# Which internal art has the most powerful strikes? Is it Tai Chi?



## Towel Snapper (Sep 14, 2014)

Or is Tai Chi just one of the more famous internal arts?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 15, 2014)

Internal arts big 3



Xingyiquan
Baguazhang
Taijiquan

Also Internal



Liuhebafa
Yiquan


----------



## mograph (Sep 15, 2014)

This is one of those questions that, in my opinion, can't really lead anywhere practical. 

While it may be possible to say that one art has more strikes than another in its forms, the power generated by a student depends on the club, the teacher and the student. For any given art, not all clubs teach the same, not all teachers teach at the same level, and not all students respond the same way. A person can't really pick an art and make a judgement of its efficacy across all clubs, all teachers or all students. 

So, since I'm assuming you actually want to learn powerful strikes and don't just want to start an argument or blue-sky some theory, you might want to ask the board about teachers in your area. Maybe take some classes. Let us know how they go.


----------



## Towel Snapper (Sep 15, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> Internal arts big 3
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thats really brilliant thankyou my friend!!!!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2014)

mograph said:


> the power generated by a student depends on the club, the teacher and the student.



I can only speak for CMA and this may not apply to non-CMA. Since the long fist system is my major and the Baji system is my minor, I can compare these 2 CMA systems.

- In the long fist system, I was told that if I train my long fist forms long enough, I should be able to understand power generation. As a beginner, I won't know when that day may come. Since most of the long fist forms are not designed for maximum power generation, I may not get into it right away.
- In the Baji system, I was told that if I train a set of drills, I should be able to understand power generation within 3 month. As a beginner, I know 3 months is all I need. Since All Baji forms are designed for maximum power generation, it's easier for me to get into it during day one.

If I don't cross train the Baji system and just go to different long fist schools, will I be able to learn the "sinking Jin, cross Jin, and twisting Jin"? I don't think so. Those terms would always be foreign to me. When one praying mantis guy cross trained the Baji system and said, "The Baji system just open my eyes". His comment made his praying mantis teacher mad at him big time as if his praying mantis teacher had kept him blind all those years.

This is why I believe that as far as the power generation is concern, the Baji system is superior than the long fist system. 

In CMA, some styles are design for 

- power generation (such as Baji, Chen Taiji, Xingyi Liu He, ...). 
- speed generation (such as praying mantis, Zimen, ...). 
- locking skill (such as eagle claw, ...),
- throwing skill (such as Shuai-Chiao).

Not all CMA systems are equal in a certain area. To pick up a right CMA system in order to meet your need is important.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2014)

The Chen Taiji has more power generation than the Yang Taiji. Not all Taiji systems are equal.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 15, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The Chen Taiji has more power generation than the Yang Taiji. Not all Taiji systems are equal.



That just says you don't understand Yang Taijiquan



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Not all CMA systems are equal in a certain area.



Although I do agree with that


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The Chen Taiji has more power generation than the Yang Taiji. Not all Taiji systems are equal.





Xue Sheng said:


> That just says you don't understand Yang Taijiquan ...



I would let clips to say for itself.

Yang taiji.






Chen Taiji:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 15, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I would let clips to say for itself.
> 
> Yang taiji.
> 
> ...



Interesting but the problem is that is not Yang style, that is Chengman Ching style which comes form Yang so your video proof just proof that you don't know what Yang style is.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> Interesting but the problem is that is not Yang style, that is Chengman Ching style which comes form Yang so your video proof just proof that you don't know what Yang style is.


My Chang style came from Yang style general Li Jing-Lin which has nothing to do with either Yang Chen-Fu of CMC. I don't mind to say that the Li Jing-Lin linkage also doesn't have *"powerful strikes".*

http://www.wudangdanpai.com/?page_id=104

May be you can put up a Yang Taiji clip that has Fajin in it. Please notice that *"powerful strikes"* is what we are talking about here.

How about this?






or this?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 15, 2014)

I do know we are talking about powerful strikes but you don't seem to know traditional Yang and you keep putting up non-Yang or non-traditional Yang clips as proof which pretty much just prove my point, you don't know what Yang is, and you appear to be basing this assessment on videos of form.

I have done both traditional Yang and traditional Chen and they both have the same power in striking. My Yang shifu sees that major difference between Yang and Chen as Chen is to low. Cheng Zhenglei saw the major difference between Chen and Yang as Yang is to high..... that is about it.

You are judging powerful strikes based on the form and Chen has more obvious fajin which translates into what appears to be more powerful strikes than a Yang form where the fajin is not so obvious. I absolutely guarantee you in application Yang has strikes as powerful as Chen. But if a youtube video is the proof you are looking for based on form you won't see it because you are looking at form

You don't fight the same way you do the form in both Yang and Chen, you don't follow form in a fight and you don't go slow either.

I have no idea what Cheng Taiji supposed to look like and I have no idea if it has powerful strikes or not, I know "traditional" Yang taijiquan does have powerful strikes, if Cheng does not then they were omitted for some reason or not understood in the first place. Now if you were to say Chen has more strikes than Yang I may agree with that but as to power, sorry your just plain wrong.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> I know "traditional" Yang taijiquan does have powerful strikes, ...



I'm very interested to see just 1 Yang Taiji clip that has powerful strikes in it. Is that too much to ask for?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 15, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I'm very interested to see just 1 Yang Taiji clip that has powerful strikes in it. Is that too much to ask for?



Yes it is because you are basing this on videos found on youtube of forms and comparing Chen forms to Yang forms and saying see, no powerful strikes in Yang. Well if that is what you base your knowledge of Yang on then there is not proof to satisfy you because Yang style forms generally do not have obvious fajin like Chen. But I've been doing Yang for a long time and I know it can hit damn hard and that is enough for me. Now if you are looking just for power then look to clips of Tung Hu Ling doing some tuishou, but you will see no strikes as defined by the punches you see in Chen. There are also 2 fast forms that come from Tung Ying Chieh. one he called Yang and one he did not. However there are no videos on the one he calls Yang that are any good and the other there is a video of but it is modified based on the space it is being done in. If you can find someone who knows those and is willing to show you then you will see obvious fajin in the form, but it still does not look like Chen. And before you go the "well that is Tung Style" route" There was no Tung (Dong) Style before Dong Zengchen (Tung Hu Lings Youngest Son). It was all Yang up until then and that is all Tung Ying Chieh ever said he was teaching, other than the second fast form which was a combination of Yang and Wu/Hao and that he called his fast form.

I am also not quite getting why you do not seem to understand the difference between obvious fajin and fajin that is not obvious if you do a Yang style derivative and why you do not seem to be able to see the difference between form and actual application


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 15, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> I am also not quite getting why you do not seem to understand the difference between obvious fajin and *fajin that is not obvious* if you do a Yang style derivative



Because I believe powerful strikes is "training method". It should not be hidden, and it should be "obvious".

IMO, if a style doesn't have a set of "drills" that can guide a new student to reach to his maximum power generation, that style doesn't have a good "power generation" training program.


----------



## blindsage (Sep 16, 2014)

So, what you're saying is you don't know how it works in Yang style, and you've never met anyone who can show it to you, therefore it doesn't exist.   You're wrong.  There are drills.  There is fajin in Yang.  There is the same power application as Chen.  Because YOU haven't seen doesn't really mean much.


----------



## Socialwealth (Sep 24, 2014)

Asking masters of these internal arts about which ones offer the most powerful strikes is like asking great poets which language conveys the most powerful imagery...


----------

