I'll try to get the this thread back to topic... Lets take San Shou:- 1) Is this unique to Cheng Tin Hung's Wudang TCC - or is it used in other styles? In general San Shou seems to be a genarlized category of all-in wrestling/kick boxing/conditioning, used accross CMA in one form(pun) or another, but I could be wrong. 2) The basic drill of outer haymaker, swiftly followed by lower lunging thrust punch, defended by waist turn and parrying hands; is usefull and COULD be very usefully used as part of double knife attack training - but I havent seen this yet in TCC. However, to do this intelligently requires a degree of understanding between parties i.e. it is potentially very dangerous. In a lot of the San Shou that I work with, my attacker is usually to concerned with lecturing me (about not much usually), whilst placing their head in my headbutting range. Without dealing with potential headbutts, training for potential knife fights is meaningless. Even if you correctly a) avoid a cheap head but, b) parry both blade/punches, you still have to deal with a decisive finish - headbut from you, throat thrust etc. Some San Shou training is excellent with some individuals however. I also train FMA, thats why knife fighting stands out for me, but I cant easily get FMAers to understand San Shou concepts. Now taking exercise drills:- 1) Seven Stars, Nine Palace step, Da Lu. Do these exist outwith Chen Tin Hung's Wudang TCC? Do other sytyle have alternative exercise drills? 2) Why is Nine Palace Step called 'nine'? Essentially it consists of 2 sideways forwards evasion pushes and 2 rearwards deflection parrying steps. Now taking on the marketing/obfuscation of 'Wudang', 'Shaolin' etc: In both cases, there must be some schools/styles in China that offer a non-watered down, non-convoluted marketing ploy of CMA - no? Not nescessarily TCC, maybe Northern/Southern style 'external' Kung Fu, or maybe Wing Chun? I find it difficult to believe that China has corrupted its MA heritage completly, in spite of the Cultural Revolution legacy. The place is too big, with too many people, and with too many village styles/schools/traditions hidden away in isolation; for only the quality to have departed to Taiwan/Hong Kong etc, after 1950. In order to build up some conceptual understanding, I have to form some kind of basis for what TCC is and is not, hence the type of questions that I ask, which at this moment are not very lucid. As far as not kicking folk etc goes, well I am often training with new folks (who sometimes get a tad upset when doing stuff like kicking, vigorous pushes etc) in different places, but Im quite happy to mix it with whoever, if they are up for it.
Keep your thread on topic by visiting it more than once a week. No, san shou in not unique to any style, but CTH was always been interested in full contact, even before san shou in the modern sense was popular. Also, to call it all in wrestling is miss leading in the extream! I was given a warning for having an arm on my oponants shoulder (in the clinch) durin my last match under international rules......hardly all in. To train against a guy with a knife who is using a haymaker movement is to assume that the guy is not very good with a knife. Also, in this question you use the term san shou in a differant sense. You are really stuck in a one step sparring mentality......stop it, one step sparring is next to worthless very quickly. Which concepts are you talking about? I think they are there in other styles, but they tend to be more stylised. Four directions and seven starts at least is common. You underestimate the extent of the effect of the revolution. No villages were over looked. While individuals did carry on, on a small scale, they would have been a needle in the hay stack, more so now as there is almost a whole generation of people that missed out on training as well as styles that exchanged a generation of development and evolution for a lon period of isloation and stagnation. The sad fact is that if you want traditional the quality is in Hong Kong, Taiwan or the west. For every "quality" teacher in PRC there will be 1000 guys trying to sell you somthing. I think that you are askimng the wrong questions. One step sprring and mxing it up are two differant things.
Chinese martial arts haven't been watered down in China. China level martial arts are, of course and obviously, still by far,over all, the highest level expressions of Chinese martial arts anywhere on the planet. What waters down Chinese martial arts is people from outside of China who hobby-train. Chinese martial arts need a minimum of four hours a day - if you don't do that, you don't really train seriously. And it's not just a matter of hours - it's how you use those hours. More serious level we're talking seven-eight hours a day. China's martial arts are the best Chinese martial arts. Chinese taiji is by far and away better than the fake taiji we have over here. China forms are better than the so called traditional we have over here. China level san da is far and away better than the basic kick boxing we call san da over here. It's just all better. Wushu is better than the fake traditional we have over here. China level stuff is just ridiculously better than 99.9999999% of the stuff we have here. And that's a fact that doesn't change for people's self serving BS. None of these people genuinely train any where near past basic hobbylevel of two or three hobby classes a week, but they slag of real masters to justify their own faliure and poor level. That's the truth. Don't even talk to me about CMA if you're not training a minimum of four hours, six days a week in a truly structured learning path of true CMA.
FQ is correct, they are better, but only where there is money. They have the best SanShou and WuShu players for the same reason they have the best circus performers.....because they are poor enough with limited enough human rights to hot house talented kids. If there was no money in Sanshou I wonder how good the Chinese would be? Do they have the best traditional guys (and I know terms such as 'traditional' have limited meaning) is subjective. And as for how many hours you need to put in, well it goes without saying the more you train the better you get but you certainly don't need 4 hours a day to be genuinely good. I can't help but feel that FQ is desperately trying to pretend that hes not a hobbyist, when in reality, hes just pursuing an interest the same as everyone else. As I have said before, if you are enjoying it, thats all that matters.
Society in this country is not geared towards training 4+ hours per day, 6 days per week, unless you dont need to earn a living and can travel to seminars every weekend, and train 4/5 nights a week. However, FQ points at a valid argument -> you have to acquire fully immersive exposure to gain a real sense of experience AND enjoy it (Liokault's closing point.) When I was a kid (I am now 9 days short of 50), I used to train something close to the above level in Aikido. I was either a student or not working i.e. money was not a major concern, and I hitchiked all over the place, slept on floors etc, in order to train wherever. Ancient history. This essentially is my problem with TCC. I have to work in an extremly mercenary environment, that involves a lot of changes and no steady lifestyle - I dont expect/anticipate this ever changing. Therefore, I simply have to make the absolute most of whoever I train with, wherever, whenever. This sometimes translates into me putting in more effort than most, and sometimes peoples' reactions can be a bit strange when they realise that I am not a passive hippy geezer. With Dan in London, TCC was immersive, in Scotland, it seems quite a bit less so, but I havent yet trained with all the Teachers here. There is a structure and method to what is taught to me however, for which I am appreciative of i.e. I appreciate the bother and effort people make to teach me. At the moment I get through 5.5 hours of TCC per week plus about 6 hours of Form at home. This means that I have to undertake other training/activity to develop in some shape or form, and it is not always in the same locale. This further means that I have to be reasonably smart about who to train with, and have to acquire some kind of conceptual understanding. At this time, I can only do this by asking fairly basic questions. I do not find the concepts of TCC simple. It is true that my questions are not well formed or described, but I have to start somewhere.
Immersive is good, but don't be fooled into thinking that there is a minimum time that you need to train each day. At your level you are doing more than enough training. Personally, if I were in your position I would sacrifice some of the form training and find someone who will spend time pushing hands with you. It's not that the questions are not well formed, its that the understanding of taichi that you are working towards is flawed. I get the feeling (which may be totally wrong as I am reading into very few posts from you) that you are trying to fit TCC into the mould of Aikido. This is why I suggest that you get a pushing hands partner out side of class. More (understanding) can be gained from freestyle pushing hands (fixed and moving) than from anything else.
I'm in North London if you want someone to train extra (free)push hands and san shou (free sparring) with. As well as generally shoot the breeze about tai chi / training and what have you. cheers
Thanks Cloudz. Unfortunately, I live in Edinburgh right now. Before the economic mess, I used to travel down south quite a bit. In Edinburgh (unlike Glasgow) folk are mostly interested in polite cups of tea, art galleries etc; than anything to do with spirited MA practice - apart from a few Hibs supporting nutcases - who are to be avoided at all costs. Currently I train with 2 different TCC teachers, after another teacher, and before Dan - so even in my short time Im on to 4 teachers allready - which has led to a somewhat patchwork assimilation of TCC. In general, for pushing hands freeform, I try to pick out bigger weightier folk - its the best way to find out for real. Comments from folk are sometimes amusing e.g. "Are you insured?". For various reasons, I am not significantly interested in Aikido these days. TCC postures are wider than Aikido (maybe greater rooting at the expense of mobility), and this is an area I have found difficult (I have a small slight frame as well), but it does seem to be getting a bit better.
Just to dig a little deeper into facts that don't change for people's self-serving BS, how many times and for how long have you actually been to China to directly experience the vast disparity in quality of training and expression of glorious quan that you describe here?
