the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Subitai wrote:

wayne hansen wrote:I don't see the guy diving for Adam
Adam has an advantage by sitting down and has the guy set up where it is easy to make him loose his centre
Adam just exploits it

Ok, 1st I don't see sitting down as an advantage...to the opposite.
1) You limit your range of motion because you cannot move or TWIST as effectively compared to standing.
2) You don't gain the power of your feet and legs issuing through the ground.
3) Have someone push on you from Various angles whilst you are seated...you'll be using both Arse cheeks in no time in an attempt to compensate. Not very efficient.

>>> Which is the reason for my feeling that the dive was unnecessary.

2nd, I used the widely known term DIVE, as in "Taking a Dive". You know like a boxer does when he loses on purpose.

NOW: It's true the student is in a bow stance and is pressing / forward...so one must assume he's issuing some sort of power towards his teacher.

ALL Adam did was put his hand on his student and feel through his structure how he's connected to the ground...that is so easy for any reputable teacher to do. As he said...his Chi is connected and he has information transfer. Again that is not difficult to do.

Ok, so mabe the guy was a total newbie at a work shop i'll give him that. But once they have any training at all in the fundamentals...any body who knows would just turn their center slightly, Relax the arms, remain standing and not FALL FORWARD.

Think about that Wayne...if you were in a forward bow stance with that classic "Press / Forward" posture and Adam connected to you with one hand:
1) He could make you Fall forward like that? Answer, only if you let him.

2) If you're a teacher, how about one of your students who has at least learned some fundamentals?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This brings me to a topic I've been hesitant to share for long time now but I might post on the main board later.

If you don't see the advantage of sitting I don't think any thing I say will penetrate
Apart from the sitting advantage the teacher has the stop go button at his command
His constant talking and redirecting allows him to turn off the students attention at will
The student has paid for the seminar so has already signed the verbal contract
He does not wish to be rude or look foolish so plays the game under the rules set
The only true demo is one done with both people in the same posture both trying the same thing with no verbal distractions
The same teacher led con can be seen of other threads shown here in recent times
You must look outside mere tai chi to the overall setup
Adam is good at this type of thing and will only get better over time the more he does these type of things
That does not mean it will help his over all tai chi development

Good points Wayne. Also, he don’t demo with just anyone, not with absolute newcomers and not people he hasn’t tested. Just look at the Martial Man interview, he won’t play with the interviewer, only demonstrate on his long term student.

wayne hansen wrote:If you don't see the advantage of sitting I don't think any thing I say will penetrate

Nicely put.

Its very difficult to try to push down on someone sitting on the chair when your toe and knee are infront of the sitting persons toe and knee. A simple but of less challenging example would be standing infront of the sink cabinet to wash dishes without putting your toe into the toe kick under the sink cabinet and lean on the cabinet.

I will try not to editorialize, but to me it looks as if the first time, he's pushing into the line of stance integrity. When he wants to move the guy, he's pulling towards the void in the student's stance. If that is indeed what is going on, it's just very basic physics, and doesn't require anything in particular with regards to structure, power, or anything else.

Taijikid wrote:

wayne hansen wrote:If you don't see the advantage of sitting I don't think any thing I say will penetrate

Nicely put.

Its very difficult to try to push down on someone sitting on the chair when your toe and knee are infront of the sitting persons toe and knee. A simple but of less challenging example would be standing infront of the sink cabinet to wash dishes without putting your toe into the toe kick under the sink cabinet and lean on the cabinet.

Oh my gosh!! Please enlighten me as to the advantages of doing this exercise whilst sitting. I'll get the popcorn ready.

Because IMO, the entire exercise would be pointless!!! Why on earth would I be trying to push DOWN on someone who's sitting in a chair in the 1st place??? So I can train for the next old persons home I come across???

That's like saying "Here I am with my back against the wall, I want you to try to push me backwards"

Ridiculous

=========================
and this, the latter part of your paragraph:

A simple but of less challenging example would be standing infront of the sink cabinet to wash dishes without putting your toe into the toe kick under the sink cabinet and lean on the cabinet.

Slaps my forehead... do you people just make s&*t up just to screw your selves over on purpose?

Your example is silly, it would cause a person to over lean forward and be structurally unsound. I would never teach this way.

Bhassler wrote:I will try not to editorialize, but to me it looks as if the first time, he's pushing into the line of stance integrity. When he wants to move the guy, he's pulling towards the void in the student's stance. If that is indeed what is going on, it's just very basic physics, and doesn't require anything in particular with regards to structure, power, or anything else.

To the enlarged text: "EXACTLY"

Subitai wrote:Because IMO, the entire exercise would be pointless!!! Why on earth would I be trying to push DOWN on someone who's sitting in a chair in the 1st place??? So I can train for the next old persons home I come across???

Why would anyone want to push someone sitting on a sofa?

It's all a bit silly, and a highly artificial situation, IMO.

The whole point of demonstrating sitting down is to get the advantage of the upward direction of force while the "pusher" is forced to compromise his structure.

Because compromising structure is the only way to push someone sitting. Either you need to lean over him/her or you need to go down really low. Uncomfortable and unnaturally low.

Very easy for the one sitting down either way.

Bao wrote:
Why would anyone want to push someone sitting on a sofa?

There's a story in "lessons with tt liang" about Master Liang sitting on a sofa minding his own business and Cheng Man Ching sat down beside him and bumped him with his hip and knocked him off the sofa. Then he said some cunty little pithy line from the classics. Can't remember off hand and the books in the other room.

Point being, reasons for wanting to push someone sitting on a sofa include establishing dominance and being a dick. I imagine the musical chairs championship may have some use for it also.

In the early 1990's I studied with a well-known, caucasian, Yang style Taijiquan guy. He was a wonderful speaker, engaging, with a gift of gab, always entertaining and a great story teller. He used to describe things and demonstrate things that remind me very much of Mr. Mizner and his presentation. The descriptions were often in classical, vague Chinese idioms that none of this teacher's students ever understood but repeated often, particularly when discussing it with or teaching others. The physical demonstrations invariably were like Mr. Mizner's in which this teacher often said he was doing one thing, but was actually doing something entirely else that he never mentioned and students never picked-up on. Students could never reproduce his "feats". When corrected, students would again get the same platitudes they already didn't understand, sink the qi, set the shoulder... Much of his presentation was designed to give the impression that he, the teacher, knew something special that the students did not. However, the teacher taught with great attention to detail that made students feel like they were getting something special. I later learned that most of the "detail" he taught was simply irrelevant to skill development.

While the teacher had some skills, I never met a single student of his who had anything beyond beginner-levek skills, but he had a large following of dedicated students who all thought that they were learning The Real Stuff. Twenty years later, the students are still beginners.

I can't help but wonder if a similar situation exists with Mr. Mizner. I've never met him, or any of his students, so I don't know. There just appear to be a lot of similarities with the teacher I used to know.

I almost always dislike his demos, but I met a couple of his students in Australia and they were very good, solid strong and soft, not hippy bullshit at all.

I-mon wrote: I met a couple of his students in Australia and they were very good, solid strong and soft, not hippy bullshit at all.

I'm pleased to hear that.

It is odd but understandable for people who run seminars to complain or say that most people they meet cannot do or understand what they are doing.

He talks about the many taiji people he meets, the ones who attend his seminars looking for answers. Of course they don't have it. If they did bad for business.

Once while having lunch with my teacher and fellow students, we were discussing a certain technique, in which in simple
Demo to make a point we crossed hands, when I made the effort to counter his yield he simply pushed back at the precise moment to connect with my core me and my chair slid easily five feet across a tile floor. His Ability to Inadvertently counter my intent was clear and was a fun and impressive demonstration of his sensitivity and complete connection, with in his structure as well as mine. The fact that I didnt topple out of the chair but rather slid across the floor, myself and chair as one, made a positive impression to all as to my own connection. No bouncing, no acting, no pretense just candid action among friends. It is rarely possible to set up such a demo, but such a thing that happens matter of factlg is the best evidence. Just as there's never a Camera rolling when a real fight occurs, the truth happens unseen. We all just had a good laugh and great discussion on that day

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

taiji, a little beer and good company,,,about right

charles wrote:In the early 1990's I studied with a well-known, caucasian, Yang style Taijiquan guy. He was a wonderful speaker, engaging, with a gift of gab, always entertaining and a great story teller. He used to describe things and demonstrate things that remind me very much of Mr. Mizner and his presentation. The descriptions were often in classical, vague Chinese idioms that none of this teacher's students ever understood but repeated often, particularly when discussing it with or teaching others. The physical demonstrations invariably were like Mr. Mizner's in which this teacher often said he was doing one thing, but was actually doing something entirely else that he never mentioned and students never picked-up on. Students could never reproduce his "feats". When corrected, students would again get the same platitudes they already didn't understand, sink the qi, set the shoulder... Much of his presentation was designed to give the impression that he, the teacher, knew something special that the students did not. However, the teacher taught with great attention to detail that made students feel like they were getting something special. I later learned that most of the "detail" he taught was simply irrelevant to skill development.

While the teacher had some skills, I never met a single student of his who had anything beyond beginner-levek skills, but he had a large following of dedicated students who all thought that they were learning The Real Stuff. Twenty years later, the students are still beginners.

I can't help but wonder if a similar situation exists with Mr. Mizner. I've never met him, or any of his students, so I don't know. There just appear to be a lot of similarities with the teacher I used to know.

Yes, what is this thing about Caucasian teachers of CIMA ? Now I have just studied with two of "those". One for a couple of years and the other for just a couple of seminars, both could be said to be kind of pioneers of teaching east- Asian MA in Europe. I always felt that something was missing in their teaching and things of their own made up stuff was added, and the whole teaching process felt very very dragged out Not until I found a Chinese teacher although he was basically just teaching "modern" WuShu I felt I learned much more. And then the teachers I have learned from here in China has been great at sharing their knowledge, and they have done so in a very down to earth no "alternative" way, all their students are good and get good quite quick. The other MA I have studied in "the west" is Karate and Aikido, the "Caucasian" teachers I have met in those arts where quite good to excellent......now it's quite a long time ago I studied CIMA in "the west" so the standard of knowledge and teaching is probably quite good nowadays