Andy_S wrote:This is gold and is basically Taiji by any other definition.
Andy_S wrote:Ian:
Fair question. Equally to the point, why do no (virtually) Taiji guys show themselves doing these kinds of reactive drills?
Andy_S wrote:There are two basic responses to a strike.
(1) Stop the strike early with a block, stop hit or push; and
(2) Parry the movement while moving your own body letting it continue on its trajectory - ie letting his momentum increase, not decrease.
The latter is IMHO, the best option,
Andy_S wrote:(4) Stop hit is good, but if your bridge can accelerate his momentum, your counter will be that much more effective.
Andy_S wrote:This is gold and is basically Taiji by any other definition.
There are two basic responses to a strike.
(1) Stop the strike early with a block, stop hit or push; and
(2) Parry the movement while moving your own body letting it continue on its trajectory - ie letting his momentum increase, not decrease.
If the Russian guys have come to this defense intuitively - and/or through practice (or, indeed, from pinching other peeps' stuff) then good for them.
The Chinese have this in their tactical philosophies, basic moves and forms (in Taiji, we add a forward step to Kostic's first defense) but IME, most CMArtists don't have the drills to teach it which are, arguably, the most important thing.
liokault wrote:This is just like 99% of TCC, in that its a sham.
I couldnt get past 1.40 in the clip Andy posted, its just stooges falling over for no real reason, just like most TCC clips. I have yet to see a convincing systema clip.
RobP2 wrote:liokault wrote:This is just like 99% of TCC, in that its a sham.
I couldnt get past 1.40 in the clip Andy posted, its just stooges falling over for no real reason, just like most TCC clips. I have yet to see a convincing systema clip.
Well there are some opportunities coming up, for example Martin and Vlad are in London next year, or there are plenty of classes, come along and we'll make a clip
Daniel wrote:I have a question for Ian and RobP2 if I may. I have been thinking about it for some time, curious about something. One thing that has made Taiji go astray is, in a sense, it´s way of transferring information to a new generation. (Forms, single movement training, push hands - codified training that should be picked apart and trained like hell, for combat, and also filled with internal work). It´s just that over primarily the last century, the same method of transferring information has become empty, while the pressure to be able to use it in combat has vanished.
How long has Systema been around? How does it transfer information? Aren´t there any forms in Systema, simply because it´s so new? What will it look like in a hundred, two-three hundred year´s time?..
The only thing I´ve heard is that Michail Ryabko´s dad taught it to him and he trained it as one of Stalin´s bodyguards. There´s probably a lot more "lineage" information I´m not aware of, maybe even various clear Systema lineages, but the question itself interests me. Has Systema been around long enough to have to develop an information transfer system to the next generation?
If you have time to answer, I would appreciate it - I´ve actually been curious about this for a few years.
D.
Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: Trick and 84 guests