power to repel people with it
cheers
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby RobP3 on Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:03 am

cloudz wrote:I just want to add a note to the Hopping part.

I got into a few discussion on Mike Yuens group and did a little of his "Ji power training" from Gin Soon and YSC.

The keeping of the structure is a deliberate part used to develop structural connection and the power of the Triangular Force of Ji. It also acts as a defensive aspect where you retreat from greater force: think the way a cat jumps back maintaining structure.
Of course the whole "dancing Qi" parts from that school ARE ridiculous and odd and Mike certainly gave me the impression that was something that changed and developed later at the Gin Soon school after the type of people coming in changed a little and were less inclined for bitter training. In the early days it wasn't there. The Ji pushing can be done against a wall solo for example. Or two person. But it is really only a conditioning exercise. So the people doing it need to know that if they hop further than once or once and catch their footing, they are doing it of their own accord; as well as the first one of course. Yes relaxing dissipates but neither party gets to train this exercise as per what it is meant to develop. Which is firstly structure and force of a specific kind.Mike is adamant this is the "Secret Sauce" of the famed Yang family power..
As well as the Ji being used in the posture holding and the idea permeates or is a foundation for everything else.
Just thought I would throw that in on that training, seeing as it is included in this clip.
I don't think it's really related to energy work or empty force/ no touch at all personally.
The best example of this kind of training for me is by Jim Uglow in the UK, there is quite a good clip online of him and one of his guys on youtube doing it.
You trained with him a fair bit I believe Rob. No hopping, Was the hopping part of Vincents stuff ?
Whilst in two person I have done it holding structure and letting it move me - before this training. I have never Hopped.
Both parties were aware it was a training exercise and no more than that.. I viewed it as a fa jin type exercise at the time, but that's changed a bit since.


From what I've seen and heard I'm not a fan of Mike, but YMMV. Interesting that he says the dancing was a later development. I trained in the dynamic pushing extensively, with the GSC people and others. It builds some things but I totally discarded it later on. Maybe part of the reason is, IME, there was never any function attached to anything - form, DPH, etc.
So is this the Yang "secret?" The ability to push people out from a firm stance? It might explain a lot in relation to how challenges were done at a certain place and time. Outside of that... I don't know
Yes I trained with Jim, I believe he is now studying under Mary Yang. No hopping. And there is footage of me doing DPH with Vincent Chu - no hopping.
Last edited by RobP3 on Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby RobP3 on Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:09 am

Fubo wrote:Not to get off topic, but I wanted to add something of my experience and understand of the yang family "pushing" exercise, the purpose and resulting reactions.
Interesting to hear about Mike Yuen, I've never met him, and have never trained in the Chu Gin Soon lineage, but I have trained with a few people in the YSC lineage. I have met teachers in that lineage who did the "empty force" stuff during "dynamic pushing hands", and while it "worked" on other students, it had no effect on me... I was told I just wasn't sensitive enough, but I found it to be just like how Rob described it, a produce of conditioning with one's own students. I will say that when there was physical contact, that training method was very good, and really enhanced one's development in all areas of the system.

My main teacher for a number of years in the YSC lineage was Ip Tai Tak, and he not only never did any "empty force" stuff, he also said that he did not believe in it. He said that some people from other branches of the YSC lineage would sometimes visit him, and try the "empty force" stuff on his students to no effect... make of that what you will. We did that "pushing" (Ip never called it "dynamic pushing hands") on ITT's small roof top class every session, against a concrete wall. Yes there was a slight "bounce" involved depending on how far you were from the wall (I don't like the term "hop", because it implies that the student is deliberately moving themselves), because as Cloud described, you were basically trying your best to maintain your structure throughout the push, to not only develop the structure through the pressure of the push being added to you, but to also have structure for when your back got pushed into the concrete wall... if you didn't maintain your structure when pushed, you were likely to get injured when you slammed into the wall (no mattresses or foam pads against the wall at his school). So, if you maintain your structure while being pushed, the natural reaction is to end up "bouncing" backwards, because our bodies are not ridged objects, out tendons and connective tissues have a rebounding effect when we pressurize them. Yes, we could have just relaxed, and the push would have done nothing, but then there would be little to no developmental value to the exercise. It's the difference between something like pushing a basketball and a floppy tree... if you push the basketball and there's some downward force, it's going to go back as an entire unit (because it won't collapse) and might bounce as the downward pressure if released upwards, but if you push a floppy tree, the tree is going to give way, and your force is going to be dissipated. I think people look at this exercise and miss the point... it's not about how the person being pushed is affected, but about what's being developed.

The YSC lineage spends a lot of time doing bitter zhan zhuang training, in addition to form, so there's a lot of lower body development. The "pushing" training is a way to tie the upper body into it, to add resistance to the upper body to further develop the arms and core within the framework and principles of the system. Rather than doing some training like a plank or push ups to add extra resistance, the pushing is just a much more task specific method, because it integrates the whole body in a way which enhances the body method of the YSC system... basically when you're receiving the pressure of a push into your body, you're not just working on maintaining your arm, shoulder, core structure, but you're learning how to redirect all the force coming at you into the ground, or projecting force from the ground upwards and through your arms and hands, while staying relaxed. It works a lot of things at the same time while remaining standing and relaxed, something bodyweight exercises on the ground can't really replicate, which is why it's a part of the system. There's nothing mystical about it, nor dies it train the student into being conditioned to be a robot... as long as the training isn't abused by the teacher and presented as something it's not.


Thanks Interesting that ITT never did EF. Vince Chu did say to me once that EF or "qi dance" was something that developed with a long-term student. It was another level of sensitivity training, but was absolutely no use against an actual attacker. Which is fine, yet it was always demoed in a martial setting. And as such, I still maintain it is down to conditioning / playing with awareness etc

I get the integration aspect of DPH training, but not the function. And, IMV, I never saw it as being relaxed, more a question of structure and tensegrity. My question was always, what if you have to break structure. Answer - "you never do!" Okay.... well my outside experiences may have been a little different from those guys lol.
Your last line I agree with - there is a temptation, perhaps for some teachers to take this into "guru " realms. Saw that develop first hand at Ding's school.
Last edited by RobP3 on Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Remember, if your life seems dull and boring - it is" Derek & Clive
www.systemauk.com
RobP3
Wuji
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:30 am
Location: UK

Re: Systema and Tai Chi – similarities and differences

Postby Fubo on Thu Aug 31, 2023 8:57 am

RobP3 wrote:Thanks Interesting that ITT never did EF. Vince Chu did say to me once that EF or "qi dance" was something that developed with a long-term student. It was another level of sensitivity training, but was absolutely no use against an actual attacker. Which is fine, yet it was always demoed in a martial setting. And as such, I still maintain it is down to conditioning / playing with awareness etc

I get the integration aspect of DPH training, but not the function. And, IMV, I never saw it as being relaxed, more a question of structure and tensegrity. My question was always, what if you have to break structure. Answer - "you never do!" Okay.... well my outside experiences may have been a little different from those guys lol.
Your last line I agree with - there is a temptation, perhaps for some teachers to take this into "guru " realms. Saw that develop first hand at Ding's school.


Sure thing. Yeah, ITT thought EF was nonsense. Ip had students that had been with him for close to 2 decades, and then some who were YSC's students that went on to train with Ip after YSC passed away... none of them ever developed any EF abilities, nor did they become susceptible to people trying it on them. I would assume that they would be considered long-term students.

I think "relaxed" was probably the wrong word to use with regards to DPH... yes, structure and tensgrity are more accurate. My understanding of the function, as least from what I learned, was that it was more to develop attributes and conditioning that would carry over to application, and not a method of application in and of itself. In a similar way people in other martial arts may do strength and conditioning training to enhance their application... The way Ip taught it, it's true, you don't "break structure", peng jin is always there, you just learn to hide it so it's harder for someone to take advantage of. But I think I get your point about "what if you need to break structure"... I think that's something Systema addresses a lot more.

In my mind there was never really any incentive for Ip to do things to make him look like a "guru", the EF stuff or otherwise. He had a small informal class on his roof, and wasn't interested in a large commercial school, and didn't advertise, so didn't need to make spectacles to wow people, and certainly didn't lean into the mystical stuff like some in the west did. He, like most people in Hong Kong, was very pragmatic, only really interested in what worked and could be demonstrated. He came from a weight lifting, background, and had trained Muay Thai and Judo before starting Tai chi, and was responsible for taking challenges on YSC's behalf, so he was only really interested in functionality.
Last edited by Fubo on Thu Aug 31, 2023 8:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fubo
Wuji
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:13 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: taiwandeutscher and 24 guests