I also don't understand why people only talk about the health part of Taiji and not the combat part of Taiji. Assume I set up my goal first. I then use the Taiji path to achieve my goal. If I want to develop a good - front kick, - hook punch, - elbow lock, - hip throw, - groin kick, face punch combo, - elbow lock, shoulder lock combo, - hip throw, leg block combo, can Taiji training help me to achieve my goal better than those external CMA systems? If I want to do this solo drill by using Taiji method/principle, what should I do differently?
It's really because we didn't bow down at the altar of Saint Patrick of Swayze (blessed be his mullet).
Well, I'd say if that's your goal, Taiji may not be the best path for that? Much like choosing boxing to learn how to kick... I haven't done Taiji long enough to have satisfactory answers for everything, but my understanding is the fighting principle in Taiji doesn't lie in kick and punch combos. But maybe there are Taiji schools that teach it, too. That, I do not know.
I wanted an interview with Benny where the said Jackie Chan was so talented he could have been a champion if he wanted to fight.... Was so tempted to post it in that thread bit stopped myself
This people hadn't refuted any studies so has no idea what was to "addressed" from this quarter. People who ask for specifics of what they were wrong about from those who can't answer...yeah,they're a problem. Fever dream? Mine is what? Oh,there go those simple questions again. Sigworthy line,tho'. Is that from the Karloff film "Dr. Terror's International House of Pancakes"? That'll haunt me,alright. It's easier than addressing,and without addressing who wants the chef's salad? Baby,we can't all be what's wrong with the Net!
Don't know about better but development comes down to practicing such things-at whatever level the individual is in whatever system. Same as anything. Hey,I saw that obvious throw in an older Yang form!Are you being tricky?That low sweep with hitting tiger as a throw...Wu TC? Or just that so many northern systems have similarities? That clip is so well performed that any specifics (if needed) to execute according to a different system's methods aren't going to be discerned from film by such as I. But Nachi,you practice juicy combos every time you do your Chen. They're there for a reason.In the earlier 1800s people-some at least- learned function before combining them into the form. All systems have principles/theories.Strikes,throws & etc are physical expressions/actualizations of the system's principles/theories. So those neat combos in your hand form lie in the principles/theories,not the opposite.
Well, I guess you are right. I mean, Taiji definitely lets me practice a specific way of movement, of creating force, good body alignment, working with the force of the opponent, etc. But I never practiced hooks per se, for example. There are straight punches, elbow strikes and various kicks in the form and I do learn mechanics of how to do them. It's just that if I wanted to learn combos like what YouKnowWho mentioned as my goal, I just wouldn't do it through Taiji. There would be more staightforward methods to do so in other arts, I think. Or maybe it's the attitude with which you go to learn a certain art? I didn't necessarily start learning Taiji for its martial aspect, that's true. Simply because that's what I have Karate for. But it is nice to see the overlaps of techniuqes and principles. That helps with learning, too. On the other hand, though, there are more explosive forms I haven't learned, yet, like the Cannon Fist form and 42 Fajins form (I think that's the name). When I learn at least the first one, I might have a somewhat different point of view. There are definitely more striking techniques in there. Or at least more obvious ones, more fajins, therefore more opportunities to learn various strikes.
And to add a little to the discussion about health benefits of Taiji, my experience is: I've been doing Karate for 8 years and Chen Taiji for a little over 2 years now, more diligently in the last year or a year and a half. While Karate had a lot of benefits since I started it as my first martial arts, I wasn't making any huge progress when it came to strenght/flexibility etc. lately. Adding Taiji on top as a somewhat different type of exercise, I can definitely feel I've improved in several ways rather obviously. - Flexibility - legs (for splits), hips, calves, hamstrings, lower back, fingers - simply by practicing the Lao Jia Yi Lu form while learning it, without stretching separately - Srtronger legs. Apart from being able to do better stances in Taiji, I can feel the difference even when now doing the Karate stances - Better balance - Lower back pain dissappeared. I had some trouble with it, but I stretched it and now I can align it and get it straighter that ever as far as I can remember. It meant my back did hurt quite a bit after classes for a couple of months, but has't bothered me since. - I am now working on straightening my upper back/neck area, too. I can already see some progress. - General coordination has improved, too - Better explosiveness for strikes. Probably due to getting a bit used to the Taiji body mechanics and power generation, maybe Taiji also taught me how to relax some muscles better. I need to study to prove that Taiji can bring results. As others said, I could certainly improve all these things through other types of exercises, too, but Taiji is more fun and since I am having fun, I find it easy to invest time - rather than seeking a physio for my back issues, for example. And it took me further than Karate with its differences. No doubt, Karate also helped me with Taiji, too. Most of the improvements I made are also thanks to my teachers. If a person is able to find something they enjoy and would spent the time and effort, any exercise should bring benefits, right? Taiji is no different. Sure, I can't speak for other Taiji styles, but... there should be similarities, right?
I wish I could hit a stronger thing than like for this post! In my opinion, you win this thread with this post right here! I have a very similar experience. TCC compliments my CLF and vise versa. I think most of us who practice it know and feel the health benefits. I don't care if there is a study or not to make it legitimate or justify it. I am somewhere in the middle of all this. On one hand, there are a lot of ridiculous far fetched miracle claims about the health benefits of TCC. They should be questioned! I do believe in science. However, I will say that I do also feel that sometimes there are forces at play that unduly influence things. So, many studies suggest some health benefits, but more research is needed. Right? But if there isn't big money to be made in TCC, will those studies readily happen? Or do studies in things that will more easily make money get priority? I think that the discussion here has been pretty fair and reasonable in calling things into question. (Except for that one study to dismiss Harvard that had nothing to do with the topic.) I have also seen here in other threads the concern Grond has expressed. That people go to long lengths to dismiss any science presented about any alternative ideas. Where it seems like people are being unreasonably dismissive of valid points. I will also add that when I said this earlier on, I have had discussions with others who agreed that have not spoken up on this thread. I also think that sometimes people expressing their personal experiences with something like, say chiropractic or acupuncture, and it is just utterly dismissed and really shut down. Where people argue that others experiences are not valid. And I find that ridiculous. But I don't get mad about it. Such is the nature of Internet discussions. It isn't just MAP. I just go on and do what I know works for me. I am sorry that Grond feels a need to leave over this. I hope he changes his mind. Forums are a place for discussion. I often present my ideas not expecting to win, but to have my idea out there for future people of an open mind to hear my side of a debate. But to expect to "win" and be upset if I don't, well....that just isn't realistic on the Internetz! I will also add that I find El Medico to be absolutely one of the most even handed informative and enjoyable posters here. I always look forward to reading his posts when I see he is speaking up on a thread. I found the critique against him to really be surprising. (Except he is just flat out wrong about how cool Fan forms are in TCC!)
Agreed. It is just that in my definition of Principles, I included principles of movements like motor skills like how you describe above. I thought it was clear in my post that that is part of what I meant. But I guess one shouldn't assume things like that on the Internet. So, thanks for this post and the detailing out of what I meant!
Thank you, though, that post wasn't supposed to really hold any deep meaning, honestly. It's just that when we talk about health benefits of Taiji, yeah, I feel the same you do - I don't need studies now that I practice Taiji - I can feel the effects myself. And yes, I also think it is a pity Grond got upset over this and felt the need to leave. He's a fellow newbie to Taiji like me, so I thought it was nice to share experience
This is absolutely a valid point. Drug companies have millions to spend on getting drugs to market that isn't there for something like Tai Chi. Unfortunately, as long as we have for profit medicine, it is what it is. And it isn't just research that is affected by profit motive, it is much better for the economy if workers pop pills than take time out of their day to do therapeutic exercise, not just because of working hours but because the pills support manufacturing industry. I don't think that is reason to change the stringent standards of scientific research though (not that I think you were saying that!). We should probably change how we structure society instead. Anecdote is fine for people doing something recreationally, or even as a supplement to medical treatment. I don't need a study to believe that Nachi has strengthened her lower back with Tai Chi. But medical intervention for serious disease such as Parkinson's, hypertension or osteoporosis requires a whole different level of evidence. Chiropractic is another matter, as we know physical manipulation works, but the very tenets of it are complete woo quackery, and known to be false. It should not be held as a valid medical practice, even if the physical manipulation done by them can produce valid effects. To me, there is a big difference between what people might spend their money on independently and what a doctor might prescribe or a hospital offer as treatment.
Chang/Yang Taiji uses "ward off" to set up "pull back". The Chang/Yang Taiji has a lot of combos. For example, the following combo uses the "switching hands" principle. 1. Turn around hammer - you use back fist on top of your opponent's head., 2. Fetching arm - When opponent blocks it, you use the other arm to take over his blocking, you then use the same arm hammer fist on top of his head again. The following clip use face attack to set up groin attack - high patting horse.
Well. yes, you are right, there are combos and many more techniques in the applications. It's just that usually, Taiji is more often taught slow and if there is sparing or drilling those combos, my guess is those are not practiced as often - I mean hard, against an opponent, etc. From my understanding Taiji is more often taught in slow motion forms where the applications might be explained, but not trained as hard and systematically as in striking arts. To me at least, the principles behind the movement seem to be the main focus vs. aiming to strike the opponent as best/fast(hard as you could. Maybe that is also part of what I feel is a difference between internal and external arts. Well at least in my mind, I am not sure I could come up with a good definition for this.
I like to talk about Taiji application, and not just the health part. Taiji has hook punch - striking tiger. It can be a body punch, but it can also be head punch too.
Ah, yeah, I might have been trying to answer a different question. I suppose those combos can be learned in Taiji, they're just not as obvious at first sight then. I don't know the forms posted as I seem to be doing a different style, but yes, I can see the techniques you were mentioning in there. Also as for the video you posted before: Again, I am no expert, only just discovering the art of Taiji, but from what I learned and understand, I can't see why this bit wouldn't be according to Taiji principle. Maybe the palm strike near the end could come more from the body (but that is total nitpicking) and maybe it even does, but looks a bit different because of the video being slowed down. But generally, I can totally imagine this being a part of a Taiji form. Do you have any insights on it? Like why it couldn't be? Or do you have any opinions about what should be done differently to adhere to the Taiji principle?
Since Taiji was my 1st CMA system when I was 7, the body unification (all body parts start to move at the same time, and stop at the same time) always apply to whatever MA system that I have trained later on. In that clip, the "left hand pull" and "left foot sweep" all start at the same time, and then stop at the same time. IMO, if one can follow this guideline, there is no different between "internal" training and external training.
That's true. What I meant was the strike that seemed to end a little after the feet stopped, but well, it was only a tiny bit and furtnermore prolonged by the slowed down pace. I suppose that this principle would indeed be same for both internal vs. external. Actually most, if not all principles most likely would? Not sure if my understanding of internal vs external is correct, but I take it more as an approach or a focus in the training. But ultimately, although from slightly differing directions, you're still approaching the same thing.
If you look at that clip closely, you can see there is a left foot slide forward while left palm strike. One day I did this drill, my friend Adam Hsu said, "Your back foot sliding while you strike can be an issue." I didn't argue with him at that moment. The back foot sliding is to set up the back foot at a proper angle for the foot sweep. Without that foot position adjustment, the foot sweep angle is not proper. So from the power generation (strike from the body) point of view, the back foot sliding can be an issue. But from an angle set up point of view, that back foot sliding is a must have.
I agree that both should end at the same time. If we consider our body as 3 springs. Without training, all 3 springs are compressed and released individually. With training, all 3 springs are compressed at the same time, also released at the same time. IMO, this is more important than anything else. Every time when I train this drill, I always wonder whether My left palm strike should start from my left foot 1. original position, or 2. final position after sliding? If I do - 1, my power generation is broken in between both foot positions. - 2, my left hand won't start to move until my left foot has reached to the new position, I may not hide my foot intention by my hand move and telegraph myself. So for power generation, 2 is better than 1 (smooth power generation). But for combat strategy, 1 is better than 2 (not telegraph intention).
