How you react

[klonk]

All that said, the Yang taiji "turn body around heel" is much better than anything karate does in its place. I fear that by discussing karate and aiki jutsu, we may alienate those who, for clear reasons, resent the Japanese.

[windwalker]

For perspective, a tai chi expert told me to stop it when I would throw in a few shotokai love taps ("sen gata"). I was doing it wrong. In real life, it would have disabled the opponent.

If he said this then what made him an expert.
What you mention is the best opportunity to demonstrate the differences in approach and technique

His school, his rule.

Saving face is a big thing with Chinese. I go along with that.

A lot is mentioned about saving face. While there are some cultural artifacts that
cover this its not what IME is, as many seem to imply.

It's not a "big" thing but it is something that can
allow one to understand if someone is about learning something or getting hurt.

Have interacted with many taiji teachers at first touch one knows.
Any other interaction beyond this point is pointless unless its in
sparing mode or fighting mode where the point of what one is doing is very clear.

With teachers in a group setting I make sure not to do anything that would upset the setting.
meet as friends along the path, leave as friends following the path.

Reading the many post here concerning push hands it does not seem to be so clear
by those who practice this "development" practice. As to what they'er doing or why.

Have meet some here "hsinchu, tw. " who got quite heated when interacting with each other, one taking and talking about
what might be called an esoteric approach, the other more of a practical usage approach.

Not understanding directly , but understanding the gist of what was going on...

I showed the usage based person how the others method would work against him,
and helped the esoteric based one understand why his way of usage would not work
out side of "demo" mode.

they both cooled down a little ....

[klonk]

"Attack me in any way you like." I never met W.E. Fairbairn, but that is the way he opened his classwork. He was Kodokan (2nd Dan) and Yin Fu bagua. Marvelous approach to teaching.

[windwalker]

Yes, my understanding of the degrees of contact are at skin level, flesh level, and bone level. This concept is contained in both the internal Japanese and internal Chinese arts that I study.
It's not that you can't touch the bone in the opponent's structure, it's more that you don't want to create vulnerability in yourself by letting the opponent feel your connection to his center. If he can feel that, then he can follow it back like a path, to your own center of mass and overtake it.
So, you must avoid telegraphing that you are manipulating their structure (and frame). This means that you can't give any pressure at the point of contact, which would be a sign that you are creating a pathway to your own center of mass via your connecting limb.

Instead, the limbs you use to make a contact point can only be used as conduits for force you are generating elsewhere in your body. The manipulation has to be in the degree and concentration of "Yang/Yo" you apply, to compress your opponent's vertebrae as you propel him out and/or down, or, the degree and concentration of "Yin/In" you apply, to make him stick to you as you draw him in. The deeper you propel into, or "suction" from, his bones, the more powerful the effect. But you have to be able to do this without letting any pressure come from whatever you are using to make a point of contact (usually the hands and arms, but it could be a shoulder, a hip, a knee, etc.) with your opponent.

Thanks for another good post.

Maybe the approach is a little different.

What you've described is to slow, requires feedback.

we use skin, hair, and "air"....lets not talk about "air" the name that shall not be named

The change ie separating the ying/yang refers in my work to mind/body. The body which is normally thought of and used in what might be called a positive "yang" state is made negative or more yin. The reveres is true for the mind. This means at the moment of touch the contact / change has already happened, the transition that occurs because of this interaction is what many seem to question as the others body/ mind tries to regain it's own equilibrium.
Some have talked about "making" someone move against their will.. They should understand that they will move because of their will....

There is no feed back loop...in hitting arts like "boxing" for example there's no time.



Usage wise, the other is given no chance to recover, this is usually followed up with a knock out shot or getting slammed.
In practice or sparring mode its enough to disrupt the balance to the point that the other has to correct it or hit the ground.

The ancients said that to listen with the ears is less preferable than to listen with the Mind but to listen with the Mind is less preferable than to listen with (the) Air.

This is so because what the ear feels is the real thing (sound waves; [a form which can be sensed]), what the Mind feels is empty [formless], (in contrast to something real, something which can be grasped [by the senses]), and what the Air feels is the Spirit, the aura (of the thing).

Even though the hundred organs may be as tiny and fine as hair on the skin, they are all filled and strengthened by Air. It is because Air was no space in between itself that it is skillful in feeling and versatile (very sensitive and swift in response). What it (Air) calls listening is feeling. Thus Air should be before [precede in importance] the Mind and body. Therefore Air feels before the Mind, and to ‘listen with Air’ is the utmost part of feeling.

http://www.baihepai.com/pak-hok-pai-lio ... -siu-jong/

[windwalker]

"Attack me in any way you like." I never met W.E. Fairbairn, but that is the way he opened his classwork. He was Kodokan (2nd Dan) and Yin Fu bagua. Marvelous approach to teaching.

all the teachers I've met

said the same thing....
its really the only way to know.

As "interloper" mentioned there are components to the training.
one has to know what one is looking for...and training on.

[Dmitri]

"Attack me in any way you like." I never met W.E. Fairbairn, but that is the way he opened his classwork. He was Kodokan (2nd Dan) and Yin Fu bagua. Marvelous approach to teaching.

Wonder if anyone ever pulled a '38 from a holster in response to that...?

[klonk]

"Attack me in any way you like." I never met W.E. Fairbairn, but that is the way he opened his classwork. He was Kodokan (2nd Dan) and Yin Fu bagua. Marvelous approach to teaching.

Wonder if anyone ever pulled a '38 from a holster in response to that...?

Looks like a .45 in the clip below. But I am pretty sure the open challenge was in context of unarmed combat. He (with Sykes) had a separate course for pistols, today regarded as dated material, but remarkable training for its time in that speed was placed at a higher premium than accuracy. Here is the course material: http://www.specops.pl/vortal/download/f ... o_live.pdf

[LaoDan]

Both teachers mention not touching the bone can you explain how you manipulate another's mass and structure without doing so, and why it might not be a good idea to to do so.

WW,

I am pretty certain that you are projecting your own ideas onto Sam’s teaching, and that what he is probably talking about is not related to skin, hair, and air. [Note that I have only studied ILiqChuan with Sam (and I do not have any teaching certification for ILC), and I have not met Roy, so I cannot speak to the Aikido approach.] Since you are not familiar with the concepts and specific ways that Sam uses various terminologies, let me explain this, to the best of my limited understanding, using an analogy.

Imagine if one were trying to control and manipulate a properly inflated ball that was floating on water, in order to move it right, left, forward, or backward at will. If one pushed to the ball’s center (pushed to the bone), then the ball would initially be pushed further into the water and would subsequently spin around the force that was pushing against it. [Note that Sam said one should avoid pushing to the bone because that would allow the opponent to spin around the force.]

But the above does not mean that one should avoid controlling the center, since the ball could also freely spin, even with a light touch, if that contact was not directed towards the ball’s center (the “bone”). This is the idea of “circle to center” that ILC uses. There is also a concept of “center to center” which is not applicable to the ball analogy since a ball only has one center. For people, this would be controlling multiple centers, including the centers of various joints, as well as the opponent’s centers of mass.

A third concept of “circle with a cross” also applies to the ball analogy. With this, one should be aware of the “cross” at the point of contact which divides the circle into four quadrants. In order to move the ball without it spinning out of one’s control, you need to control the center while directing energy into one of the quadrants in order to move the ball in the direction desired. In people this would also involve yin surfaces and yang surfaces and directing forces through the opponent’s specific muscles (flexors or extensors respectively) in a way that is not present in the simple ball analogy. [Note that I think that this is probably compatible with the stickiness that Roy mentioned.]

ILC does also have concepts of “uniting the mental with the physical” “mental over physical” and “mental instead of physical,” but these are more about awareness than they are about physical pressure (or skin, hair, air), although with greater awareness (and sensitivity) one can accomplish the same amount of control with less force. Most ILC students are working at the first level, trying to unite the mental with the physical, and Sam often recommends practitioners use power at this stage in order to make the physical more obvious. If too subtle, then the forces are difficult to understand, and therefore difficult to mentally unite with.

ILC practitioners are sometimes criticized, especially by TJQ practitioners, for using force or power. But this is just reflective of the level of skill. When one has more awareness, then less physical power is needed. Control of the ball which is floating on water needs less power for controlling it and move it at will when one has greater awareness of the ball and the forces needed to move it. But improperly directed force, of whatever level, can also backfire since the opponent can use, or avoid, those forces.

In the video, when Sam demonstrates the wrong action of “pushing to the bone,” the receiver of the force incorrectly moved downward rather than simply spinning around the force as he should have. He therefore showed less awareness than an inanimate ball floating on water, which would have naturally spun around Sam’s force. I therefore see no reason to comment further on him. I suspect that Japanese martial arts have sayings about the mind getting in the way – this person, who responds worse than an inanimate ball would, seems to exhibit this defect.

[windwalker]

I am pretty certain that you are projecting your own ideas onto Sam’s teaching, and that what he is probably talking about is not related to skin, hair, and air.
Not projecting anything I started off by saying "Maybe the approach is a little different. " I can see what he is doing regardless of how its explained. I can also cause the same reactions in varying degrees to people I've met or those I work with. The whole post " how you react" is based around the why of the reaction and would it be the same for anyone..... my post directed at "interloper" contrasting my methods and reasonings asking for a little more clarification on his whether I agree with it or not...

[Note that I have only studied ILiqChuan with Sam (and I do not have any teaching certification for ILC), and I have not met Roy, so I cannot speak to the Aikido approach.] Since you are not familiar with the concepts and specific ways that Sam uses various terminologies, let me explain this, to the best of my limited understanding, using an analogy. Have met some who said they've practice this method. Not a fan of it. Have watched many clips of Sam and his teachings....Like much of what he says again don't care for the applications shown...reminds me very much of s-mantis which I did work with for a little while

Imagine if one were trying to control and manipulate a properly inflated ball that was floating on water, in order to move it right, left, forward, or backward at will. If one pushed to the ball’s center (pushed to the bone), then the ball would initially be pushed further into the water and would subsequently spin around the force that was pushing against it. [Note that Sam said one should avoid pushing to the bone because that would allow the opponent to spin around the force.]

But the above does not mean that one should avoid controlling the center, since the ball could also freely spin, even with a light touch, if that contact was not directed towards the ball’s center (the “bone”). This is the idea of “circle to center” that ILC uses. There is also a concept of “center to center” which is not applicable to the ball analogy since a ball only has one center. For people, this would be controlling multiple centers, including the centers of various joints, as well as the opponent’s centers of mass. you might want to check out whats called "parallel axis theorem"

A third concept of “circle with a cross” also applies to the ball analogy. With this, one should be aware of the “cross” at the point of contact which divides the circle into four quadrants. In order to move the ball without it spinning out of one’s control, you need to control the center while directing energy into one of the quadrants in order to move the ball in the direction desired. In people this would also involve yin surfaces and yang surfaces and directing forces through the opponent’s specific muscles (flexors or extensors respectively) in a way that is not present in the simple ball analogy. [Note that I think that this is probably compatible with the stickiness that Roy mentioned.] If one can do it, then it really doesn't matter how its explained.

ILC does also have concepts of “uniting the mental with the physical” “mental over physical” and “mental instead of physical,” but these are more about awareness than they are about physical pressure (or skin, hair, air), although with greater awareness (and sensitivity) one can accomplish the same amount of control with less force. Most ILC students are working at the first level, trying to unite the mental with the physical, and Sam often recommends practitioners use power at this stage in order to make the physical more obvious. If too subtle, then the forces are difficult to understand, and therefore difficult to mentally unite with. Seems like you either didn't read the commentary I posted or maybe didn't understand it
http://www.baihepai.com/pak-hok-pai-lio ... -siu-jong/ its not about the amount of force or no force. Its also not about controlling anything. Its to slow.....when a fist is coming towards one, they either react it or get hit. The question is what are they reacting to and why if its only the "fist" its to slow they will get hit...the link explains this .

ILC practitioners are sometimes criticized, especially by TJQ practitioners, for using force or power. But this is just reflective of the level of skill. When one has more awareness, then less physical power is needed. Control of the ball which is floating on water needs less power for controlling it and move it at will when one has greater awareness of the ball and the forces needed to move it. But improperly directed force, of whatever level, can also backfire since the opponent can use, or avoid, those forces.

In the video, when Sam demonstrates the wrong action of “pushing to the bone,” the receiver of the force incorrectly moved downward rather than simply spinning around the force as he should have. He therefore showed less awareness than an inanimate ball floating on water, which would have naturally spun around Sam’s force. I therefore see no reason to comment further on him. I suspect that Japanese martial arts have sayings about the mind getting in the way – this person, who responds worse than an inanimate ball would, seems to exhibit this defect.

Thanks for your post.

I dont listen much to what is said directly. I do watch what others do and the reactions caused. Most of what I've seen I can do to according to my own level and the level of those I met...Having said this their are no clips of either of them actually putting what they do to use.

Its all demo mode or push hands mode...There are no practitioners or examples from either discipline that say they use or show this in a competitive
environment. Those shown do not appear to be doing anything much different than anybody else...many reasons given why this is so.

On the other hand for what is called "drop step" Jack Dempsey,
provides a good explanation of why it works with examples of it working and being used in a competitive environment with an opponent who is also skilled and actively trying to knock one out as shown in this clip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnG7PWGrx20&t=27s


What is shown in the OP clips just as in the many clips shown on inner work while interesting have not been shown being applied and used as shown in demo mode for the most part...

[windwalker]

"Attack me in any way you like." I never met W.E. Fairbairn, but that is the way he opened his classwork. He was Kodokan (2nd Dan) and Yin Fu bagua. Marvelous approach to teaching.

Wonder if anyone ever pulled a '38 from a holster in response to that...?

Looks like a .45 in the clip below. But I am pretty sure the open challenge was in context of unarmed combat. He (with Sykes) had a separate course for pistols, today regarded as dated material, but remarkable training for its time in that speed was placed at a higher premium than accuracy. Here is the course material: http://www.specops.pl/vortal/download/f ... o_live.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zTvkst4AGk

Nice clip,,,in the infantry unit I was in, I along with other MA in the unit put on a demo in Luxembourg a city a long time ago,
the unit had helped free during WWII and would go back each yr in celebration of this event...really amazing at the time.

We also demoed Bayonet rifle disarms and sentry take downs. The rifle demos used real bayonets, the sentry take downs used rubber knives
as the sentries get stabbed or sliced in the process. Garrotting was also shown and used, usage and preventions...

It was kind of fake in a way as it implied the whole unit was trained in this way, when in truth it was really only a small number of people who had the skill level to do the demos...different type of work then what mechanized infantry units specialize in .

Would later work as an armed driver for a company that moved money between the banks for a little while,,,we also talked about and practiced weapon disarms although the company itself had no formal policy or training for it.

Hard to say whether it would have worked or not...luckily no one had to find out.

[Interloper]

What you've described is to slow, requires feedback.

Not really. It is instantaneous on-contact.

[windwalker]

What you've described is to slow, requires feedback.

Not really. It is instantaneous on-contact.

exactly my point.

What you outlined and what is shown is not instantaneous it takes a while for the CNS to react to it.


getting knocked out happens at contact, first contact.
It is instantaneous and has been shown in usage.

not getting knocked out means no contact.

how this is done accords to methods used.
there are no clips showing what you've mentioned in use
one is left with discussing methods and theories based on
what is shown in the clip....

what some have noted and asked for is anything that would
point to it being used outside of old stories or seminar events
in demo mode..

do enjoy the discussions, have worked with / on what is being discussed
for a while,,,for me its not about if it works, why or how....just a little shop talk
comparing notes so to speak...

[Interloper]

We have what is called "kuzushi on contact," meaning to instantaneously control the opponent's center of mass on contact. This can be a knockout (due to using a pulse that shocks the nervous system), or used to numb a limb, or simply to off-balance the person and set them up for a takedown, throw, etc. It is effortless when your are making 6-directional energy, because all you then have to do is direct it to the specific place you want it to go, for the desired effect.

What you've described is to slow, requires feedback.

Not really. It is instantaneous on-contact.

exactly my point.

What you outlined and what is shown is not instantaneous it takes a while for the CNS to react to it.


getting knocked out happens at contact, first contact.
It is instantaneous and has been shown in usage.

not getting knocked out means no contact.

how this is done accords to methods used.
there are no clips showing what you've mentioned in use
one is left with discussing methods and theories based on
what is shown in the clip....

what some have noted and asked for is anything that would
point to it being used outside of old stories or seminar events
in demo mode..

do enjoy the discussions, have worked with / on what is being discussed
for a while,,,for me its not about if it works, why or how....just a little shop talk
comparing notes so to speak...

[GrahamB]

We have what is called "kuzushi on contact," meaning to instantaneously control the opponent's center of mass on contact. This can be a knockout (due to using a pulse that shocks the nervous system), or used to numb a limb, or simply to off-balance the person and set them up for a takedown, throw, etc. It is effortless when your are making 6-directional energy, because all you then have to do is direct it to the specific place you want it to go, for the desired effect.

If it was possible to knock people who aren't conditioned to act like Lemmings unconscious from a mere touch of the arm, which you seem to be implying, then I'm pretty sure an MMA fight would look very different than it does.

"all you have to do is" - yeah, right!

I would highly recommend Stephan Kesting's Strenuous Life podcast for those needing a large dose of reality in their training. The most recent episode where he interviews Rob the owner of McDojoLife is very good:

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/stepha ... io-podcast

[Trick]

We have what is called "kuzushi on contact," meaning to instantaneously control the opponent's center of mass on contact. This can be a knockout (due to using a pulse that shocks the nervous system), or used to numb a limb, or simply to off-balance the person and set them up for a takedown, throw, etc. It is effortless when your are making 6-directional energy, because all you then have to do is direct it to the specific place you want it to go, for the desired effect.
]

The founder of the art(daito-ryu) if i recall right went out on a kind of “Knight errand” quest to test and harness and sharpen his skill, and probably it was not seldom a dangerous path. Could anyone today in the Dojo even hope to achieve his skill ? Or have the Dojo goers of today actually surpassed the skill of the founder of their art...if you can knock someone down by just touching their arm, that’s pretty skillful especially in a free moving non compliant engagement