great push hands skill

[bruce]

Bruce I don't disagree with what you say - but I am calling it as I see it. The senior master was asked that question through a translater - in a back room - and I demonstrated exactly what I was talking about. What he said was what he said.

Remember, in the village the training almost died out in the 1940s and 1950s;...only in the 60s did Chen Zhaokui go back and start it up again. By that time, he was old. Moreover, there was the Cultural Revolution in the 60s, which impacted training.

For these reasons, much of the fight training may have been lost. Ask yourself how often you see the 4 big masters - Chen Xiaowang, Chen Zhenglei, Zhu Tiencai or Wang Xian - doing ANYTHING combative beyond a bit of PH and some basic apps, usually qinna?

I would add that standing grappling is a legitimate combat method. Wrestlers and judoka can fight, even though they don't practice much (or any) striking. Wrestling, Judo and Taiji are not MMA: They don't cover everything. If the Taiji you have learned does, good for you. I DO question some of the training methods. As per above. In my own training, I mix it up. But I would prefer it if the syllabus was wider.

I think the younger generation in the village - Chen Bing, Chen Ziqiang - will be more combative in their outlook than the previous generation. Chen XQ told me he is working on a book on fighting Taiji, for eg. We shall see.

that is good to note "judo and tai chi" are not mma. and i would say i practice mma, not in the sports sense but in that i have combined ideas/methods from several ways of fighting in my own personal practice. for example when i am sparring or pushing hands it is hard not to use move x from yang tai chi and move y from boxing and move z from wrestling ... keeping it "pure as you learn may be important but in practice/usage i do not think "purity" matters.

my personal skills came from a lot of places so i can not say my tai chi covers all the bases ... i think there is some very good skill shown from some of the younger chen village guys you mentioned.

it seems to me that all martial arts contain grappling. it is a very natural way of removing your self from danger.

[bailewen]

Throw out all the crap you have read or been told. The real meanings behind these principles...

Zhan or attaching...any vertical downward parry, deflection or shielding.
Lin or Adhering.... any vertical upward parry, deflection or shielding.
xie or Connecting.... any horizontal parry, deflection or shielding while moving with the attack.
zhui or Following.... any horizontal parry, deflection or shielding while moving against the attack.

You need better drugs dude.

[Ba-men]

Throw out all the crap you have read or been told. The real meanings behind these principles...

Zhan or attaching...any vertical downward parry, deflection or shielding.
Lin or Adhering.... any vertical upward parry, deflection or shielding.
xie or Connecting.... any horizontal parry, deflection or shielding while moving with the attack.
zhui or Following.... any horizontal parry, deflection or shielding while moving against the attack.

You need better drugs dude.

Nice slam....But considering "Murphy's Law" ....Its been my experience In reality It's best to keep it simple.

[bailewen]

lol. Sure.

Thanks for taking it in stride.

See, I got nothing against keeping it simple. I'm a huge WC fan for just that reason but even if dividing your defensive maneouvers in to those 4 categories is a good idea, there's just no relation whatsoever between the categories you outlined and the terms you assigned them.

[Ba-men]

lol. Sure.

Thanks for taking it in stride.

See, I got nothing against keeping it simple. I'm a huge WC fan for just that reason but even if dividing your defensive maneouvers in to those 4 categories is a good idea, there's just no relation whatsoever between the categories you outlined and the terms you assigned them.

No problem... just words... Its ok to disagree. Its ok to say I'm full of it. Here its clear we all respect and love CMA or else you and I wouldn't be be coming here.

As far as.... there being no relation between the categories I outlined in Attaching, adhering, connecting and following.. My main influences (my two Sifu) were and are close to the Yang tree... (Yang Zhen Duo and Zhen Weiming.) pretty much they clearly spelled it out. I was just more direct. It's even in print ( Pang Jeng Lo wrote several good books on Taijiquan. He was close to one of my main Sifu, He pretty much was as direct as my words) I'm secure in my knowledge. If you believe different its cool.

Problem is.... many (in person or in print) have over analyzed it, over complicated it, or just were not clear. I've also come across other instructors who want to make it magical. I lump all that nonsense into the "Matador vs the Bull syndrome. " Most people want to talk about attaching, adhering, connecting and following and try to explain it in terms of feeling, listening and sensitivity. The categories I outlined if you do them with correct jing and softness then you naturally (through doing) learn and understand them. Example : Take the student, tell them to lead the opponent's push downward vertically.. Explain to them that what they are feeling is attachment to the opponent. Explain to them to listen for it, be sensitive, soft etc..etc Same push tell them to lead the push upward vertically, tell them that they are now experiencing Adhering.... etc etc..

Martially.....Take what I outlined and add softness to it and tell me what you get? (Softness is the glue..literally the key ingredient)

Probably what you believe to be correct. If not...it's

I'm sure well get another chance to get more in depth at another date...