這就是中國, This is China says Xu Xiaodong

[BruceP]

Cheers, George

[Steve James]

Well, if you mean there's a map for jab, cross, hook, uppercut, etc., it exists because the map just marks out directions of force. But, what I meant was that no tcc practitioner is required to follow any map at all, from the tcc form or from anywhere else. Tcc is in the service of the practitioner, not the other way around. Though, I appreciate the efforts of those who want to preserve tradition for tradition's sake.

But, I agree entirely with your sentiments.

[BruceP]

Well, if you mean there's a map for jab, cross, hook, uppercut, etc., it exists because the map just marks out directions of force. But, what I meant was that no tcc practitioner is required to follow any map at all, from the tcc form or from anywhere else. Tcc is in the service of the practitioner, not the other way around. Though, I appreciate the efforts of those who want to preserve tradition for tradition's sake.

But, I agree entirely with your sentiments.

Well, of course you agree. I've been writing about those same things since the EF days - back when nobody 'agreed', aside from Mckinley and John Wang.

There is no map for anything other than what resonates with the individual who's 'reading it' - it's more like a grid. That's the trick. As shown in the examples of BKTS I gave, 'directions of force' can be viewed similarly among some people, and differently among others. What some can turn into a hitting method, others can turn into a throwing method, and the real magic is that they tend to discover it all by themselves when the right kinds of pressure are presented (Re: "Everyone has natural talent...") . Whew! That's why I've been talking about Neutrality Principle these past 2 decades against the tide of derision from most tcc 'teachers'. As can be seen above, there are still some tcc guys who don't even know what that is.

No neutrality, no tai chi.

[Steve James]

Sorry to hear about the problems, but I know lots of tcc people who've competed in open competitions long before EF, RSF or the internet. Actually, I only learned about truly non-martial, as opposed to ineffectual, tcc was after people had pcs at home.

I've never tried to convince anyone what real tcc was. It is what they make it. I don't complain if they don't see it my way. But, I'm glad if people are happy that now everyone's seen the light.

[wayne hansen]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/xingyi/permalink/10155347428001248/

Yea dude, but didn't you notice all the "typical boxing and kickboxing" in there.
tut tut

Is it any wonder TCMA is vanishing up it's own butt with so many of those kind of attitudes around, including the ones Dave Chesser mentions.
He's bang on and the tale has been told so often on forums like this, it's getting older than you Wayne!

Can you call that Hsingyi - what was your comment earlier "just don't call it tai chi.."
So when you cross train in TSD and FMA, you afford yourself the same standard and privelage that you offer other cross trainers ?

Bruce, you've dropped some sweet prose on this thread, so thank you. It's nice to hear from progressive Tai Chi people around here. It's like a breath of fresh air man!

Before I learned those other things I was well versed in tai chi and didn't deviate from that path
I trained with others to get exposed to good teachers they were few and far between in the 70's
I learnt an entire system ,I am talking about those that never get far enough into a system before going on another path.
Sure I notice the boxing and kickboxing in their art but all those techniques exist within tai chi and hsing I
Anyone who puts on gloves goes outside of a barehanded art and must learn to punch in a modified way
If I had met the tai chi teachers I know today I would have had no need to seek other arts/teachers
The thing I see today is people who aren't very deep into there art and run to the latest fad to cover their own shortcomings
Train whatever you like but if the other arts overshadow the art you advertise be honest and call it by its real name

[Yuen-Ming]

I think to have Taiji fighting skill/ability is more important than to master the whole Taiji system.

- If you can use "cloud hand" to take down everybody on this planet, even if that's the only Taiji skill you have mastered, nobody on earth will say you are not a good Taiji master.
- Even if you have mastered the whole Taiji system, if you can't handle a 6 months boxer, nobody will call you a Taiji master.

Yessssss!

This was my original note with the subtitled video

https://www.facebook.com/wong.yuenming. ... 6931242102

and last day I added another short thing to give a better historical perspective to the CMA decline

https://www.facebook.com/wong.yuenming. ... 8427082102

Maybe some will find the above content of some interests

YM

[cloudz]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/xingyi/permalink/10155347428001248/

Yea dude, but didn't you notice all the "typical boxing and kickboxing" in there.
tut tut

Is it any wonder TCMA is vanishing up it's own butt with so many of those kind of attitudes around, including the ones Dave Chesser mentions.
He's bang on and the tale has been told so often on forums like this, it's getting older than you Wayne!

Can you call that Hsingyi - what was your comment earlier "just don't call it tai chi.."
So when you cross train in TSD and FMA, you afford yourself the same standard and privelage that you offer other cross trainers ?

Bruce, you've dropped some sweet prose on this thread, so thank you. It's nice to hear from progressive Tai Chi people around here. It's like a breath of fresh air man!

Before I learned those other things I was well versed in tai chi and didn't deviate from that path
I trained with others to get exposed to good teachers they were few and far between in the 70's
I learnt an entire system ,I am talking about those that never get far enough into a system before going on another path.
Sure I notice the boxing and kickboxing in their art but all those techniques exist within tai chi and hsing I
Anyone who puts on gloves goes outside of a barehanded art and must learn to punch in a modified way
If I had met the tai chi teachers I know today I would have had no need to seek other arts/teachers
The thing I see today is people who aren't very deep into there art and run to the latest fad to cover their own shortcomings
Train whatever you like but if the other arts overshadow the art you advertise be honest and call it by its real name

The trouble is though Wayne that there are so few good martial (fighting) taiji teachers - and this applies to other KF styles - you are quite hard pressed to get that training or even see it. It's no wonder people look at other people doing what they would like to be doing and want some of that.

[wayne hansen]

Yes it helps to be lucky at the start
There is nothing wrong with training other things as long as you let those you teach know where it comes from
It is a pity that good teachers are so hard to find
The sad fact is in a few generations the real arts will be gone forever

[BruceP]

Sorry to hear about the problems, but I know lots of tcc people who've competed in open competitions long before EF, RSF or the internet. Actually, I only learned about truly non-martial, as opposed to ineffectual, tcc was after people had pcs at home.

I've never tried to convince anyone what real tcc was. It is what they make it. I don't complain if they don't see it my way. But, I'm glad if people are happy that now everyone's seen the light.

Problems? more like entertainment. But, yeah, we all know lots of people who know lots of people. That's why tcc so well represented since PCs came on the scene, right? C'mon now.


The only "light" is/was shone on the hypocrisy of tradition and lineage being the measure of 'real' tcc.

[Steve James]

Well, I actually put up a video of tcc people who have competed against other styles for years, nationally and internationally. But, as you wrote immediately afterward, some will say that it's not tcc. That has never been my problem.

That's why tcc so well represented since PCs came on the scene, right? C'mon now.

No clue what you mean there. My greatest involvement in competition was before people had pcs. I didn't think that tcc practitioners had any problem competing. What I saw happen after wu shu came on the scene were claims being made about what "real" tcc was and who had it. If it didn't come from a certain place or was done a certain way, it was fake. And, since none of the people who claimed to have "real" tcc competed, there was no way to check. No one who had been on the scene earlier was considered legitimate; but, it was only they who had ever competed.

So, we have people on bulletin boards talking about what tcc should be and how it's not living up to its reputation. They're young enough. Make a reputation. I don't understand why fighters care at all about it. I don't get the indignation; but, then again, I don't care.

[Stillness]

The fake fight also happened in Taiwan. When I took my SC team to compete in Taiwan back in 1984. During the 1st tournament in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, I also got on the mat and compete myself. When I attacked, I could sense my opponent's defense was strong. Suddenly, I felt my opponent's defense was gone. I could enter and threw him down almost effortless. I then realized that the Taiwan SC team wanted me to win (because I was the team leader of the US team). After I had won that match, I no longer competed myself. I don't like fake match even if my opponent wants to let me win. To me, it's a personal insult.

This clip states a lot of interested view points. Do you agree, or disagree?

I am not sure about the fake matches, but what I am sure of is that after this, Tai chi teachers will probably take a different route of training if their students want to learn Tai chi for self defence.

In a way, this is a good thing. It may be a wake up call to lot's of tai chi practitioners.

[johnwang]

I am sure of is that after this, Tai chi teachers will probably take a different route of training if their students want to learn Tai chi for self defence.

In a way, this is a good thing. It may be a wake up call to lot's of tai chi practitioners.

Agree! Taiji training has too much Yin and not enough Yang. Yin can be used for defense. But you need Yang for offense.

Taiji has:

1. straight punch - vital punch,
2. hammer fist - turn around hammer,
3. uppercut - snake extend tone,
4. hook punch - twin peaks to the ear, striking tiger,
5. downward punch - drop down hammer,
6. side punch - diagonal fly,
7. ...

All the punching tools exist in the Taiji system. How many Taiji guys train how to use "turn around hammer" to knock down their opponents? May be less than 0.01%.

Again, it's not how to change Taiji training method. It's how to get students who are willing to test their Taiji fighting skill against other TCMA systems. If all your students are "tree buggers", you will be hopeless.

[BruceP]

If all your students are "tree buggers", you will be hopeless.

How could that be a typo?

[johnwang]

If all your students are "tree buggers", you will be hopeless.

How could that be a typo?

I had a group of Taiji students. They all came together because one person in their group had cancer. They had heard that Taiji can cure cancer, so they all came to help that cancer friend. When I taught them Taiji application, none of them had any interest in it. I then knew that I had a group of "Taiji for health" students. There were nothing I could do there.

Is that cancer student still alive today? If she is, I can be famous by using Taiji to cure cancer.

[Steve James]

4. hook punch - twin peaks to the ear, striking tiger,

Well, a "hook" in western boxing is a technique that in not like the "twin peaks" (or phoenix fist) strike. "Hit tiger" is also a curved punch (ok, punches). But, my point is that it wouldn't hurt for a tcc practitioner to learn how a good boxer throws a hook. Imo, it's not enough that they're similar. Hmm, it might be helpful to point out the proper tcc defense to a boxer's hook/s. For ex., against someone like Frazier .