# Leading senior citizens to the "Dark Side" - Right or wrong?



## bill miller

I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


----------



## O'Malley

It's not like you're sworn to secrecy. If both you and the other students are happy with it, why should it be a problem?


----------



## Flying Crane

I would start by stop calling it the “dark side”.  

Taiji is a martial art.  End of story.  Many people practice it as NOT a martial art, and that is ok.  Many “instructors” do not understand the martial usefulness of taiji.  As long as they don’t claim to teach the martial usefulness, then that too is ok.  But taiji is a form of Chinese martial art, or wushu (what we call kung-fu).  

I cringe when people list varieties of martial arts and include both kung fu and taiji on the list. Taiji is a form of kung fu.  But I am going off on a tangent here.  

At any rate, the martial use of taiji isn’t a dark side.  It is the original intention of taiji.  So please, share it with those who are interested.  It makes their exercise taiji better, if they have some understanding of the martial use.


----------



## bill miller

Flying Crane said:


> I would start by stop calling it the “dark side”.
> 
> Taiji is a martial art.  End of story.  Many people practice it as NOT a martial art, and that is ok.  Many “instructors” do not understand the martial usefulness of taiji.  As long as they don’t claim to teach the martial usefulness, then that too is ok.  But taiji is a form of Chinese martial art, or wushu (what we call kung-fu).
> 
> I cringe when people list varieties of martial arts and include both kung fu and taiji on the list. Taiji is a form of kung fu.  But I am going off on a tangent here.
> 
> At any rate, the martial use of taiji isn’t a dark side.  It is the original intention of taiji.  So please, share it with those who are interested.  It makes their exercise taiji better, if they have some understanding of the martial use.


I totally agree and I know that there is no dark side. These were one persons words. Not mine.


----------



## Flying Crane

bill miller said:


> I totally agree and I know that there is no dark side. These were one persons words. Not mine.


I hope they were being facetious?


----------



## bill miller

O'Malley said:


> It's not like you're sworn to secrecy. If both you and the other students are happy with it, why should it be a problem?


I guess it really isn't, but I don't want to offend my instructor in any way.


----------



## Flying Crane

bill miller said:


> I guess it really isn't, but I don't want to offend my instructor in any way.


Those relationships are important.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

bill miller said:


> but I don't want to offend my instructor in any way.


The dark side of Taiji is Taiji dancing. You may just remind your Taiji teacher the correct way to teach Taiji.

I had taught a group of old people Taiji too. I forced them to learn application. They asked me, "Do you expect us to use Taiji to fight in our old age?" I told them, "Without application as guideline, Taiji could be evolved into dancing, and I don't teach dancing".

If you just want to teach someone Taiji for health, To drill "brush knee twist step" 1000 times should do the job.


----------



## bill miller

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I had taught a group of old people Taiji too. I forced them to learn application. They asked me, "Do you expect us to use Taiji to fight in our old age?" I told them, "Without application as guideline, Taiji could be evolved into dancing, and I don't teach dancing".


This instructor is very good at what he needs to do, and he does use application as examples. The students enjoy the class very much, but there are a select few that want to go deeper, and in my humble way, I am trying to help them to the best of my abilities.


----------



## isshinryuronin

Kung Fu Wang said:


> "Without application as guideline, Taiji could be evolved into dancing, and I don't teach dancing".





Flying Crane said:


> Taiji is a martial art. End of story. Many people practice it as NOT a martial art, and that is ok. Many “instructors” do not understand the martial usefulness of taiji.


(I'll preface this post with my understanding that Taijii=Tai Chi, and is the form oriented version and that Tai Chi Chuan is the combat oriented version.  If I am mistaken, I think the spirit and purpose of my post will still hold.)  

In this respect, Taijii and Taijii Chuan (with martial application) is no different from the current situation facing karate, except in Taijii, the separation between forms and combat have _already_ evolved into distinct disciplines as is widely practiced, and I believe the names signify this difference.

At least in Taijii, its practitioners know the fighting applications aren't there.  They practice that art for other reasons.  Yeah, I know they _used_ to be, but after so long leaving them out, the tendency is for the forms to drift to the point of their combat applications being unable to be used.  No expert in CMA, but the addition of "Chuan" signifies the combat side?  So, it seems to be marketed as two different things:  solely meditative exercise and more inclusive combat system, each with its own dedicated students.

Due to a number of reasons, karate kata have been changed and otherwise set adrift, sometimes to the point where technique application has been lost.  Then, as Kung Fu Wang states, you have "dancing."  Except, karate does not see itself as having a "bi polar" crisis.  Karate _do_ and karate _jutsu_ are the two strategic sides of this art.  Throw in the further catalysts of change, competition in both forms and kumite, the art faces even more fracturing of its capabilities.

Taijii is so widely practiced, I think it would be hard to reunify it with Taijii Chuan.  With the advent of organized competition, the way karate is widely practiced is changing.  I have posed the question before - Should there be different names for karate:  tournament karate, karate do, and karate jutsu?  Then, as in Taijii, one knows what one is getting.  My personal wish is for it to be unified, but powerful organized competition forces and instructors who have little understanding of original karate will keep that from happening.  Luckily, there are still dojo and sensei who favor the  more original "classic" version of karate for those interested in it.


----------



## Oily Dragon

isshinryuronin said:


> Taijii is so widely practiced, I think it would be hard to reunify it with Taijii Chuan.


This is probably true except for people who actually want the kuen part in their daily lives.

Throughout history, this has not been a small group of people by any measure.  It's just a certain level most people don't really even want.  Lower levels are enough.

I hope when I'm 60, somebody tells me they want to teach me dark kung fu.  That would be fun.  I already know enough light side kung fu to make it interesting.


----------



## Steve

what exactly are you showing them and what do they think they’re learning from you?   Are you showing them martial techniques they think they’ll be able to execute?  Or is it just for fun?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

I see nothing wrong _if _you actually know what you're teaching. Do you have more experience with tai chi outside of this class, or have you just been in the class longer than them? If you're only experience is a bit more of your instructor occasionally tell you what the application is, with no sort of pressure testing or practice of the martial application, then you probably aren't the person to legitimately be teaching them that.

Unless they just think it's a cool thing to know. But make sure they're aware they're not learning how to be actually effective with it (if the above paragraph was correct).


----------



## bill miller

Steve said:


> what exactly are you showing them and what do they think they’re learning from you?   Are you showing them martial techniques they think they’ll be able to execute?  Or is it just for fun?


I hope I am showing them something that would enhance their focus and intent. I hold no illusions of teaching them how to fight.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

bill miller said:


> I hope I am showing them something that would enhance their focus and intent. I hold no illusions of teaching them how to fight.


Taiji brush knee twist step






Taiji brush knee twist step + leg skill front cut


----------



## bill miller

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I see nothing wrong _if _you actually know what you're teaching. Do you have more experience with tai chi outside of this class, or have you just been in the class longer than them? If you're only experience is a bit more of your instructor occasionally tell you what the application is, with no sort of pressure testing or practice of the martial application, then you probably aren't the person to legitimately be teaching them that.
> 
> Unless they just think it's a cool thing to know. But make sure they're aware they're not learning how to be actually effective with it (if the above paragraph was correct).


My first instructors were very keen on the balance of health with effective application. I have had the chance to test these techniques under pressure against various arts. I was an instructor for many years in a  Korean style that held many similarities with with some of the tai chi I have learned over the past several years. I am not teaching them to fight, only giving them something to think about, which helps them make sense of the postures. And believe me, I hold no illusions of being some kind of master. Also, they really just want to have fun, as well.


----------



## Steve

bill miller said:


> I hold no illusions of teaching them how to fight.


As long as you know that AND they know that, I think you're probably fine.


----------



## Steve

bill miller said:


> My first instructors were very keen on the balance of health with effective application. I have had the chance to test these techniques under pressure against various arts. I was an instructor for many years in a  Korean style that held many similarities with with some of the tai chi I have learned over the past several years. I am not teaching them to fight, only giving them something to think about, which helps them make sense of the postures. And believe me, I hold no illusions of being some kind of master. Also, they really just want to have fun, as well.


My mom has been doing tai chi for about 15 years now.  She's not learning to fight, but it has been really good for her overall health and fitness.  She's in her late 70s, moves really well, has strong legs in particular, and remains flexible and active.  She isn't at all fragile like many folks get in their 70s.  My dad doesn't do tai chi, but gets the same benefits by playing a LOT of golf!


----------



## Flying Crane

isshinryuronin said:


> (I'll preface this post with my understanding that Taijii=Tai Chi, and is the form oriented version and that Tai Chi Chuan is the combat oriented version.  If I am mistaken, I think the spirit and purpose of my post will still hold.)


I think some people make a deliberate distinction in that way, but I do not and I cannot say that any of it is official.  As for me, I was just short-handing it out of laziness more than anything else, using the briefer term to mean the martial method. 

Certainly many other methods of CMA do not add “Chuan/Kuen” to the name of their system, or they freely make reference to it without that term on the end.  I refer to my system as “Bac Hoc” “white crane” or “Bac Hoc Pai” “white crane system” without adding Chuan/Kuen. I, in no way, mean that it is forms devoid of martial understanding.  It is the fighting method.


----------



## Steve

Flying Crane said:


> I think some people make a deliberate distinction in that way, but I do not and I cannot say that any of it is official.  As for me, I was just short-handing it out of laziness more than anything else, using the briefer term to mean the martial method.
> 
> Certainly many other methods of CMA do not add “Chuan/Kuen” to the name of their system, or they freely make reference to it without that term on the end.  I refer to my system as “Bac Hoc” “white crane” or “Bac Hoc Pai” “white crane system” without adding Chuan/Kuen. I, in no way, mean that it is forms devoid of martial understanding.  It is the fighting method.


And here we go...


----------



## dvcochran

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


Full disclosure: I have no Tai Chi experience but some Kung Fu experience. 

To me, your question lies more in the social contract you have with the current instructor and the interpretation from the people you are teaching. 
Be forthright and talk to the other instructor and let him/her know what you are doing. Don't invite friction. 
Also be forthright with what you are showing folks. Make certain they understand what it is Not just as much as what it is.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Taiji brush knee twist step
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taiji brush knee twist step + leg skill front cut
> 
> View attachment 27686


That upper video makes 


Steve said:


> And here we go...


where are we going?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

My Sifu taught us Tai Chi Chuan as a martial art. I have 25 years of practice.  I have visited many Tai Chi Chuan classes, very few seem to know what the postures are for or how to align the body to transition between them. Even fewer practice to learn the form to the right AND to the left. This ineptitude leads to bad form and collapsed structure. It is unfortunately ubiquitous. Poor posture, double weighting the legs, incorrect hand position/structure and pushing up instead of sitting down on the legs is invariably what I have seen in these classes. I could go on and on, it’s why this martial art has so many charlatans and hucksters. Sifu Woo said once “ if I go to Tiananmen Square and I watch a million Chinese do Tai chi, 999,999 of them aren’t doing a damn thing” He was admittedly a hard critic, but with 80 years of practice he earned the right to critique. After 25 years, I am still a beginner and have a long way to go. I think that this art requires a skilled teacher and a LOT of patience.


----------



## punisher73

dvcochran said:


> Full disclosure: I have no Tai Chi experience but some Kung Fu experience.
> 
> To me, your question lies more in the social contract you have with the current instructor and the interpretation from the people you are teaching.
> Be forthright and talk to the other instructor and let him/her know what you are doing. Don't invite friction.
> Also be forthright with what you are showing folks. Make certain they understand what it is Not just as much as what it is.



Beat me to it.

I would talk to your instructor about what it is you would like to do.  Things get twisted sometimes as people are talking and probably the last thing that you want is it to get back to the main instructor that you are training/teaching his students behind his back.


----------



## bill miller

punisher73 said:


> I would talk to your instructor about what it is you would like to do. Things get twisted sometimes as people are talking and probably the last thing that you want is it to get back to the main instructor that you are training/teaching his students behind his back.


I talked to him today, and he is fine with it, as long as it is done with care, and don't do any harm. These little practice sessions are gear for focus, and give them and idea of what the postures may represent when applied, and that is all.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

bill miller said:


> I talked to him today, and he is fine with it, as long as it is done with care, and don't do any harm. These little practice sessions are gear for focus, and give them and idea of what the postures may represent when applied, and that is all.


That is kind of you to help. I am sure that other students appreciate your time and efforts. I like to see my students helping each other. My teachers did too.


----------



## punisher73

bill miller said:


> I talked to him today, and he is fine with it, as long as it is done with care, and don't do any harm. These little practice sessions are gear for focus, and give them and idea of what the postures may represent when applied, and that is all.


Awesome, plus you get the added benefit of learning more by explaining it.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

punisher73 said:


> Awesome, plus you get the added benefit of learning more by explaining it.


Wow! That is very true.


----------



## Kuengi

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side"


There is no such thing. The first and best tool in training is an open mind, the tool next to that is to be able to recognize ignorance as defined as "choosing to ignore". In looking for answers know that any answer should be continually open to the original question. Eventually you will find that you naturally accept a concept advanced when you collected answers. Train, utilize what results in a success for you as an individual. Self defense will be a large part of that gained, but still only a part of Martial Arts as a whole.


----------



## Xue Sheng

isshinryuronin said:


> (I'll preface this post with my understanding that Taijii=Tai Chi, and is the form oriented version and that Tai Chi Chuan is the combat oriented version.  If I am mistaken, I think the spirit and purpose of my post will still hold.)
> 
> In this respect, Taijii and Taijii Chuan (with martial application) is no different from the current situation facing karate, except in Taijii, the separation between forms and combat have _already_ evolved into distinct disciplines as is widely practiced, and I believe the names signify this difference.
> 
> At least in Taijii, its practitioners know the fighting applications aren't there.  They practice that art for other reasons.  Yeah, I know they _used_ to be, but after so long leaving them out, the tendency is for the forms to drift to the point of their combat applications being unable to be used.  No expert in CMA, but the addition of "Chuan" signifies the combat side?  So, it seems to be marketed as two different things:  solely meditative exercise and more inclusive combat system, each with its own dedicated students.
> 
> Due to a number of reasons, karate kata have been changed and otherwise set adrift, sometimes to the point where technique application has been lost.  Then, as Kung Fu Wang states, you have "dancing."  Except, karate does not see itself as having a "bi polar" crisis.  Karate _do_ and karate _jutsu_ are the two strategic sides of this art.  Throw in the further catalysts of change, competition in both forms and kumite, the art faces even more fracturing of its capabilities.
> 
> Taijii is so widely practiced, I think it would be hard to reunify it with Taijii Chuan.  With the advent of organized competition, the way karate is widely practiced is changing.  I have posed the question before - Should there be different names for karate:  tournament karate, karate do, and karate jutsu?  Then, as in Taijii, one knows what one is getting.  My personal wish is for it to be unified, but powerful organized competition forces and instructors who have little understanding of original karate will keep that from happening.  Luckily, there are still dojo and sensei who favor the  more original "classic" version of karate for those interested in it.



No, this is a Taiji






There is also a Taijiqigong

What they are learning, with or without applications is called Taijiquan






But mostly they are not training the Quán (拳 Fist) part of it

And many of the "Martial" taijiquan classes are not the martial arts of taijiquan. They are Taijiquan forms applied using other arts and that does not make it marital taijiquan, it makes it something else.

There are a few still around that know the martial side, aka the entire style, but not many and most of those will not emphasize it until later in your training. And most are rather old too.

I believe it was Chen Xiaowang that said as far as he was concerned Taijiquan as a martial art was dead. Not that there were not people that still knew it, but there were so many that did not. And if you divide a very small number by a very large number the result is so close to zero, it might as well be zero.







Also should add that there are many that are offended if you talk about martial arts and taijiquan in the same sentence

A person I was helping my first shifu train. We were working on a 2 person form and he was not really finishing anything. I pointed out he needed to finish the posture or he left himself open for various attacks. He looked at me and said "I'm not TRAINING martial arts...I'm training TAI CHI"

A class I once had one of my students asked me abot the martial applications of a form. I told him I would discuss it with him after class, I was not teaching the martial side in this class. One of my other students, who was very good at the forms, loked at me and said. "I'm not HERE to learn KARATE!!!" and she stormed out of the class never to return

My Yang shifu had students who got visibly upset at any discussion of the martial side. They were annoyed by his and my conversation about Qinna.

I was helping my Yang Shifu with teaching the Dao and 2 people there asked me what that movement was for. I told them it is a block and and a strike to the other guys neck....they did not get mad, they continued to train, but they looked shocked and never assked me a question like that again.


----------



## RTMairose

Flying Crane said:


> I would start by stop calling it the “dark side”.
> 
> Taiji is a martial art.  End of story.  Many people practice it as NOT a martial art, and that is ok.  Many “instructors” do not understand the martial usefulness of taiji.  As long as they don’t claim to teach the martial usefulness, then that too is ok.  But taiji is a form of Chinese martial art, or wushu (what we call kung-fu).
> 
> I cringe when people list varieties of martial arts and include both kung fu and taiji on the list. Taiji is a form of kung fu.  But I am going off on a tangent here.
> 
> At any rate, the martial use of taiji isn’t a dark side.  It is the original intention of taiji.  So please, share it with those who are interested.  It makes their exercise taiji better, if they have some understanding of the martial use.


Thank you and precisely. Would you say few teachers of taiji understand it as taijiquan?


----------



## brian k

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


It sounds like you've been studying Tai Chi for quite some time...or perhaps other forms of martial arts as well...There is nothing wrong with a group of students eager for knowledge to get together to learn all that can be learned about anything, even Tai Chi....I studied and taught karate for years and was happy to find out my students were getting together to go over things and learn other techniques from other styles/students.  This is a new era.  Back in the 70's and 80's, my sensei would not allow us to learn from anyone else...and even frown us practicing on our own in our free time.  But we did it anyway.  Sometimes you'll find something in a technique that you didn't see before or maybe there's someone there that studied from a different instructor of a slightly different style that learned something that hasn't been shown or shown yet.  Keep practicing on the side and if your instructor gets angry, there may be ulterior motives of your instructor.  The more one knows the better.  _"A wise man can learn more from a foolish question that a fool can learn from a wise answer."  "To know oneself is to study oneself in action with another person."  _


----------



## Flying Crane

RTMairose said:


> Thank you and precisely. Would you say few teachers of taiji understand it as taijiquan?


I don’t make the taiji/taiji chuan distinction, but yes, I would say most instructors do not understand it as a martial method.


----------



## AIKIKENJITSU

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


Bill,
I begain my martial art journey 52 years ago and am still going strong. 
Ti chi is mostly for health, so they go slowly. I don't believe in it. Why can't you have a martial art that is fast, good and healthy? I searched and I found American Kenpo karate. The body is made for moving fast, not slowly. Kenpo is all about speed. My speed is the same as is was at the beginning. 
I can't still move very fast and the movements when you slow down to half speed are great for your body..
If you take Kenpo, you'll have to learn katas which to me are a waiste of time because all Kenpo techniques are like mini katas. Learn katas if you must, and then after passing, stop practicing katas and practice instead the defense techniques. If you want, do them slowly and then fast.
Hope I added a little of knowledge.
Sifu
Puyallup, WA


----------



## Xue Sheng

AIKIKENJITSU said:


> Bill,
> 
> Ti chi is mostly for health, so they go slowly.


That is not why they traditionally go slow. And there forms with fajin and there are fajin forms that are fast, just more advanced


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

AIKIKENJITSU said:


> Ti chi is mostly for health, so they go slowly.


There are 2 reasons to do Taiji slow:

- Coordinate hand and foot.
- Each Taiji move is either an inhale, or an exhale.

If you just finished 3 miles running, you will do your Taiji in much faster speed.

Today, many Taiji people use multiple inhales and multiple exhales to do one slow Taiji move. That's wrong, wrong, and wrong.


----------



## bill miller

AIKIKENJITSU said:


> Bill,
> I begain my martial art journey 52 years ago and am still going strong.
> Ti chi is mostly for health, so they go slowly. I don't believe in it. Why can't you have a martial art that is fast, good and healthy? I searched and I found American Kenpo karate. The body is made for moving fast, not slowly. Kenpo is all about speed. My speed is the same as is was at the beginning.
> I can't still move very fast and the movements when you slow down to half speed are great for your body..
> If you take Kenpo, you'll have to learn katas which to me are a waiste of time because all Kenpo techniques are like mini katas. Learn katas if you must, and then after passing, stop practicing katas and practice instead the defense techniques. If you want, do them slowly and then fast.
> Hope I added a little of knowledge.
> Sifu
> Puyallup, WA


Thank you for the input, sir. I came from a Korean system that was kata/hyung and sparring based. I trained and instructed in this style for over thirty years, which took its toll on my body. The katas where a text book, as is the Tai Chi forms, no matter what the style. It all boils down to what you want to do with what you know. Once you have your postures correct, and have repeated each sequence over and over,muscle memory will, or should take over. This is why, IMHO, Forms, katas, hyungs are very in necessary. That and good instruction, for sure.
thanks again


----------



## JowGaWolf

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


My personal thoughts on this is that I became better at Tai Chi once I understood the movements that I was making with my hands.  Knowing the applications allows me to correct my structure because now my movement has context.  Without the application, Tai Chi has no meaning and focus.  Without that people are more likely to move incorrectly.   It's not enough to copy movement. 

Imagine watching someone draw on paper and the only thing you knew was to copy the movement.  Now lets add context to the movement say you are drawing a map. Now your movement has meaning.  It's doesn't mean you are going to be traveling, but it does mean your movement has direction and purpose.  I think this is important in Tai Chi as moving incorrectly can cause more harm than good.


----------



## JowGaWolf

bill miller said:


> I hope I am showing them something that would enhance their focus and intent. I hold no illusions of teaching them how to fight.


I should have read all the post before I made my first comment.   Movement with purpose is important.  The purpose helps define the structures that one must use.  Dancing is about expression and expression often doesn't seek healthy movement or healthy structure.  Ballerinas move gracefully, but take a look at their feet and you may be shocked that their feet look that bad.  

Knowing an application and knowing how to apply one in a real fight are big differences.  One might as well be in another dimension.


Kung Fu Wang said:


> There are 2 reasons to do Taiji slow:
> 
> - Coordinate hand and foot.
> - Each Taiji move is either an inhale, or an exhale.
> 
> If you just finished 3 miles running, you will do your Taiji in much faster speed.
> 
> Today, many Taiji people use multiple inhales and multiple exhales to do one slow Taiji move. That's wrong, wrong, and wrong.


I was always taught that movement matches breathing.  If my breathing is fast then my tai chi should move faster to match my breathing.   Breathing controls movement.


----------



## kfman

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


I didn't know Darth Vader did Tai Chi.


----------



## mograph

JowGaWolf said:


> I was always taught that movement matches breathing.  If my breathing is fast then my tai chi should move faster to match my breathing.   Breathing controls movement.


I don't think so. I think we can move quite fast while breathing slowly if we have the training and are relaxed. Breathing quickly is a sign that we are taxing our system, to me. We only synchronize an exhale with a strike, but footwork and parrying could be done without that exhale, yes?

Right now, you could probably do some of your forms quite quickly, while breathing slowly, I think.


----------



## Xue Sheng

kfman said:


> I didn't know Darth Vader did Tai Chi.


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> I don't think so. I think we can move quite fast while breathing slowly if we have the training and are relaxed. Breathing quickly is a sign that we are taxing our system, to me. We only synchronize an exhale with a strike, but footwork and parrying could be done without that exhale, yes?
> 
> Right now, you could probably do some of your forms quite quickly, while breathing slowly, I think.



My Xingyiquan Shifu once said if you can only strike with power when you exhale, I will attack right after you exhale.

And my Taijiquan shifu always said the same thing, when asked about breathing, that his shifu said....."Yes you should"


----------



## bill miller

kfman said:


> I didn't know Darth Vader did Tai Chi.


Naw...He was more of a Kendo fella.


----------



## Xue Sheng

JowGaWolf said:


> I was always taught that movement matches breathing.  If my breathing is fast then my tai chi should move faster to match my breathing.   Breathing controls movement.



Taijiquan saying
Yi Qi Li, meaning mind controls qi and qi controls muscles


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

mograph said:


> I think we can move quite fast while breathing slowly


When you throw 3 punches as fast as you can, you may have the following options:

1. Hold your breath and finish 3 punches.
2. You breath slow. Your breath has nothing to do with your punches.
3. exhale 1/4 for your 1st punch, exhale 1/4 for your 2nd punch, exhale 1/4 for your 3rd punch. After you have finished all 3 punches, your lung still have 1/4 air left.

IMO,  1 < 2 < 3.

1. Of course 1 is a bad idea.
2. Your breath has nothing to do with your power generation. Your mind does not control your breath, and your breath does not control your power.
3. If you can coordinate your power generation with the amount of air that you exhale, your mind control your breath, your breath control your power.

For example, if you just want to use the 1st punch, and the 2nd punch to set up my 3rd punch, you can exhale 1/6 for 1st punch, exhale 1/6 for 2nd punch, and exhale 1/2 for the 3rd punch. It's always a good idea to reserve some air in your lung for emergency, even 1/6 amount of air in your lung is still better than no air in your lung.

IMO, inhale when you punch out is a bad idea. If your opponent attacks you right at that moment, your body is too weak to take that punch. Just let your opponent to punch on your chest when you exhale and when you inhale, you can tell the difference.


----------



## wolfeyes2323

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


Martial Arts are a double edged sword,
Like Traditional Chinese Medicine ,
the knowledge can be used to heal or
to harm,  it is not the art that is
good or bad, it is the intent of the
practitioner.  what is the intent
of teaching martial application,
or learning martial application,
to threaten , intimidate or harm,
or to protect, defend, and do no
unnecessary harm ?  

It comes down to the character of
those you teach, if you are comfortable
with this then continue , if you begin
to doubt stop.

Remember though we may not want to do it,
a punch in the jaw that renders a attacker
unconscious is preferable to a bullet between
the eyes.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

JowGaWolf said:


> My personal thoughts on this is that I became better at Tai Chi once I understood the movements that I was making with my hands.  Knowing the applications allows me to correct my structure because now my movement has context.  Without the application, Tai Chi has no meaning and focus.  Without that people are more likely to move incorrectly.   It's not enough to copy movement.
> 
> Imagine watching someone draw on paper and the only thing you knew was to copy the movement.  Now lets add context to the movement say you are drawing a map. Now your movement has meaning.  It's doesn't mean you are going to be traveling, but it does mean your movement has direction and purpose.  I think this is important in Tai Chi as moving incorrectly can cause more harm than good.


Yes!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> I don't think so. I think we can move quite fast while breathing slowly if we have the training and are relaxed. Breathing quickly is a sign that we are taxing our system, to me. We only synchronize an exhale with a strike, but footwork and parrying could be done without that exhale, yes?
> 
> Right now, you could probably do some of your forms quite quickly, while breathing slowly, I think.


I was taught that the breath rides the motion, and the motion guides the breath.  My breath at whatever speed, goes with my motions and they create whatever rhythm I’m using. Once I catch the beat of the opponents motion and breathing i change mine to match or counter their timing. I’m playing my breath and motion like two separate instruments. This allows me to control the lead or yield positions more effectively because I can switch which of my two instruments is controlling my rhythm. i practice all things at differing speeds and power alternating my rhythms.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> My Xingyiquan Shifu once said if you can only strike with power when you exhale, I will attack right after you exhale.
> 
> And my Taijiquan shifu always said the same thing, when asked about breathing, that his shifu said....."Yes you should"


Breathe in and then out, and then in and out, repeat as needed. Great post!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Breathe in and then out, and then in and out, repeat as needed. Great post!


This is great medical advice from an anesthesiologist I know. He says this to everyone as they wake up.


----------



## JowGaWolf

mograph said:


> I don't think so. I think we can move quite fast while breathing slowly if we have the training and are relaxed. Breathing quickly is a sign that we are taxing our system, to me. We only synchronize an exhale with a strike, but footwork and parrying could be done without that exhale, yes?
> 
> Right now, you could probably do some of your forms quite quickly, while breathing slowly, I think.


I coordinate all of my movement with my breathing.  Fast breathing (Fast Exhale) creates fast strikes. (Slower Exhale) for grappling creates better power over longer period of activity.

Doing kung fu forms quickly while breathing slowly is like telling someone to sprint 110 meters while breathing slowly. I don't know about other systems, but it won't happen in Jow Ga.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 2. Your breath has nothing to do with your power generation


I disagree lift a heavy weight while breathing in. Throw your hardest punch while breathing in. Swing at a baseball while breathing in.   One will feel weaker.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> Doing kung fu forms quickly while breathing slowly is like telling someone to sprint 110 meters while breathing slowly. I don't know about other systems, but it won't happen in Jow Ga.


If you train the praying mantis form, there is no way that you can breath slow.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> I disagree lift a heavy weight while breathing in. Throw your hardest punch while breathing in. Swing at a baseball while breathing in.   One will feel weaker.


I mean if you "breath slow", your breath will have nothing to do with power generation.

You just can't breath slow when you move fast.

https://i.postimg.cc/wjrnrqHP/my-PM-speed.gif


----------



## Xue Sheng

JowGaWolf said:


> I disagree lift a heavy weight while breathing in. Throw your hardest punch while breathing in. Swing at a baseball while breathing in.   One will feel weaker.



Because that is the only way you have ever trained it.

Like my Xingyi shifu said, if you can only hit with power while exhaling, he will attack right after you exhale


----------



## Flying Crane

If you are muscling the punch, then you need to exhale sharply when you strike.  

If you are relaxed and using full-body connection, then breath normally.  Could either inhale or exhale on the strike, doesn’t matter much.  Don’t exhale sharply.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Flying Crane said:


> If you are relaxed and using full-body connection, then breath normally.


If you throw right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second, can you breath normally?

Old CMA saying said, "Fighting is like your shirt is catching on fire." To be able to relax in a life and death situation may not be realistic. When your body is moving in lighting speed, there is no way that you can breath normally.


----------



## Xue Sheng

"Breathing during practice – to breathe naturally. Do not force your breath deeply. After many times of practice, your Tai Chi Chuan will reach the natural point. By that time, the breath will be balanced automatically." - Tung Ying Chieh


----------



## Xue Sheng

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you throw right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second, can you breath normally?
> 
> Old CMA saying said, "Fighting is like your shirt is catching on fire." To be able to relax in a life and death situation may not be realistic. When your body is moving in lighting speed, there is no way that you can breath normally.



Can you throw a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Xue Sheng said:


> Can you throw a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second?


I believe I can still do it. My best speed was 5 punches within 1 second.

In the following clip, I repeat 8 moves combo twice within 3 seconds.

8 x 2 = 16.
16/3 = 5.3.


----------



## Flying Crane

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you throw right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second, can you breath normally?
> 
> Old CMA saying said, "Fighting is like your shirt is catching on fire." To be able to relax in a life and death situation may not be realistic. When your body is moving in lighting speed, there is no way that you can breath normally.


Of course stress has an effect.  You don’t need to exhale for each of those three punches.  Could all happen with one exhale or one inhale, or whatever.  So, breathe normally, don’t try to deliberately match breathing or exhaling with punch.  Work is being done by the legs, don’t work so hard with the arms/


----------



## Flying Crane

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I believe I can still do it. My best speed was 5 punches within 1 second.
> 
> In the following clip, I repeat 8 moves combo twice within 3 seconds.
> 
> 8 x 2 = 16.
> 16/3 = 5.3.


And what was your breathing like when you did this?


----------



## Xue Sheng

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I believe I can still do it. My best speed was 5 punches within 1 second.
> 
> In the following clip, I repeat 8 moves combo twice within 3 seconds.
> 
> 8 x 2 = 16.
> 16/3 = 5.3.



Impressive, but not a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut. And how powerful are those strikes?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> Because that is the only way you have ever trained it.
> 
> Like my Xingyi shifu said, if you can only hit with power while exhaling, he will attack right after you exhale


I am always looking for the in between beats(breath) to strike. I try to lead people into a motion for this reason alone. If I can catch people while they are extended and in between inspiration and expiration the strike tends to have some added effect (Interrupted rhythm).


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> "Breathing during practice – to breathe naturally. Do not force your breath deeply. After many times of practice, your Tai Chi Chuan will reach the natural point. By that time, the breath will be balanced automatically." - Tung Ying Chieh


I never force breath. The body motion creates the breath on its own. If I move fast the breath moves with me, having rhythm is key. My pulse, my breath, my motion must play together. I have to be able to feel those things without paying too much attention, this is a tedious practice that pays big dividends. It took a long time to get everything to sync up and even longer to be able to freely change one without disturbing the others.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I believe I can still do it. My best speed was 5 punches within 1 second.
> 
> In the following clip, I repeat 8 moves combo twice within 3 seconds.
> 
> 8 x 2 = 16.
> 16/3 = 5.3.





Flying Crane said:


> Of course stress has an effect.  You don’t need to exhale for each of those three punches.  Could all happen with one exhale or one inhale, or whatever.  So, breathe normally, don’t try to deliberately match breathing or exhaling without punch.  Work is being done by the legs, don’t work so hard with the arms/


More than one way to do this, but I agree that it must come from legs or there isn’t much in it. The breath can match the motion so short quick strikes can create short quick breaths that serve just fine, or even several short exhales without inhale to pressurize the motion. A lot can be done in this regard. As Dirty Dog recently said, tuning a carburetor is tricky!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Flying Crane said:


> And what was your breathing like when you did this?


When you jog, you use "section breath method" that you inhale 1/2, inhale another 1/2, exhale 1/2, exhale another 1/2.

I use sections breath method with partial inhale and partial exhale. I also try never to empty my lung.

The sections breath method is different from the Taiji full inhale and full exhale. IMO, the full inhale and full exhale is the perfect condition. In fighting, you never have chance to do that. You may exhale 1/3, exhale another 1/3, and inhale 2/3. That's the normal situation in fast moving speed.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Xue Sheng said:


> Impressive, but not a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut. And how powerful are those strikes?


That 8 moves combo require 3 forward monkey stance footwork. Without moving forward, if you just punch static, you should get better speed (you only have to move your arms and you don't have to move your legs).

Partial exhale mean partial power generation. It will take full exhale to generate the maximum power.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

You exhale when you take a break fall. When the outside pressure applies on your body, you exhale to adjust that pressure. I believe to take a punch is the same as to take a break fall.

Has anybody ever take a punch when you inhale? How do you feel?


----------



## JowGaWolf

Xue Sheng said:


> Like my Xingyi shifu said, if you can only hit with power while exhaling, he will attack right after you exhale


It's not because I was always trained that way. Here's why I think this.

I can throw multiple strikes in one exhale.
I can inhale in between strikes.
I can inhale as quickly as I exhale.  Do a short exhale burst with a quick jab and your next natural reflex is a short inhale that happens just as quick.
I can turn my one exhale into short bursts.  So I'm not fully exhaling.
I'm not standing in one place.  I'm using body movement and footwork so I can inhale in between moving my feet.  Let off a 3 piece, 4 piece, or 5 piece combo and inhale while you recover from defense.
My opponent isn't always engaging me 100% of the time with attacks.  Unless he or she can defeat me within a few seconds withing a burst of strikes.  Trying to sustain a long combo or attack will wear a person out.  It's the concept behind "Rope a dope." Part of my training is to do continuous attacking for a minute.  So I'm familiar with this on a personal level.
 My defense and footwork should have the effect of making it difficult to reach me for more than a few seconds.  I should be a moving target and not a punching bag.
Unless a person is gulping for air then trying to catch them breathing is going to be near impossible simply because breathing motion can be hidden inside regular motion.
After I get a good strike on that person, the last thing they will be looking at is my breathing (unless I have bad cardio).
I can inhale faster than my opponent can strike me
This is just a few things that I can think off the top of my head and with the exception of timing bad cardio, the intentionally hitting someone while they inhale will almost be impossible to do.  All it takes is for me to punch a person hard in their face, kick them in their ribs, or sweep them and I'll guarantee that person won't be thinking about my breathing.  

Even at this speed. Once can see how difficult it would be to try to intentionally hit someone while they are inhaling.






With all of this said:
Q:  Can a person time a strike to land when their opponent inhales? 
A: Yes.  When breathing becomes a tell. Then it's most likely that this will occur.  If an opponent takes a noticeable inhale right before they strike. Then that person will most likely get hit on the inhale.  If the breathing is calm then I don't think anyone is going to pick up while punches and kicks occur.

Look a fighters and practitioners of all skill levels and you rarely see anyone purposely trying to hit someone while they inhale.  In terms of striking vs grappling. Grapplers are probably more sensitive to their opponents breathing, even when they have great cardio.  For me personally.  I'm more cautious of my breathing with grapplers than strikes as they have more opportunity to take advantage of it.


----------



## bill miller

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Has anybody ever take a punch when you inhale? How do you feel?


not on purpose      1


----------



## JowGaWolf

Flying Crane said:


> If you are muscling the punch, then you need to exhale sharply when you strike.
> 
> If you are relaxed and using full-body connection, then breath normally.  Could either inhale or exhale on the strike, doesn’t matter much.  Don’t exhale sharply.


Again this is like me telling you to run as fast as you can and breath normally.  There's a difference between sharp breaths and tense breaths.  Normal breathing is always in the context of the motion or activity you are doing.  

Watch any professional fighter any athlete and you'll see the variation of breathing.  If you muscling a punch it's usually because someone is tense, and they are usually tense because they aren't breathing.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Partial exhale mean partial power generation. It will take full exhale to generate the maximum power.


You don't always need maximum power to get the job done, which is why professional fighters don't try to fight the entire fight with Power shots.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Has anybody ever take a punch when you inhale? How do you feel?


I've been kicked in the stomach while inhaling by an instructor who was explaining a technique.  I wasn't expecting it so I had casual breathing.  It wasn't a mean kick or a hard kick, but it penetrated.  Didn't like it. There was no resistance to push against the kick.  I rather take a punch with my muscles tense unless it's against a downward punch. 

I think break falls are not the same as punches.  Large area impact vs small area impact.  Just like I wouldn't equate. Those things should be looked at within their own context.  I personally wouldn't assume that what is good for a break fall is good for receiving punches.

But I could be wrong.  Somebody try it out and lets us know how that goes lol.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> I rather take a punch with my muscles tense


This is why I don't understand why people think it's OK to inhale when you punch. When you punch at your opponent, your opponent can also punch you back. You are in the punching range. You should try not to let your opponent to punch you when you inhale.

Of course if you just train solo and punch into the thin air, you can inhale/exhale anyway that you want to. But the habit that you have developed in solo training may be difficult to be removed in fighting.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Of course if you just train solo and punch into the thin air, you can inhale/exhale anyway that you want to. But the habit that you have developed in solo training may be difficult to be removed in fighting.


I totally agree with this and I think this came to light with the kung fu masters vs mma series of defeats. Not only did their strikes suffer but their footwork suffered big time too.

Tai chi is like this for me to certain extent because I don't strike pads with tai chi and I don't spar with Tai Chi.  I have to mentally focus on trying to follow application and not just moving.   Sometimes I find myself slipping between just going through the motions and focusing on the movement for application. For me I think this happens because I'm always trying to pay attention to my relaxation.  Which is the main reason I do it.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> I don't strike pads with tai chi and I don't spar with Tai Chi.


The Taiji "double pulling - pull to your left then pull to your right" is a very useful skill.

In wrestling, if you can sweep your opponent's leading leg and pull his back arm at the same time, you can take him down effortless. But to sweep your opponent's leading leg is easy, to have opportunity to pull his back arm is hard. If you can pull your opponent's leading arm, when he uses his back arm to deal with your arms, it will give you a chance to pull his back arm.






https://i.postimg.cc/J7kctQkD/Chang-double-pulls.gif


----------



## Xue Sheng

Kung Fu Wang said:


> That 8 moves combo require 3 forward monkey stance footwork. Without moving forward, if you just punch static, you should get better speed (you only have to move your arms and you don't have to move your legs).
> 
> Partial exhale mean partial power generation. It will take full exhale to generate the maximum power.



Would you be able to generate more power with 1 less punch in the sequence, thereby giving you more room to breath?


----------



## Xue Sheng

JowGaWolf said:


> It's not because I was always trained that way. Here's why I think this.
> 
> I can throw multiple strikes in one exhale.
> I can inhale in between strikes.
> I can inhale as quickly as I exhale.  Do a short exhale burst with a quick jab and your next natural reflex is a short inhale that happens just as quick.
> I can turn my one exhale into short bursts.  So I'm not fully exhaling.
> I'm not standing in one place.  I'm using body movement and footwork so I can inhale in between moving my feet.  Let off a 3 piece, 4 piece, or 5 piece combo and inhale while you recover from defense.
> My opponent isn't always engaging me 100% of the time with attacks.  Unless he or she can defeat me within a few seconds withing a burst of strikes.  Trying to sustain a long combo or attack will wear a person out.  It's the concept behind "Rope a dope." Part of my training is to do continuous attacking for a minute.  So I'm familiar with this on a personal level.
> My defense and footwork should have the effect of making it difficult to reach me for more than a few seconds.  I should be a moving target and not a punching bag.
> Unless a person is gulping for air then trying to catch them breathing is going to be near impossible simply because breathing motion can be hidden inside regular motion.
> After I get a good strike on that person, the last thing they will be looking at is my breathing (unless I have bad cardio).
> I can inhale faster than my opponent can strike me
> This is just a few things that I can think off the top of my head and with the exception of timing bad cardio, the intentionally hitting someone while they inhale will almost be impossible to do.  All it takes is for me to punch a person hard in their face, kick them in their ribs, or sweep them and I'll guarantee that person won't be thinking about my breathing.
> 
> Even at this speed. Once can see how difficult it would be to try to intentionally hit someone while they are inhaling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With all of this said:
> Q:  Can a person time a strike to land when their opponent inhales?
> A: Yes.  When breathing becomes a tell. Then it's most likely that this will occur.  If an opponent takes a noticeable inhale right before they strike. Then that person will most likely get hit on the inhale.  If the breathing is calm then I don't think anyone is going to pick up while punches and kicks occur.
> 
> Look a fighters and practitioners of all skill levels and you rarely see anyone purposely trying to hit someone while they inhale.  In terms of striking vs grappling. Grapplers are probably more sensitive to their opponents breathing, even when they have great cardio.  For me personally.  I'm more cautious of my breathing with grapplers than strikes as they have more opportunity to take advantage of it.


It would not be landed as you inhale, you strike, you exhale, he strikes, you just have to finish exhale, or miss during exhale. He was incredibly fast too. I never tie exhale to strike, don't care if it is inhale, exhale or somewhere in between. I can strike, with power, just need root and body unity. It also messed with people when I lifted weights. I simply breath normally and lift.

We basically do not agree, that is all


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Xue Sheng said:


> Would you be able to generate more power with 1 less punch in the sequence, thereby giving you more room to breath?


Among those 8 moves, there are 3 strikes and 5 setups.

1. Your right palm strike on your opponent's right leading arm.
2. Your left palm strike on his right elbow (free your right arm).
3. Your right hand strike (1st strike) on the right side of your opponent's head (switch hands).

4. Your opponent's left arm blocks your right strike. You use left hand to grab-pull his left wrist.
5. You then right palm strike (2nd strike) to the left side of his head (block-strike).

6. Your opponent uses right arm to block your right palm strike. You use right hand to pull his right arm toward you.
7. You use left hand to take over (free your right arm).
8. Your right hand strike (3rd strike) on his face (another switch hands).

None of these step up can be removed. Of course if you can knock down your opponent by your 1st strike, you won't need your 2nd strike, and 3rd strike.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

JowGaWolf said:


> It's not because I was always trained that way. Here's why I think this.
> 
> I can throw multiple strikes in one exhale.
> I can inhale in between strikes.
> I can inhale as quickly as I exhale.  Do a short exhale burst with a quick jab and your next natural reflex is a short inhale that happens just as quick.
> I can turn my one exhale into short bursts.  So I'm not fully exhaling.
> I'm not standing in one place.  I'm using body movement and footwork so I can inhale in between moving my feet.  Let off a 3 piece, 4 piece, or 5 piece combo and inhale while you recover from defense.
> My opponent isn't always engaging me 100% of the time with attacks.  Unless he or she can defeat me within a few seconds withing a burst of strikes.  Trying to sustain a long combo or attack will wear a person out.  It's the concept behind "Rope a dope." Part of my training is to do continuous attacking for a minute.  So I'm familiar with this on a personal level.
> My defense and footwork should have the effect of making it difficult to reach me for more than a few seconds.  I should be a moving target and not a punching bag.
> Unless a person is gulping for air then trying to catch them breathing is going to be near impossible simply because breathing motion can be hidden inside regular motion.
> After I get a good strike on that person, the last thing they will be looking at is my breathing (unless I have bad cardio).
> I can inhale faster than my opponent can strike me
> This is just a few things that I can think off the top of my head and with the exception of timing bad cardio, the intentionally hitting someone while they inhale will almost be impossible to do.  All it takes is for me to punch a person hard in their face, kick them in their ribs, or sweep them and I'll guarantee that person won't be thinking about my breathing.
> 
> Even at this speed. Once can see how difficult it would be to try to intentionally hit someone while they are inhaling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With all of this said:
> Q:  Can a person time a strike to land when their opponent inhales?
> A: Yes.  When breathing becomes a tell. Then it's most likely that this will occur.  If an opponent takes a noticeable inhale right before they strike. Then that person will most likely get hit on the inhale.  If the breathing is calm then I don't think anyone is going to pick up while punches and kicks occur.
> 
> Look a fighters and practitioners of all skill levels and you rarely see anyone purposely trying to hit someone while they inhale.  In terms of striking vs grappling. Grapplers are probably more sensitive to their opponents breathing, even when they have great cardio.  For me personally.  I'm more cautious of my breathing with grapplers than strikes as they have more opportunity to take advantage of it.


People often do show the breath when tired or excited. People often visibly breathe from the upper chest during confrontation. Many people move from this breath, blowing out air from the mouth. This can be exploited. It isn’t about speed, it is about listening and timing. Im sure you strike off of the opponents strike, this is similar in concept. if I feel you better than you feel you, I have some advantage.


----------



## dvcochran

Wing Woo Gar said:


> People often do show the breath when tired or excited. People often visibly breathe from the upper chest during confrontation. Many people move from this breath, blowing out air from the mouth. This can be exploited. It isn’t about speed, it is about listening and timing. Im sure you strike off of the opponents strike, this is similar in concept. if I feel you better than you feel you, I have some advantage.





JowGaWolf said:


> It's not because I was always trained that way. Here's why I think this.
> 
> I can throw multiple strikes in one exhale.
> I can inhale in between strikes.
> I can inhale as quickly as I exhale.  Do a short exhale burst with a quick jab and your next natural reflex is a short inhale that happens just as quick.
> I can turn my one exhale into short bursts.  So I'm not fully exhaling.
> I'm not standing in one place.  I'm using body movement and footwork so I can inhale in between moving my feet.  Let off a 3 piece, 4 piece, or 5 piece combo and inhale while you recover from defense.
> My opponent isn't always engaging me 100% of the time with attacks.  Unless he or she can defeat me within a few seconds withing a burst of strikes.  Trying to sustain a long combo or attack will wear a person out.  It's the concept behind "Rope a dope." Part of my training is to do continuous attacking for a minute.  So I'm familiar with this on a personal level.
> My defense and footwork should have the effect of making it difficult to reach me for more than a few seconds.  I should be a moving target and not a punching bag.
> Unless a person is gulping for air then trying to catch them breathing is going to be near impossible simply because breathing motion can be hidden inside regular motion.
> After I get a good strike on that person, the last thing they will be looking at is my breathing (unless I have bad cardio).
> I can inhale faster than my opponent can strike me
> This is just a few things that I can think off the top of my head and with the exception of timing bad cardio, the intentionally hitting someone while they inhale will almost be impossible to do.  All it takes is for me to punch a person hard in their face, kick them in their ribs, or sweep them and I'll guarantee that person won't be thinking about my breathing.
> 
> Even at this speed. Once can see how difficult it would be to try to intentionally hit someone while they are inhaling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With all of this said:
> Q:  Can a person time a strike to land when their opponent inhales?
> A: Yes.  When breathing becomes a tell. Then it's most likely that this will occur.  If an opponent takes a noticeable inhale right before they strike. Then that person will most likely get hit on the inhale.  If the breathing is calm then I don't think anyone is going to pick up while punches and kicks occur.
> 
> Look a fighters and practitioners of all skill levels and you rarely see anyone purposely trying to hit someone while they inhale.  In terms of striking vs grappling. Grapplers are probably more sensitive to their opponents breathing, even when they have great cardio.  For me personally.  I'm more cautious of my breathing with grapplers than strikes as they have more opportunity to take advantage of it.


I did my first workout after having the Flu (Covid?) last night. I was surprised how much wind I had lost so I was happy to be doing breathing of any kind. 

Seriously though, we also practice breathing drills in regards to offensive movement and defensive (taking a hit) movement.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Among those 8 moves, there are 3 strikes and 5 setups.
> 
> 1. Your right palm strike on your opponent's right leading arm.
> 2. Your left palm strike on his right elbow (free your right arm).
> 3. Your right hand strike (1st strike) on the right side of your opponent's head (switch hands).
> 
> 4. Your opponent's left arm blocks your right strike. You use left hand to grab-pull his left wrist.
> 5. You then right palm strike (2nd strike) to the left side of his head (block-strike).
> 
> 6. Your opponent uses right arm to block your right palm strike. You use right hand to pull his right arm toward you.
> 7. You use left hand to take over (free your right arm).
> 8. Your right hand strike (3rd strike) on his face (another switch hands).
> 
> None of these step up can be removed. Of course if you can knock down your opponent by your 1st strike, you won't need your 2nd strike, and 3rd strike.


That is not an answer though, and I am not asking about the sequence, I'm asking about the number of strikes in the time allotted. 

Knowing the situation can require different responses, meaning more or less strikes may be required, I guess my question is, would it be better to train for multiple fast strikes with less power or fewer strikes with more power. When I see things like the Wing Chun chain punch, although it has its place and it can be powerful, a single Xingyi Bengquan strike I feel is more powerful. Both have there place and reasons for use. But, as you said, throwing a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second, although fast, I feel it loses in power over say throwing a  right hook, left hook, right uppercut, within 1 second. Speed is impressive and can be effective, but I feel, in general, it lacks power.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Xue Sheng said:


> That is not an answer though, and I am not asking about the sequence, I'm asking about the number of strikes in the time allotted.
> 
> Knowing the situation can require different responses, meaning more or less strikes may be required, I guess my question is, would it be better to train for multiple fast strikes with less power or fewer strikes with more power. When I see things like the Wing Chun chain punch, although it has its place and it can be powerful, a single Xingyi Bengquan strike I feel is more powerful. Both have there place and reasons for use. But, as you said, throwing a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second, although fast, I feel it loses in power over say throwing a  right hook, left hook, right uppercut, within 1 second. Speed is impressive and can be effective, but I feel, in general, it lacks power.


I trained a drill where I did something similar.  Students could do the combo fast but it was awkward.  I wouldn't use the punch combo in a figh. Our combo left too much open.  I guess it was an exercise for power generation and not a fighting sequence.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> That is not an answer though, and I am not asking about the sequence, I'm asking about the number of strikes in the time allotted.
> 
> Knowing the situation can require different responses, meaning more or less strikes may be required, I guess my question is, would it be better to train for multiple fast strikes with less power or fewer strikes with more power. When I see things like the Wing Chun chain punch, although it has its place and it can be powerful, a single Xingyi Bengquan strike I feel is more powerful. Both have there place and reasons for use. But, as you said, throwing a right hook, left hook, right uppercut, left uppercut within 1 second, although fast, I feel it loses in power over say throwing a  right hook, left hook, right uppercut, within 1 second. Speed is impressive and can be effective, but I feel, in general, it lacks power.


I often find that in a combo I start with fast, lesser power strikes to get the opponent to move and finish the combo with a higher power strike. I don’t think it means much because i never know ahead of time what I’m going to do. I like to get people to move and then I move off of their movement. It feels more natural for me. I almost always start out this way because it gives me a chance to feel them and catch their rhythm and find where they lack balance or structure, or have an injury or physical limitation(everybody does).


----------



## Oily Dragon

RTMairose said:


> Thank you and precisely. Would you say few teachers of taiji understand it as taijiquan?


Teachers of Taiji?  

Who really needs one.


----------



## Xue Sheng

JowGaWolf said:


> I trained a drill where I did something similar.  Students could do the combo fast but it was awkward.  I wouldn't use the punch combo in a figh. Our combo left too much open.  I guess it was an exercise for power generation and not a fighting sequence.



Used what I was talking about in sparring too


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Xue Sheng said:


> Speed is impressive and can be effective, but I feel, in general, it lacks power.


To use speed to force your opponent to give up is more civilized than to use power to knock him down.

The praying mantis master Brendan Lai told me that one day a challenger came to his school and challenged him. Brendan said, "I'll throw just 1 punch, if you can block my punch, you win, otherwise, you lose." When Brendan punched at his opponent's face, his opponent could not block it. Brendan then said, "Next punch I will blind you." The challenger left. The challenge fight ended peacefully, Nobody got hurt.

IMO, The fast speed may not have enough knock down power, but it can help you to obtain a clinch in a fist flying situation.

Both machine gun and grenade have place in the battle field. The praying mantis system emphasizes speed. The Baji system emphasizes power. Su Yu-Chang created his "Baji praying mantis" system so he can have both.

When you throw multiple punches in fast speed, you are not using your body to the maximum (body method). Of course you can't generate maximum power. When you try to knock your opponent down with one punch, if he moves back, you will punch into the thin air.

MA is all about "trade off". If there is a perfect system, everybody will learn that system and there won't be any place for other MA systems.

This is why I believe one should train:

- 1 step 3 punches (for speed).
- 2 steps 3 punches (compromise between speed and power).
- 3 steps 3 punches (for power).


----------



## Steve

Xue Sheng said:


> Speed is impressive and can be effective, but I feel, in general, it lacks power.


Not if you're punching on the exhale. 

Just kidding.  I'm really enjoying this thread and the other one on secrecy in kung fu, and the topics are similar.  Couldn't resist this easy call back.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Steve said:


> Not if you're punching on the exhale.
> 
> Just kidding.  I'm really enjoying this thread and the other one on secrecy in kung fu, and the topics are similar.  Couldn't resist this easy call back.



You're cruzin' for a shunnin' fella


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Steve said:


> Not if you're punching on the exhale.
> 
> Just kidding.  I'm really enjoying this thread and the other one on secrecy in kung fu, and the topics are similar.  Couldn't resist this easy call back.


Lol!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> You're cruzin' for a shunnin' fella


Love that movie. The one that has jack nicholson?


----------



## Oily Dragon

Steve said:


> Not if you're punching on the exhale.


Don't forget the toes.  Toe placement is crucial otherwise the Qi can't flow properly from the earth to your fist..


----------



## Ebrahim

Hi Bill,
There is no actual dark side in martial arts. There will always be a perfect balance. 
As a student and teacher I prefer to show both right from the offset in order to maintain a good balance in the curiosity of my students. If one only teaches the one aspect the curiosity about the other will be amplified and vice versa. so my advice to you is that you maintain balance in what you teach. you will find that your students will grow at a rate that far exceeds your expectations. 
In short I do not see any wrong in what you are doing.
So,,  It is as difficult to sleep in the day as it is to see at night unless there are elements of the opposite present that will ease things.


----------



## geezer

dvcochran said:


> I did my first workout after having the Flu (Covid?) last night. I was surprised how much wind I had lost so I was happy to be doing breathing of any kind.
> 
> Seriously though, we also practice breathing drills in regards to offensive movement and defensive (taking a hit) movement.


Glad you're on the upswing! 

BTW if there is any doubt that you might have had COVID I'm surprised you didn't get tested. It would be useful to know, not only for the sake of those you have been in contact with, but also for knowing whether you not you might have acquired some natural resistance in addition to any vaccines you may have had. 

Oh, and also for the bragging rights.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

The "dark side" of Taiji is to use the invisible energy to make a guy jump backward.


----------



## dvcochran

geezer said:


> Glad you're on the upswing!
> 
> BTW if there is any doubt that you might have had COVID I'm surprised you didn't get tested. It would be useful to know, not only for the sake of those you have been in contact with, but also for knowing whether you not you might have acquired some natural resistance in addition to any vaccines you may have had.
> 
> Oh, and also for the bragging rights.


My wife and I both got tested for Covid, Flu, and Strep at the same time. That little Flu test thingy hurt like the dickens!!! Came back positive for Covid. However, I had very few of the classic Covid symptoms (which generally overlap). No fever or chills, no loss of taste/smell. Just felt cruddy and tired for 4-5 days so it does make me wonder. I have had the Flu in years past that was Way rougher on me. 
We are pretty certain where we got it (church), even to the point of knowing the initial carrier, so I fully believe this thing is highly transmissible. I also fully believe you either have had it (may not have even known it), have it, or will get it. Mother nature is a self-righting ship.

I did not work out for about two weeks. Much of this was because of playing catchup at work. But some of it was simply because I am getting older and just don't bounce back as quick as I used to. I am not about to blame it all on Covid.


----------



## Oily Dragon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The "dark side" of Taiji is to use the invisible energy to make a guy jump backward.


The dark, dark side is the 94 likes, and 0 dislikes of that video, before we even start translating the comments, the first of which was enough to sum the rest up.  _"This is the real inner fist master, not many know this"_, basically.

You and I see that video and are dumbfounded by its stupidity, but for some reason Youtube claims everyone loves this video.  It's just like the Lizard Illuminati.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Oily Dragon said:


> The dark, dark side is the 94 likes, and 0 dislikes of that video, before we even start translating the comments, the first of which was enough to sum the rest up.  _"This is the real inner fist master, not many know this"_, basically.
> 
> You and I see that video and are dumbfounded by its stupidity, but for some reason Youtube claims everyone loves this video.  It's just like the Lizard Illuminati.


Man you are so right on target here! Qanon and fa Jing and lizard people believers make me want to start my own cult of verifiable truths. Wait, that won’t make money though.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Oily Dragon said:


> The dark, dark side is the 94 likes, and 0 dislikes of that video, before we even start translating the comments, the first of which was enough to sum the rest up.  _"This is the real inner fist master, not many know this"_, basically.
> 
> You and I see that video and are dumbfounded by its stupidity, but for some reason Youtube claims everyone loves this video.  It's just like the Lizard Illuminati.


These are the guys that make me consider some dojo busting.


----------



## bill miller

Oily Dragon said:


> The dark, dark side is the 94 likes, and 0 dislikes of that video, before we even start translating the comments, the first of which was enough to sum the rest up.  _"This is the real inner fist master, not many know this"_, basically.
> 
> You and I see that video and are dumbfounded by its stupidity, but for some reason Youtube claims everyone loves this video.  It's just like the Lizard Illuminati.


OMG!! are they back again?!?


----------



## bill miller

The chain schools around here vary from instructor to instructor in the quality of training. Some folks would lump them all together as "Mcdojo'". but that is not always the case. The ones that drive me nuts are the schools that offer the "Martial Art of the DAY". Karate schools suddenly teach Gracie jujitsu,muay tai, or the latest rage, krav maga. And we can't leave out jeet kundo! Not all, but at least some of these instructors may have taken a couple of seminars, and/or got a DVD and sent their money in. Maybe I am old fashioned, but it just isn't right.


----------



## Steve

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Man you are so right on target here! Qanon and fa Jing and lizard people believers make me want to start my own cult of verifiable truths. Wait, that won’t make money though.


A cult of _verifiable _truths?  No.  That's not going to go well at all.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Wing Woo Gar said:


> These are the guys that make me consider some dojo busting.


For Some unknown reason, the personal challenge culture just disappeared in the past 50 years. I still remember that the long fist GM Han Ching-Tang tried to challenge the Taiji master Yang Chen-Fu back in 1930.

Allow me to quote someone said in another forum that I agree 100%.

"I have zero interest in pushing people out of their stance as practicing like that will ruin you for actual fighting. Making aging boomer hippies take a step back and acting like that's "winning" or pretending that means you have "good taiji" (whatever that means) has always completely baffled me."


----------



## geezer

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The "dark side" of Taiji is to use the invisible energy to make a guy jump backward.


Jump backwards repeatedly with barely a touch? I'd like to see that work on me! My leg joints hurt so much, I simply don't jump ... or run much. Cardio on a bike is a better bet. So yeah, I'd like to see that guy magically get me to jump like that!


----------



## mograph

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Man you are so right on target here! Qanon and fa Jing and lizard people believers make me want to start my own cult of verifiable truths. Wait, that won’t make money though.


Strictly speaking, this is Fa Jin. I’m not sure what the “shock” stuff in that other video is called.


----------



## geezer

mograph said:


> Strictly speaking, this is Fa Jin. I’m not sure what the “shock” stuff in that other video is called.


The caption with that video says: 

_He's demonstrating explosive power. "The fa jing release of energy is akin to* a sneeze;* the entire body opening and closing in an instant." _

You know, what with COVID and everything, it might be easier to skip all that and just train _sneezing_ for self defense. I mean, who's going to mess with somebody violently sneezing and spraying snot all over the place?


----------



## Steve

geezer said:


> Jump backwards repeatedly with barely a touch? I'd like to see that work on me! My leg joints hurt so much, I simply don't jump ... or run much. Cardio on a bike is a better bet. So yeah, I'd like to see that guy magically get me to jump like that!


Would be good to introduce a little vigor.


----------



## Steve

geezer said:


> The caption with that video says:
> 
> _He's demonstrating explosive power. "The fa jing release of energy is akin to* a sneeze;* the entire body opening and closing in an instant." _
> 
> You know, what with COVID and everything, it might be easier to skip all that and just train _sneezing_ for self defense. I mean, who's going to mess with somebody violently sneezing and spraying snot all over the place?


Reminds me of an inappropriate joke.


----------



## JowGaWolf

geezer said:


> Jump backwards repeatedly with barely a touch? I'd like to see that work on me! My leg joints hurt so much, I simply don't jump ... or run much. Cardio on a bike is a better bet. So yeah, I'd like to see that guy magically get me to jump like that!


The jump amazes me the most because everyone does the same jump.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

More Taiji "dark side" clip.


----------



## Oily Dragon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> More Taiji "dark side" clip.


I've got that beat.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

It's pretty strange that this kind of clips only exist in the Taiji system.

Why?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Kung Fu Wang said:


> For Some unknown reason, the personal challenge culture just disappeared in the past 50 years. I still remember that the long fist GM Han Ching-Tang tried to challenge the Taiji master Yang Chen-Fu back in 1930.
> 
> Allow me to quote someone said in another forum that I agree 100%.
> 
> "I have zero interest in pushing people out of their stance as practicing like that will ruin you for actual fighting. Making aging boomer hippies take a step back and acting like that's "winning" or pretending that means you have "good taiji" (whatever that means) has always completely baffled me."


You are 100% correct. The quote you posted is also 100%. I’m just grousing when I say that I would consider it. Phonies and charlatans that take peoples money for that crap just irritate me.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Wing Woo Gar said:


> These are the guys that make me consider some dojo busting.


I’m just kidding.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Steve said:


> Reminds me of an inappropriate joke.


Yikes!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> Strictly speaking, this is Fa Jin. I’m not sure what the “shock” stuff in that other video is called.


Strictly speaking, yes, it’s a thing. How many times have you been impressed? That is a genuine question.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> Strictly speaking, this is Fa Jin. I’m not sure what the “shock” stuff in that other video is called.


To me this is a tool. Taken out of context and without physical application it is as useful as an ironing board in a swimming pool. The shock guy is what happens when some fool sees some hidden wisdom in the secret underwater ironing technique.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

mograph said:


> Strictly speaking, this is Fa Jin. I’m not sure what the “shock” stuff in that other video is called.


Chen Xiao Wang has never made his opponent to jump up and down. I believe even in the Taiji community, some Taiji masters still won't believe such jumping up and down skill is real.


----------



## mograph

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Strictly speaking, yes, it’s a thing. How many times have you been impressed? That is a genuine question.


A few times? Many times? Being impressed is time- and exposure-dependent, isn't it? One is first _impressed_ at the new thing, then _respectful_ on subsequent exposures to that thing, I suppose. In order to be continually impressed by someone, we need to continually see new things from them. I'm not _impressed_ by the Xiaowang clip, because I've seen it a lot, but I _respect_ his high level of skill -- c'mon, the guy's a Chen Grandmaster. 

When I first saw the musician Esperanza Spalding, I was very impressed; if I see her again, I'll be very pleased and respectful of her immense skill and talent. But in order to be _impressed_, I'd have to see something new from her, or I'd need to have _forgotten_ how good she is. But if I don't see something new, I'll still feel very grateful to see her live in concert.

So being impressed is subjective. It lies in the _interaction_ between the subject and the object (how Eastern). Being impressive is not a quality that lies solely in the object.

When old fans go to see the Rolling Stones playing familiar material, are they _impressed_? Or do they just have a good time, enjoying the skills of the musicians? If some young'un saw them for the first time, and said "I'm not impressed," they'd get a whack on the head.

But our modern western society demands continual stimulation, always something new and impressive. "Impress me." If you're "not impressed," that's seen as a bad thing. Bah. 

Anyway, I'm impressed about as much as the next person, I guess. Not sure what you mean.


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> A few times? Many times? Being impressed is time- and exposure-dependent, isn't it? One is first _impressed_ at the new thing, then _respectful_ on subsequent exposures to that thing, I suppose. In order to be continually impressed by someone, we need to continually see new things from them. I'm not _impressed_ by the Xiaowang clip, because I've seen it a lot, but I _respect_ his high level of skill -- c'mon, the guy's a Chen Grandmaster.
> 
> When I first saw the musician Esperanza Spalding, I was very impressed; if I see her again, I'll be very pleased and respectful of her immense skill and talent. But in order to be _impressed_, I'd have to see something new from her, or I'd need to have _forgotten_ how good she is. But if I don't see something new, I'll still feel very grateful to see her live in concert.
> 
> So being impressed is subjective. It lies in the _interaction_ between the subject and the object (how Eastern). Being impressive is not a quality that lies solely in the object.
> 
> When old fans go to see the Rolling Stones playing familiar material, are they _impressed_? Or do they just have a good time, enjoying the skills of the musicians? If some young'un saw them for the first time, and said "I'm not impressed," they'd get a whack on the head.
> 
> But our modern western society demands continual stimulation, always something new and impressive. "Impress me." If you're "not impressed," that's seen as a bad thing. Bah.
> 
> Anyway, I'm impressed about as much as the next person, I guess. Not sure what you mean.



Agreed

Speaking as a Traditional Taijiquan guy for many years......Chen Xiaowang's level of skill is rather impressive..... am I looking at the clip wide eyed and saying WOW at every strike....nope....but knowing what I know about taijiquan, that is pretty impressive.  And sadly, that level of skill and understanding is dying out. Chen Xiao Wang is in his mid 70s, Chen Zhenglei is in his early 70s, and folks like my Yang Shifu tend to be in their 80s or older.


----------



## mograph

Xue Sheng said:


> Agreed
> 
> Speaking as a Traditional Taijiquan guy for many years......Chen Xiaowang's level of skill is rather impressive..... am I looking at the clip wide eyed and saying WOW at every strike....nope....but knowing what I know about taijiquan, that is pretty impressive.  And sadly, that level of skill and understanding is dying out. Chen Xiao Wang is in his mid 70s, Chen Zhenglei is in his early 70s, and folks like my Yang Shifu tend to be in their 80s or older.


Yep. It's dying out because people don't want to take the time to learn it. And it doesn't give instant gratification. And it takes yeeeeeeears to look like a badass.

My teacher's TCM specialty was bone-setting, and he's a lineage guy for Mizongyi. Yeah, those and a buck will get you a cup of coffee, nowadays.

Anyway, what most tai chi folks think is the "dark side" is just martial. I would tell them that it's not about gleefully wanting to injure people; in their context, it's more like testing your skill with a partner. In class, nobody's going to want to injure anyone. If they do, they should be kicked out. 

But if they want to _defend_ themselves in the short term, they're probably in the wrong school, or wrong system.


----------



## Phoenix44

I think it’s kind of unfair to imply there’s no value to “tai chi for health,” or that it’s somehow “wrong.” The movement of the forms improves balance and decreases the risk of falls in seniors (that’s research, not my personal opinion). For some people, that’s all they want or need. Tai chi taught as a martial art, applications, contact, may be risky for those who have arthritis, autoimmune disorders, or osteoporosis for example. Should they NOT do “tai chi for health”? People who who want more from their tai chi practice can be directed to appropriate training.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> A few times? Many times? Being impressed is time- and exposure-dependent, isn't it? One is first _impressed_ at the new thing, then _respectful_ on subsequent exposures to that thing, I suppose. In order to be continually impressed by someone, we need to continually see new things from them. I'm not _impressed_ by the Xiaowang clip, because I've seen it a lot, but I _respect_ his high level of skill -- c'mon, the guy's a Chen Grandmaster.
> 
> When I first saw the musician Esperanza Spalding, I was very impressed; if I see her again, I'll be very pleased and respectful of her immense skill and talent. But in order to be _impressed_, I'd have to see something new from her, or I'd need to have _forgotten_ how good she is. But if I don't see something new, I'll still feel very grateful to see her live in concert.
> 
> So being impressed is subjective. It lies in the _interaction_ between the subject and the object (how Eastern). Being impressive is not a quality that lies solely in the object.
> 
> When old fans go to see the Rolling Stones playing familiar material, are they _impressed_? Or do they just have a good time, enjoying the skills of the musicians? If some young'un saw them for the first time, and said "I'm not impressed," they'd get a whack on the head.
> 
> But our modern western society demands continual stimulation, always something new and impressive. "Impress me." If you're "not impressed," that's seen as a bad thing. Bah.
> 
> Anyway, I'm impressed about as much as the next person, I guess. Not sure what you mean.


What I am getting at is the Fa Jing is a real tool that has been perverted by charlatans into a sideshow gimmick. I don’t like candle snuffers, it isn’t real. I’m not impressed by these demonstrations. I have trained in Yang style Tai chi Chuan for over 25 years. I have seen so many fakers and bs artists that I cant count them all. It isn’t eastern or western to call bs on people that claim to make people fall down without touch. Either it’s real or it isn’t, there is one certain way to find it out. The reluctance to face any scrutiny is the reason the hucksters and phony teachers have proliferated in Tai chi for so long. My Sifu would say “the mumbo jumbo is real, but not without the physical reality, there are no magic shortcuts”. The phonys cheapen the hard work and long hours of effort it takes to cultivate high skill in the realm of internal martial arts. That’s why I am so stridently opposed to it, and why I call it like I see it.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Phoenix44 said:


> I think it’s kind of unfair to imply there’s no value to “tai chi for health,” or that it’s somehow “wrong.” The movement of the forms improves balance and decreases the risk of falls in seniors (that’s research, not my personal opinion). For some people, that’s all they want or need. Tai chi taught as a martial art, applications, contact, may be risky for those who have arthritis, autoimmune disorders, or osteoporosis for example. Should they NOT do “tai chi for health”? People who who want more from their tai chi practice can be directed to appropriate training.



I don't think anyone is implying that, I know I am not. But what does happen is many that come form health, and most I taught over the years were there for that, get upset or offended if there is any discussion about the martial arts of taijiquan and its history as a martial art.

Note a previous post where one of my students stormed out saying "I'm Not here for Karate" after another student of mine asked about the martial arts of it. And all I basically said was yes it is, but I'm not teaching that in this class, talk to me after class. Or the gentleman I tried to correct his form in tuishou (2 person form) who looked at me and very arrogantly said, "I don't DO martial arts, I do TAIJI" and then left the guan. I have run into this multiple times in the 30 years I have been training taijiquan.

It has health benefits, and if that is what someone is after that's great. Just don't get upset, be offended or argue the point if someone else wants to know or learn about it.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> A few times? Many times? Being impressed is time- and exposure-dependent, isn't it? One is first _impressed_ at the new thing, then _respectful_ on subsequent exposures to that thing, I suppose. In order to be continually impressed by someone, we need to continually see new things from them. I'm not _impressed_ by the Xiaowang clip, because I've seen it a lot, but I _respect_ his high level of skill -- c'mon, the guy's a Chen Grandmaster.
> 
> When I first saw the musician Esperanza Spalding, I was very impressed; if I see her again, I'll be very pleased and respectful of her immense skill and talent. But in order to be _impressed_, I'd have to see something new from her, or I'd need to have _forgotten_ how good she is. But if I don't see something new, I'll still feel very grateful to see her live in concert.
> 
> So being impressed is subjective. It lies in the _interaction_ between the subject and the object (how Eastern). Being impressive is not a quality that lies solely in the object.
> 
> When old fans go to see the Rolling Stones playing familiar material, are they _impressed_? Or do they just have a good time, enjoying the skills of the musicians? If some young'un saw them for the first time, and said "I'm not impressed," they'd get a whack on the head.
> 
> But our modern western society demands continual stimulation, always something new and impressive. "Impress me." If you're "not impressed," that's seen as a bad thing. Bah.
> 
> Anyway, I'm impressed about as much as the next person, I guess. Not sure what you mean.


To be fair, I’m not talking about the Chen master Per se. I was talking fa Jing.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> A few times? Many times? Being impressed is time- and exposure-dependent, isn't it? One is first _impressed_ at the new thing, then _respectful_ on subsequent exposures to that thing, I suppose. In order to be continually impressed by someone, we need to continually see new things from them. I'm not _impressed_ by the Xiaowang clip, because I've seen it a lot, but I _respect_ his high level of skill -- c'mon, the guy's a Chen Grandmaster.
> 
> When I first saw the musician Esperanza Spalding, I was very impressed; if I see her again, I'll be very pleased and respectful of her immense skill and talent. But in order to be _impressed_, I'd have to see something new from her, or I'd need to have _forgotten_ how good she is. But if I don't see something new, I'll still feel very grateful to see her live in concert.
> 
> So being impressed is subjective. It lies in the _interaction_ between the subject and the object (how Eastern). Being impressive is not a quality that lies solely in the object.
> 
> When old fans go to see the Rolling Stones playing familiar material, are they _impressed_? Or do they just have a good time, enjoying the skills of the musicians? If some young'un saw them for the first time, and said "I'm not impressed," they'd get a whack on the head.
> 
> But our modern western society demands continual stimulation, always something new and impressive. "Impress me." If you're "not impressed," that's seen as a bad thing. Bah.
> 
> Anyway, I'm impressed about as much as the next person, I guess. Not sure what you mean.


I don’t think I was very clear in my post. Apologies.


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> Yep. It's dying out because people don't want to take the time to learn it. And it doesn't give instant gratification. And it takes yeeeeeeears to look like a badass.
> 
> My teacher's TCM specialty was bone-setting, and he's a lineage guy for Mizongyi. Yeah, those and a buck will get you a cup of coffee, nowadays.
> 
> Anyway, what most tai chi folks think is the "dark side" is just martial. I would tell them that it's not about gleefully wanting to injure people; in their context, it's more like testing your skill with a partner. In class, nobody's going to want to injure anyone. If they do, they should be kicked out.
> 
> But if they want to _defend_ themselves in the short term, they're probably in the wrong school, or wrong system.


If they don't want to learn the martial arts, I'm ok with that, just don't try and stop others from learning it if they want. 

My Yang shifu said years ago he was retired from teaching taijiquan, because no one want to learn it anymore. All they want is forms and to cal themselves a master. 

But you are absolutely right, taijiquan, to use it as it is intended, as a martial art, is most certainly no quick fix. It takes a long time.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Phoenix44 said:


> I think it’s kind of unfair to imply there’s no value to “tai chi for health,” or that it’s somehow “wrong.” The movement of the forms improves balance and decreases the risk of falls in seniors (that’s research, not my personal opinion). For some people, that’s all they want or need. Tai chi taught as a martial art, applications, contact, may be risky for those who have arthritis, autoimmune disorders, or osteoporosis for example. Should they NOT do “tai chi for health”? People who who want more from their tai chi practice can be directed to appropriate training.


Nobody I know thinks that. I definitely believe that you will get an increased health benefit from knowing what the postures are for and doing the form with proper intention, but it certainly isn’t required. Any Tai Chi Chuan you are doing is better than nothing.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> If they don't want to learn the martial arts, I'm ok with that, just don't try and stop others from learning it if they want.
> 
> My Yang shifu said years ago he was retired from teaching taijiquan, because no one want to learn it anymore. All they want is forms and to cal themselves a master.
> 
> But you are absolutely right, taijiquan, to use it as it is intended, as a martial art, is most certainly no quick fix. It takes a long time.





mograph said:


> Yep. It's dying out because people don't want to take the time to learn it. And it doesn't give instant gratification. And it takes yeeeeeeears to look like a badass.
> 
> My teacher's TCM specialty was bone-setting, and he's a lineage guy for Mizongyi. Yeah, those and a buck will get you a cup of coffee, nowadays.
> 
> Anyway, what most tai chi folks think is the "dark side" is just martial. I would tell them that it's not about gleefully wanting to injure people; in their context, it's more like testing your skill with a partner. In class, nobody's going to want to injure anyone. If they do, they should be kicked out.
> 
> But if they want to _defend_ themselves in the short term, they're probably in the wrong school, or wrong system.


Most times what I see is the young strong guys can’t soften up enough to understand what they are missing out on so they only want to train wushu gung fu. The older or softer crowd can’t or won’t do the hard fast excercise required so they only want to train Tai Chi Chuan. The people who train both find out that these things are like mirror images, you can do wushu forms slow and you can do Tai Chi Chuan fast. Being able to all things equally in all directions is the way.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> A few times? Many times? Being impressed is time- and exposure-dependent, isn't it? One is first _impressed_ at the new thing, then _respectful_ on subsequent exposures to that thing, I suppose. In order to be continually impressed by someone, we need to continually see new things from them. I'm not _impressed_ by the Xiaowang clip, because I've seen it a lot, but I _respect_ his high level of skill -- c'mon, the guy's a Chen Grandmaster.
> 
> When I first saw the musician Esperanza Spalding, I was very impressed; if I see her again, I'll be very pleased and respectful of her immense skill and talent. But in order to be _impressed_, I'd have to see something new from her, or I'd need to have _forgotten_ how good she is. But if I don't see something new, I'll still feel very grateful to see her live in concert.
> 
> So being impressed is subjective. It lies in the _interaction_ between the subject and the object (how Eastern). Being impressive is not a quality that lies solely in the object.
> 
> When old fans go to see the Rolling Stones playing familiar material, are they _impressed_? Or do they just have a good time, enjoying the skills of the musicians? If some young'un saw them for the first time, and said "I'm not impressed," they'd get a whack on the head.
> 
> But our modern western society demands continual stimulation, always something new and impressive. "Impress me." If you're "not impressed," that's seen as a bad thing. Bah.
> 
> Anyway, I'm impressed about as much as the next person, I guess. Not sure what you mean.


I mean that the real deal skill is rare. How many times did you see someone who really impressed you with skill? Who were they? I am not claiming to be on that level, but I would count my Sifu and Sigung in that group. I know my post sounded aggressive but that’s not how I meant it. I was honestly asking.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Most times what I see is the young strong guys can’t soften up enough to understand what they are missing out on so they only want to train wushu gung fu. The older or softer crowd can’t or won’t do the hard fast excercise required so they only want to train Tai Chi Chuan. The people who train both find out that these things are like mirror images, you can do wushu forms slow and you can do Tai Chi Chuan fast. Being able to all things equally in all directions is the way.



Which is why there are 2 fast forms (one is the fajin form) in my flavor of Yang style that are considered advanced forms


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> Which is why there are 2 fast forms (one is the fajin form) in my flavor of Yang style that are considered advanced forms


How many postures in your long form?


----------



## Xue Sheng

Wing Woo Gar said:


> How many postures in your long form?



Don't really know, depends on how you count, my shifu and his shifu only called it the long form. But talking with my shifu, it is 108 or 88, depends on if you count the repeats


----------



## mograph

Wing Woo Gar said:


> To be fair, I’m not talking about the Chen master Per se. I was talking fa Jing.


I guess we need to define terms, specifically "fa jing." I understand that what Chen Xiaowang was doing is "fa jin." What do you mean by "fa jing?"


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> I guess we need to define terms, specifically "fa jing." I understand that what Chen Xiaowang was doing is "fa jin." What do you mean by "fa jing?"



I'm guessing it is Fajin

fājìn, (發勁), sometimes misspelled as fajing,


----------



## mograph

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I mean that the real deal skill is rare. How many times did you see someone who really impressed you with skill? Who were they? I am not claiming to be on that level, but I would count my Sifu and Sigung in that group. I know my post sounded aggressive but that’s not how I meant it. I was honestly asking.


Oh, yeah, that's why I wrote such a long-winded post -- a serious question deserves some effort put into the answer, I think!  Actually yours didn't sound aggressive, so sorry if I gave that impression. I could have asked for clarification in a better way.

I should open with the fact that I'm 61, like most of us here, not a spring chicken. Anyway ... here's another long-winded post. Sorry!

My opinion is that the more _impressed_ I am by something, the farther away I am from it. An actor friend of mine once said that another actor was a God, and I took him to task for it: "nobody is a God, and when you put them on that pedestal, you prevent yourself from acquiring their level of skill." My friend later became the artistic director of a regional theatre, which is good.

I also have been impressed by great trumpet players (I play), such as Rafael Mendez or Wynton Marsalis playing _Flight of The Bumblebee_ at a fast tempo. But in the last year (covid!) I've been learning to play the bloody instrument properly, and can now do things I've never done before, through hard work, attitude, and tips from experts, such as playing a solid, loud, "super C," an octave above a high C. Mendez and Marsalis are still top-flight players, but when I hear them, I think "they're doing _that_ ... but I do _this_ ... but if I change _this_, I can get closer to _that_." If I stay impressed, I limit my level of skill. I might never _achieve_ their level of skill (especially circular breathing), but if I stay impressed and _separate_ from them, I won't try, and I might not improve at all.

I've done a couple of things myself that impressed people, but I arrived there through work, attitude, and reflection. We've all done stuff that impressed people, but we don't consider _ourselves_ impressive, I hope. Once we do the new thing, it becomes the new normal. We get in shape, we don't think we're Superman, but we can go up stairs more quickly and stand longer, for example.

Don't get me wrong: I understand beginner's mind, but I don't think that being _impressed_ is necessary to having one. It might even be detrimental, because it reinforces a construct: "I cannot achieve that," whereas the truth is "maybe I can, maybe I can't. But I won't if I don't try."

So, while I have great respect for the masters, I'm only _impressed_ the first time I see them do something. After that, I think "Hmm ... what are they doing there ... how did they do that ...?" And if the feat is years (or decades) away for me, I determine whether I have the time, ability and desire to make their skill a goal. At least, I try to _understand_ what they are doing. I still _respect_ their great skill, but to me, being _impressed_ is time- and exposure-sensitive.

Somewhat relevant to the discussion, I wondered about ling kong jin (empty force), where the teacher waves his hands, and the students fall or bounce away, with no physical contact having been made. At first, I was impressed, but then dismayed by the negative comments about it as its being BS. Then I read a bit more about it, and came to believe that the truth is in-between. It's not meant to be an offensive or defensive technique, it's not meant to be used _against_ anyone, and most importantly, the _teacher_ is not showing off. Instead, he's showing how sensitive his _students_ are, to his visual cues. If they are this sensitive, they should be able to read a partner/opponent's _physical_ cues during push hands, and be sensitive to their own sensations.

When I heard about "energy balls" between the hands (e.g. during Zhan Zhuang), I was impressed when I felt that pull between my own hands. Wow! Energy! But then, with study, I've figured out what that really is: _proprioception_. We are fooling our body into _thinking_ there's a ball between our hands, and the finer the movements we make between the hands, the greater the imagined sensation of a ball's being there. But that ability is also a good thing to have, because it indicates _not_ this energy flowing between (in a electromagnetic-ish sense), but again, a heightened _sensitivity_, which can lead to other breakthroughs.

Who in this martial context has impressed me? Hmm. My Sifu (since 2006) has impressed me with his speed, skill in many forms, and tactile sensitivity ... but now I think of him warmly as more of a kindly uncle figure. I think he's from a world that doesn't display great feats unless they mean to teach them to you, so maybe I just haven't seen the wild stuff.

I agree with you that individuals exhibiting high levels of skill are rare these days, which is very unfortunate. I try not to think about it much, because they have a lot of wonderful gifts to share. I fear for the loss of their world, which to me is similar to the world of the Japanese carpenter, or Jiro the sushi chef. A world of care, respect, and precision. It reminds me of the world of my father and uncles, best exemplified by Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Burt Munro in The World's Fastest Indian. Sometimes I feel like Brooksie in _The Shawshank Redemption_. The world's just gotten too damn fast.

Thanks for reading. I hope that makes sense.

I see that a number of posts have appeared since I started this one (before Covid, it seems), so I'll check them out when I get a chance. Sorry if I missed your responses.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

One year I taught a Taiji class in the Austin Community College. During the 1st day of my Taiji class, I introduced the 8 basic stances

- horse stance (used in Taiji open position stance).
- bow-arrow stance (used in Taiji diagonal fly)
- golden rooster stance (used in Taiji golden rooster stand on one leg).
- empty stance (used in Taiji white crane flap wings).
- ...

Right after I just finished the bow-arrow stance, one guy stood up and said, "This is not Taiji". He then left, and I have never seen him after that day.

When you learn ballroom dance (I'm only in the bronze level), you start with Waltz step, cha cha step, Tango step, ... In Taiji, you start with basic stances. IMO, this is the most natural way to learn Taiji by starting with the stance posture.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Kung Fu Wang said:


> One year I taught a Taiji class in the Austin Community College. During the 1st day of my Taiji class, I introduced the 8 basic stances
> 
> - horse stance (used in Taiji open position stance).
> - bow-arrow stance (used in Taiji diagonal fly)
> - golden rooster stance (used in Taiji golden rooster stand on one leg).
> - empty stance (used in Taiji white crane flap wings).
> - ...
> 
> Right after I just finished the bow-arrow stance, one guy stood up and said, "This is not Taiji". He then left, and I have never seen him after that day.
> 
> When you learn ballroom dance (I'm only in the bronze level), you start with Waltz step, cha cha step, Tango step, ... In Taiji, you start with basic stances. IMO, this is the most natural way to learn Taiji by starting with the stance posture.



that's how my first shifu taught taijiquan and it is part of my second (main) shifu original curriculum. But you rarely, if ever, see it anymore. no one has the patients these days


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> Oh, yeah, that's why I wrote such a long-winded post -- a serious question deserves some effort put into the answer, I think!  Actually yours didn't sound aggressive, so sorry if I gave that impression. I could have asked for clarification in a better way.
> 
> I should open with the fact that I'm 61, like most of us here, not a spring chicken. Anyway ... here's another long-winded post. Sorry!
> 
> My opinion is that the more _impressed_ I am by something, the farther away I am from it. An actor friend of mine once said that another actor was a God, and I took him to task for it: "nobody is a God, and when you put them on that pedestal, you prevent yourself from acquiring their level of skill." My friend later became the artistic director of a regional theatre, which is good.
> 
> I also have been impressed by great trumpet players (I play), such as Rafael Mendez or Wynton Marsalis playing _Flight of The Bumblebee_ at a fast tempo. But in the last year (covid!) I've been learning to play the bloody instrument properly, and can now do things I've never done before, through hard work, attitude, and tips from experts, such as playing a solid, loud, "super C," an octave above a high C. Mendez and Marsalis are still top-flight players, but when I hear them, I think "they're doing _that_ ... but I do _this_ ... but if I change _this_, I can get closer to _that_." If I stay impressed, I limit my level of skill. I might never _achieve_ their level of skill (especially circular breathing), but if I stay impressed and _separate_ from them, I won't try, and I might not improve at all.
> 
> I've done a couple of things myself that impressed people, but I arrived there through work, attitude, and reflection. We've all done stuff that impressed people, but we don't consider _ourselves_ impressive, I hope. Once we do the new thing, it becomes the new normal. We get in shape, we don't think we're Superman, but we can go up stairs more quickly and stand longer, for example.
> 
> Don't get me wrong: I understand beginner's mind, but I don't think that being _impressed_ is necessary to having one. It might even be detrimental, because it reinforces a construct: "I cannot achieve that," whereas the truth is "maybe I can, maybe I can't. But I won't if I don't try."
> 
> So, while I have great respect for the masters, I'm only _impressed_ the first time I see them do something. After that, I think "Hmm ... what are they doing there ... how did they do that ...?" And if the feat is years (or decades) away for me, I determine whether I have the time, ability and desire to make their skill a goal. At least, I try to _understand_ what they are doing. I still _respect_ their great skill, but to me, being _impressed_ is time- and exposure-sensitive.
> 
> Somewhat relevant to the discussion, I wondered about ling kong jin (empty force), where the teacher waves his hands, and the students fall or bounce away, with no physical contact having been made. At first, I was impressed, but then dismayed by the negative comments about it as its being BS. Then I read a bit more about it, and came to believe that the truth is in-between. It's not meant to be an offensive or defensive technique, it's not meant to be used _against_ anyone, and most importantly, the _teacher_ is not showing off. Instead, he's showing how sensitive his _students_ are, to his visual cues. If they are this sensitive, they should be able to read a partner/opponent's _physical_ cues during push hands, and be sensitive to their own sensations.
> 
> When I heard about "energy balls" between the hands (e.g. during Zhan Zhuang), I was impressed when I felt that pull between my own hands. Wow! Energy! But then, with study, I've figured out what that really is: _proprioception_. We are fooling our body into _thinking_ there's a ball between our hands, and the finer the movements we make between the hands, the greater the imagined sensation of a ball's being there. But that ability is also a good thing to have, because it indicates _not_ this energy flowing between (in a electromagnetic-ish sense), but again, a heightened _sensitivity_, which can lead to other breakthroughs.
> 
> Who in this martial context has impressed me? Hmm. My Sifu (since 2006) has impressed me with his speed, skill in many forms, and tactile sensitivity ... but now I think of him warmly as more of a kindly uncle figure. I think he's from a world that doesn't display great feats unless they mean to teach them to you, so maybe I just haven't seen the wild stuff.
> 
> I agree with you that individuals exhibiting high levels of skill are rare these days, which is very unfortunate. I try not to think about it much, because they have a lot of wonderful gifts to share. I fear for the loss of their world, which to me is similar to the world of the Japanese carpenter, or Jiro the sushi chef. A world of care, respect, and precision. It reminds me of the world of my father and uncles, best exemplified by Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Burt Munro in The World's Fastest Indian. Sometimes I feel like Brooksie in _The Shawshank Redemption_. The world's just gotten too damn fast.
> 
> Thanks for reading. I hope that makes sense.
> 
> I see that a number of posts have appeared since I started this one (before Covid, it seems), so I'll check them out when I get a chance. Sorry if I missed your responses.



And yes, the world has gotten to damn fast, and appears to have gotten even faster since the pandemic


----------



## geezer

JowGaWolf said:


> The jump amazes me the most because everyone does the same jump.


I know...right?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> Don't really know, depends on how you count, my shifu and his shifu only called it the long form. But talking with my shifu, it is 108 or 88, depends on if you count the repeats


Just curious, how long does it take to do the form at a normal slow pace? We go anywhere from 35-50 minutes depending on the pace of whoever the leader is. We take turns leading.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Any Tai Chi Chuan you are doing is better than nothing.


Within reason.  Some things are just really bad, might lead to injury.  Sometimes better to just go for a walk and get gentle exercise that way instead.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> And yes, the world has gotten to damn fast, and appears to have gotten even faster since the pandemic


Yes, so true.


mograph said:


> I guess we need to define terms, specifically "fa jing." I understand that what Chen Xiaowang was doing is "fa jin." What do you mean by "fa jing?"


sorry I meant fa Jin. i don’t speak Cantonese, the g was unintentional. My spelling isn’t great but the damn auto correct isn’t helping.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Within reason.  Some things are just really bad, might lead to injury.  Sometimes better to just go for a walk and get gentle exercise that way instead.


Ok fair enough. I often simplify things by looking at them through my very narrow view point.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Ok fair enough. I often simplify things by looking at them through my very narrow view point.


And I might be too much of a stickler for language.  I sometimes interpret too much in the specific words used when I ought to just accept the spirit of the comment.  🙂


----------



## Xue Sheng

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Just curious, how long does it take to do the form at a normal slow pace? We go anywhere from 35-50 minutes depending on the pace of whoever the leader is. We take turns leading.



Average student time, in class, is about 20 minutes. But it does depend on pace. on my own I generally come in around 30 minutes .

My Shifu once went to a conference with his wife and he said it was one of the best vacations he had in years. HIs wife would be in the conference and he spent the time doing taijiquan...for 6 to 7 hours a day, for 3 days, while she was in the conference


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> that's how my first shifu taught taijiquan and it is part of my second (main) shifu original curriculum. But you rarely, if ever, see it anymore. no one has the patients these days


It took two years of almost daily and sometimes twice daily classes to learn the long form. Some people are 5 years in and still working on the 3rd section. Patience is one of the 4 virtues on the wall at my Sifu’s kwoon.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> Average student time, in class, is about 20 minutes. But it does depend on pace. on my own I generally come in 30 minutes .
> 
> My Shifu once went to a conference with his wife and he said it was one of the best vacations he had in years. HIs wife would be in the conference and he spent the time doing taijiquan...for 6 to 7 hours a day, for 3 days, while she was in the conference


Sometimes my Sifu would lead. I have done a 60 minute long form with him. My legs were shaking and threatening to burst into flame. And to think some people think that wushu is hard work!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> Oh, yeah, that's why I wrote such a long-winded post -- a serious question deserves some effort put into the answer, I think!  Actually yours didn't sound aggressive, so sorry if I gave that impression. I could have asked for clarification in a better way.
> 
> I should open with the fact that I'm 61, like most of us here, not a spring chicken. Anyway ... here's another long-winded post. Sorry!
> 
> My opinion is that the more _impressed_ I am by something, the farther away I am from it. An actor friend of mine once said that another actor was a God, and I took him to task for it: "nobody is a God, and when you put them on that pedestal, you prevent yourself from acquiring their level of skill." My friend later became the artistic director of a regional theatre, which is good.
> 
> I also have been impressed by great trumpet players (I play), such as Rafael Mendez or Wynton Marsalis playing _Flight of The Bumblebee_ at a fast tempo. But in the last year (covid!) I've been learning to play the bloody instrument properly, and can now do things I've never done before, through hard work, attitude, and tips from experts, such as playing a solid, loud, "super C," an octave above a high C. Mendez and Marsalis are still top-flight players, but when I hear them, I think "they're doing _that_ ... but I do _this_ ... but if I change _this_, I can get closer to _that_." If I stay impressed, I limit my level of skill. I might never _achieve_ their level of skill (especially circular breathing), but if I stay impressed and _separate_ from them, I won't try, and I might not improve at all.
> 
> I've done a couple of things myself that impressed people, but I arrived there through work, attitude, and reflection. We've all done stuff that impressed people, but we don't consider _ourselves_ impressive, I hope. Once we do the new thing, it becomes the new normal. We get in shape, we don't think we're Superman, but we can go up stairs more quickly and stand longer, for example.
> 
> Don't get me wrong: I understand beginner's mind, but I don't think that being _impressed_ is necessary to having one. It might even be detrimental, because it reinforces a construct: "I cannot achieve that," whereas the truth is "maybe I can, maybe I can't. But I won't if I don't try."
> 
> So, while I have great respect for the masters, I'm only _impressed_ the first time I see them do something. After that, I think "Hmm ... what are they doing there ... how did they do that ...?" And if the feat is years (or decades) away for me, I determine whether I have the time, ability and desire to make their skill a goal. At least, I try to _understand_ what they are doing. I still _respect_ their great skill, but to me, being _impressed_ is time- and exposure-sensitive.
> 
> Somewhat relevant to the discussion, I wondered about ling kong jin (empty force), where the teacher waves his hands, and the students fall or bounce away, with no physical contact having been made. At first, I was impressed, but then dismayed by the negative comments about it as its being BS. Then I read a bit more about it, and came to believe that the truth is in-between. It's not meant to be an offensive or defensive technique, it's not meant to be used _against_ anyone, and most importantly, the _teacher_ is not showing off. Instead, he's showing how sensitive his _students_ are, to his visual cues. If they are this sensitive, they should be able to read a partner/opponent's _physical_ cues during push hands, and be sensitive to their own sensations.
> 
> When I heard about "energy balls" between the hands (e.g. during Zhan Zhuang), I was impressed when I felt that pull between my own hands. Wow! Energy! But then, with study, I've figured out what that really is: _proprioception_. We are fooling our body into _thinking_ there's a ball between our hands, and the finer the movements we make between the hands, the greater the imagined sensation of a ball's being there. But that ability is also a good thing to have, because it indicates _not_ this energy flowing between (in a electromagnetic-ish sense), but again, a heightened _sensitivity_, which can lead to other breakthroughs.
> 
> Who in this martial context has impressed me? Hmm. My Sifu (since 2006) has impressed me with his speed, skill in many forms, and tactile sensitivity ... but now I think of him warmly as more of a kindly uncle figure. I think he's from a world that doesn't display great feats unless they mean to teach them to you, so maybe I just haven't seen the wild stuff.
> 
> I agree with you that individuals exhibiting high levels of skill are rare these days, which is very unfortunate. I try not to think about it much, because they have a lot of wonderful gifts to share. I fear for the loss of their world, which to me is similar to the world of the Japanese carpenter, or Jiro the sushi chef. A world of care, respect, and precision. It reminds me of the world of my father and uncles, best exemplified by Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Burt Munro in The World's Fastest Indian. Sometimes I feel like Brooksie in _The Shawshank Redemption_. The world's just gotten too damn fast.
> 
> Thanks for reading. I hope that makes sense.
> 
> I see that a number of posts have appeared since I started this one (before Covid, it seems), so I'll check them out when I get a chance. Sorry if I missed your responses.


This is so well written and expressed! Thank you!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> I'm guessing it is Fajin
> 
> fājìn, (發勁), sometimes misspelled as fajing,


I’m a famous missspeller.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Sometimes my Sifu would lead. I have done a 60 minute long form with him. My legs were shaking and threatening to burst into flame. And to think some people think that wushu is hard work!


I should say that our long form Is quite a bit longer than what I usually see.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Wing Woo Gar said:


> It took two years of almost daily and sometimes twice daily classes to learn the long form. Some people are 5 years in and still working on the 3rd section. Patience is one of the 4 virtues on the wall at my Sifu’s kwoon.



My Yang Shifu taught us fairly fast, but he likes to get the form taught then he went on correcting everyone for awhile


Wing Woo Gar said:


> Sometimes my Sifu would lead. I have done a 60 minute long form with him. My legs were shaking and threatening to burst into flame. And to think some people think that wushu is hard work!


Part of that correction he gave was him saying stop, and having to hold the form until he got to you, and he did nt care what posture he stopped you in and made you hold. standing on one leg or two we all jsut waited. And what got me, as time went on, he'd stop everybody, correct everybody, then get to me last and correct nothing. So I stood there waiting while he corrected, but he did not feel I needed corrected, only wanted to make me stand I guess


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> My Yang Shifu taught us fairly fast, but he likes to get the form taught then he went on correcting everyone for awhile
> 
> Part of that correction he gave was him saying stop, and having to hold the form until he got to you, and he did nt care what posture he stopped you in and made you hold. standing on one leg or two we all jsut waited. And what got me, as time went on, he'd stop everybody, correct everybody, then get to me last and correct nothing. So I stood there waiting while he corrected, but he did not feel I needed corrected, only wanted to make me stand I guess


And that made you even better.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Just curious, how long does it take to do the form at a normal slow pace? We go anywhere from 35-50 minutes depending on the pace of whoever the leader is. We take turns leading.


My 108 moves Taiji form only take 4 minute and 42 seconds.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> My Yang Shifu taught us fairly fast, but he likes to get the form taught then he went on correcting everyone for awhile
> 
> Part of that correction he gave was him saying stop, and having to hold the form until he got to you, and he did nt care what posture he stopped you in and made you hold. standing on one leg or two we all jsut waited. And what got me, as time went on, he'd stop everybody, correct everybody, then get to me last and correct nothing. So I stood there waiting while he corrected, but he did not feel I needed corrected, only wanted to make me stand I guess


That’s an awesome story. That’s the stuff that kept me coming back. I’m a glutton for that brand of punishment.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My 108 moves Taiji form only take 4 minute and 42 seconds.


Is that you? Nice transitions. That’s quite fast. Nothing wrong with fast, I have had to do it as fast or as slow as I was able. Slow is harder in my opinion. My Sifu made us sit down deep on the legs for a long time.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> My Yang Shifu taught us fairly fast, but he likes to get the form taught then he went on correcting everyone for awhile
> 
> Part of that correction he gave was him saying stop, and having to hold the form until he got to you, and he did nt care what posture he stopped you in and made you hold. standing on one leg or two we all jsut waited. And what got me, as time went on, he'd stop everybody, correct everybody, then get to me last and correct nothing. So I stood there waiting while he corrected, but he did not feel I needed corrected, only wanted to make me stand I guess


Once in Sifu Woo’s gym in Hollywood we were practicing Tai chi While Sifu walked between us and gave corrections. He was hilariously brutal in his corrections. As he passed a lady that was in snake creeps down he said “ you know Mr. Kegel? We just lost him”. Then he looked at another long term student and said “it’s a good thing I didn’t eat any lunch today”. I loved him for that stuff. We would all just be silent but then laugh like hyenas after class about the things he would say. Another time in his Gung fu class he told us to ” feel your bunghole on top of your head when you move the horse stance” we tried to comply but after moving with us up and down the floor he stopped us and said “ now you tell me which one of you felt your bunghole on top of your head? That’s right, none of you!” We still laugh about those old days when we had not a clue what he really meant. Its a wonder that he tolerated us and our buffoonery, he must have been slightly entertained to have Moe, Larry, and Curley in his gym.


----------



## mograph

Wing Woo Gar said:


> This is so well written and expressed! Thank you!


Thanks!


----------



## Xue Sheng

Wing Woo Gar said:


> That’s an awesome story. That’s the stuff that kept me coming back. I’m a glutton for that brand of punishment.



I was a Xingyiquan guy, that is mostly punishment


----------



## Xue Sheng

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Once in Sifu Woo’s gym in Hollywood we were practicing Tai chi While Sifu walked between us and gave corrections. He was hilariously brutal in his corrections. As he passed a lady that was in snake creeps down he said “ you know Mr. Kegel? We just lost him”. Then he looked at another long term student and said “it’s a good thing I didn’t eat any lunch today”. I loved him for that stuff. We would all just be silent but then laugh like hyenas after class about the things he would say. Another time in his Gung fu class he told us to ” feel your bunghole on top of your head when you move the horse stance” we tried to comply but after moving with us up and down the floor he stopped us and said “ now you tell me which one of you felt your bunghole on top of your head? That’s right, none of you!” We still laugh about those old days when we had not a clue what he really meant. Its a wonder that he tolerated us and our buffoonery, he must have been slightly entertained to have Moe, Larry, and Curley in his gym.



My Shifu's teacher, My shigong was not big on talking, its a Northern Chinese thing. My shifu who is from Shanghai, but grew up in Hong Kong is pretty much the same... it was over 10 years of me training with him when he finally told me I was doing good...in passing, as he was walking by


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> My Shifu's teacher, My shigong was not big on talking, its a Northern Chinese thing. My shifu who is from Shanghai, but grew up in Hong Kong is pretty much the same... it was over 10 years of me training with him when he finally told me I was doing good...in passing, as he was walking by


Yeah, those are the times you wish you had an audio recorder going.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Xue Sheng said:


> I was a Xingyiquan guy, that is mostly punishment


I have almost no experience with that. I do know what it is and what it feels like to get my baby shook. Lol. I asked about it once. Only once.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Yeah, those are the times you wish you had an audio recorder going.


Sifu Woo let Jess o Brien record the three hour interview for the Nei 
Jia Quan book. It’s priceless. I have the transcript Of the unedited original.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Is that you? Nice transitions. That’s quite fast. Nothing wrong with fast, I have had to do it as fast or as slow as I was able. Slow is harder in my opinion. My Sifu made us sit down deep on the legs for a long time.


That's my teacher. He won't teach his students Taiji until they are over 30 years old. He thinks young people should, jump, flip, run, ...

This is my 108 moves Taiji form. It takes 5 minutes and 52 seconds.


----------



## mograph

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Sifu Woo let Jess o Brien record the three hour interview for the Nei
> Jia Quan book. It’s priceless. I have the transcript Of the unedited original.


Good book!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> Good book!


Both my Sifu Paul Gale and Sigung James Wing Woo are in it. I had Jess at my house last night With some friends.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

mograph said:


> Good book!


I will tell him you said so.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Sifu Woo let Jess o Brien record the three hour interview for the Nei
> Jia Quan book. It’s priceless. I have the transcript Of the unedited original.


Is Bryant Fong in that book?


----------



## Oily Dragon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It's pretty strange that this kind of clips only exist in the Taiji system.
> 
> Why?



Because it's the Supreme Ultimate Separation.  If you really think about it, Tai Chi is very busy successfully cutting through time, unlike most of us.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Is Bryant Fong in that book?


I’m not sure. I can look tonite. Been a while since I read it. It’s internal martial artists. Is he Tai Chi Chuan or XingyiQuan or Bagua ?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Is Bryant Fong in that book?


Actually, I can just text Jess. It’s a good read. Lots of skilled guys giving their two cents.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Is Bryant Fong in that book?


Yes, he translated the interview with the Bagua teacher Zhao Da Yuan.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I’m not sure. I can look tonite. Been a while since I read it. It’s internal martial artists. Is he Tai Chi Chuan or XingyiQuan or Bagua ?


Taiji and bagua.  I don’t have the book anymore, but memory tells me he was in it.  He was my taiji Sifu and my first Tibetan white crane sifu.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Taiji and bagua.  I don’t have the book anymore, but memory tells me he was in it.  He was my taiji Sifu and my first Tibetan white crane sifu.


Jess just told me that he was a very nice chap. Jess knows so many martial artists it’s hard to keep track.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Jess just told me that he was a very nice chap. Jess knows so many martial artists it’s hard to keep track.


I’m going to reread that one tonite.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Jess just told me that he was a very nice chap. Jess knows so many martial artists it’s hard to keep track.


He is.  We are still very much in contact and I consider him a good friend.  He has always been very supportive of my own teaching, as well as my sword making and other weaponry.  

After training with him for over a decade, he took me to meet his Tibetan crane Sifu, Quentin Fong, and Sifu Quentin accepted me as his student.  So I guess Bryant is my Sihing now.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> He is.  We are still very much in contact and I consider him a good friend.  He has always been very supportive of my own teaching, as well as my sword making and other weaponry.
> 
> After training with him for over a decade, he took me to meet his Tibetan crane Sifu, Quentin Fong, and Sifu Quentin accepted me as his student.  So I guess Bryant is my Sihing now.


You make swords? Fascinating! I know almost nothing about swordplay, though I am quite familiar with weapons in general. What sort of weapons do you make?


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> You make swords? Fascinating! I know almost nothing about swordplay, though I am quite familiar with weapons in general. What sort of weapons do you make?


I don’t actually make the blades, only hilts and scabbards.  I’ve done jian, long swords, and dao.  It started with my frustration at the consistently poor quality of swords coming in from China, for the TCMA community.  Hilts and scabbards poorly fitted and made from junk.  I finally decided to just rebuild myself, if I can acquire blades of acceptable quality.  I’ve done a bunch over the years, grips and scabbards are made from hardwood (curly maple is my favorite) and for a long time all the metalwork (guard, pommel, scabbard fittings) was cast bronze.  Lately I’ve been shifting the guards and pommels to steel, cutting and shaping them from bar stock and rod stock.  Some samples below.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> I don’t actually make the blades, only hilts and scabbards.  I’ve done jian, long swords, and dao.  It started with my frustration at the consistently poor quality of swords coming in from China, for the TCMA community.  Hilts and scabbards poorly fitted and made from junk.  I finally decided to just rebuild myself, if I can acquire blades of acceptable quality.  I’ve done a bunch over the years, grips and scabbards are made from hardwood (curly maple is my favorite) and for a long time all the metalwork (guard, pommel, scabbard fittings) was cast bronze.  Lately I’ve been shifting the guards and pommels to steel, cutting and shaping them from bar stock and rod stock.  Some samples below.


Beautiful! Live edge or for practice? Again I don’t know much about swordplay but I am interested.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> He is.  We are still very much in contact and I consider him a good friend.  He has always been very supportive of my own teaching, as well as my sword making and other weaponry.
> 
> After training with him for over a decade, he took me to meet his Tibetan crane Sifu, Quentin Fong, and Sifu Quentin accepted me as his student.  So I guess Bryant is my Sihing now.


Is Quentin his uncle?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

T


Wing Woo Gar said:


> Is Quentin his uncle?


there is some connection to Wong Jack Man there I think.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Beautiful! Live edge or for practice? Again I don’t know much about swordplay but I am interested.


Some of both.  I have a couple that are quite sharp, but even those that are not sharp, I generally put an edge on them so they can be sharpened.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Is Quentin his uncle?


Not in the Western blood relation concept, but in the wider, Chinese notion.  Bryant was born in the US, but his parents are immigrants.  Quentin immigrated from the same area.  That apparently is close enough, and Bryant says that Quentin always treated him like family.

Bryant always referred to him as his uncle. It took me a while before I understood the relationship.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> T
> 
> there is some connection to Wong Jack Man there I think.


Bryant trained for about a decade under Sifu Wong, Jack Man as well.  He says Sifu Wong was an exceptional martial artist.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Bryant trained for about a decade under Sifu Wong, Jack Man as well.  He says Sifu Wong was an exceptional martial artist.


That’s what I heard too.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> That’s what I heard too.


I believe Sifu Wong is deceased now.  But some years back one of Bryant’s other students branched out to study with him for a while.  He then Moved out of the area and I only had limited opportunity to talk with him about the experience.


----------



## bill miller

We have an excellent facility in Memphis that caters to all types of metal work, including blades. The blacksmith shop is first class, and the workers are very good at what they do.I'm not sure if any of these folks have done an Asian style blade, but I'd be willing to bet that they would be very good at it.


----------



## Flying Crane

bill miller said:


> We have an excellent facility in Memphis that caters to all types of metal work, including blades. The blacksmith shop is first class, and the workers are very good at what they do.I'm not sure if any of these folks have done an Asian style blade, but I'd be willing to bet that they would be very good at it.


In my opinion, there is not a lot of difference in the blade shape of a Chinese jian and a European single-hand straight sword (arming sword?).  Jian tend to be on the narrow side of things, but I’ve seen (and have) European blades with similar profiles.  The oxtail dao is kinda unique to China, and Ive heard it is a later development that came after most of this stuff was no longer being used on the battlefield.  Perhaps they are a bit removed from battle reality and represent a fantasy ideal of a dao.  I find the oxtail dao to be somewhat awkward because of the mass toward the end of the blade.  The narrower willow leaf dao is more lively and might be comparable on some level to a European saber.  I think it is a more realistic design as a battlefield weapon. 

The hilt is where you often find differences.  The Chinese jian tends to have a more compact, blocky guard, less of a cross shape like you often find in a European sword.  When I was doing the guards in cast bronze, I was trying to create something of a blockier guard in that respect, although I was not concerning myself with being true to any specific historical designs.  I just wanted it to be durable and functional.  As I have started using steel, I am leaning into a more European cross style, and am finding that I kind of prefer that.  Either way, I think they are fine for practice of Chinese methods.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Flying Crane said:


> In my opinion, there is not a lot of difference in the blade shape of a Chinese jian and a European single-hand straight sword (arming sword?). Jian tend to be on the narrow side of things, but I’ve seen (and have) European blades with similar profiles.


Functionally, I think a jian is pretty much a rapier, but without the complex hilt.


----------



## Flying Crane

Tony Dismukes said:


> Functionally, I think a jian is pretty much a rapier, but without the complex hilt.


I wouldn’t classify it that way.  There can be a fair bit of variety in the width of the blade, with a sharp edge.  Rapier is mostly thrusting, quite narrow and without an edge, yes?  Jian technique includes a lot of sweeping cuts, depending on the system.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Flying Crane said:


> I wouldn’t classify it that way.  There can be a fair bit of variety in the width of the blade, with a sharp edge.  Rapier is mostly thrusting, quite narrow and without an edge, yes?  Jian technique includes a lot of sweeping cuts, depending on the system.


Rapiers have an edge and can cut. How well they cut varies quite a bit, depending on the vintage. Earlier rapiers were more balanced between cutting and thrusting. Later rapiers became more and more specialized for thrusting. (This is a generalization, but it holds up pretty well.)

The system I train (Meyer) includes a fair balance of cut and thrust for the rapier (or “rappier” as Meyer spells it), but systems from a century later are primarily focused on thrusts and the swords of the time evolved to meet that focus,


----------



## Tony Dismukes




----------



## Flying Crane

Tony Dismukes said:


> Rapiers have an edge and can cut. How well they cut varies quite a bit, depending on the vintage. Earlier rapiers were more balanced between cutting and thrusting. Later rapiers became more and more specialized for thrusting. (This is a generalization, but it holds up pretty well.)
> 
> The system I train (Meyer) includes a fair balance of cut and thrust for the rapier (or “rappier” as Meyer spells it), but systems from a century later are primarily focused on thrusts and the swords of the time evolved to meet that focus,


Interesting stuff.  I guess I don’t have the familiarity with the European methods to really comment in a coherent manner.


----------



## Flying Crane

Tony Dismukes said:


>


Nice video.  I would say that for the most part the jian i have held have had wider blades than that.  Actually, as I think on it, I have a couple Chinese imports that have quite heavy and wide blades, I think little different from a European long sword.  That photo i posted a few clicks back of the longsword hilt, is the one.  This was made in the 1970s and I believe the blades were being heavily overbuilt at that time.  I think the makers didn’t understand the historical blade geometry as well as they do now, but even today you still see some bridge supports disguised as swords coming in from China.  It’s funny, they seem to either be over heavy or super- light modern wushu stage props.  At any rate, that heavy sword was built as a single-hand jian.  I was able to recapture more tang for the grip and it’s got a seven inch handle now.  Weird, how they constructed some of these things.  

So I guess sometimes I see jian that are on the narrower side, and other times I see wider blades that would compare with an arming sword or a long sword.


----------



## bill miller

Flying Crane said:


> Nice video.  I would say that for the most part the jian i have held have had wider blades than that.  Actually, as I think on it, I have a couple Chinese imports that have quite heavy and wide blades, I think little different from a European long sword.  That photo i posted a few clicks back of the longsword hilt, is the one.  This was made in the 1970s and I believe the blades were being heavily overbuilt at that time.  I think the makers didn’t understand the historical blade geometry as well as they do now, but even today you still see some bridge supports disguised as swords coming in from China.  It’s funny, they seem to either be over heavy or super- light modern wushu stage props.  At any rate, that heavy sword was built as a single-hand jian.  I was able to recapture more tang for the grip and it’s got a seven inch handle now.  Weird, how they constructed some of these things.
> 
> So I guess sometimes I see jian that are on the narrower side, and other times I see wider blades that would compare with an arming sword or a long sword.


What would the epee be used for?


----------



## Flying Crane

bill miller said:


> What would the epee be used for?


That is modern sport fencing, heavily removed from old combat swordplay.  It is thrust only, to my understanding.  I only did a bit of foil fencing, a long time ago.  Epee is kinda the big brother of foil, with some differences in the rule set.  Olympic stuff.


----------



## Xue Sheng

thing to know about the jian as compared to a rapier. The rapier is a specific sword. the Jian is a family of swords. The Chinese put things into categories that the europeans did not. We tend to see only one Chinese sword, called a jian...






but there are several different versions that fall under that name
these are also fall under the category of Jian


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Xue Sheng said:


> The rapier is a specific sword. the Jian is a family of swords.


The rapier is a family of swords as well, although the variety of the rapier family doesn't exactly map to the variety of the jian family.

This is the sort of jian I was thinking of when I compared it to a rapier:





Jian like the ones in the 3rd and 4th images in your post would be closer to what we might call an arming sword in HEMA circles.


----------



## Oily Dragon

OK, Sword nerd time.

劍 means "a unified knife", and "jian" is close to Trans-Himalayan for "sharp".  The unifying factor all of jian type weapons in China is the poke.  These swords, while double edged, are not meant for slashing, but for thrusting.   Much like the rapier, unless I'm wrong.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Oily Dragon said:


> OK, Sword nerd time.
> 
> 劍 means "a unified knife", and "jian" is close to Trans-Himalayan for "sharp".  The unifying factor all of jian type weapons in China is the poke.  These swords, while double edged, are not meant for slashing, but for thrusting.   Much like the rapier, unless I'm wrong.



The Dāo *刀* (knife) is for slashing, not the jian. Which is why they said the jain was for scholars and the dao is for a butcher. And for the rest, the dao is also a family of swords to the Chinese

The Dāo *刀, *one of them at least, and the one most are familiar with


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> The Dāo *刀* (knife) is for slashing, not the jian. Which is why they said the jain was for scholars and the dao is for a butcher. And for the rest, the dao is also a family of swords to the Chinese
> 
> The Dāo *刀, *one of them at least, and the one most are familiar with


And a lot of jian material has large cuts as well.  The way I see it, the use of jian runs the range as it did in Europe.  Methods probably developed and changed, as aspects of society changed and the needs changed.  So depending on the era, likely technical use would have been different.  In my opinion, jian is a cut-and- thrust sword.  Some variants may emphasize cut more, others thrust more.  That we be evident in their physical design and in the methods practiced.  But impossible to say “jian is THIS and not THAT”.


----------



## bill miller

I sure hope my senior citizens don't show up with bladed weapons! It could get ugly pretty quick


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

bill miller said:


> I sure hope my senior citizens don't show up with bladed weapons! It could get ugly pretty quick


That’s funny!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> And a lot of jian material has large cuts as well.  The way I see it, the use of jian runs the range as it did in Europe.  Methods probably developed and changed, as aspects of society changed and the needs changed.  So depending on the era, likely technical use would have been different.  In my opinion, jian is a cut-and- thrust sword.  Some variants may emphasize cut more, others thrust more.  That we be evident in their physical design and in the methods practiced.  But impossible to say “jian is THIS and not THAT”.


I never trained with weapons in CMA but I am intrigued By this discussion. I am bursting With what are probably silly questions. I will stay quiet and see if some other mole pops his head up to ask them.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

bill miller said:


> I sure hope my senior citizens don't show up with bladed weapons! It could get ugly pretty quick


Start with handing out foam noodles.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I never trained with weapons in CMA but I am intrigued By this discussion. I am bursting With what are probably silly questions. I will stay quiet and see if some other mole pops his head up to ask them.


Nah.  Ask.  It builds the discussion.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Start with handing out foam noodles.





Flying Crane said:


> Nah.  Ask.  It builds the discussion.


Ok here goes. is this discussion of cut vs. thrust from Jian vs. Dao allegorical to European sword evolution or styles? Say side sword vs small sword vs rapier for example. One led to another over a period of time in Europe is my limited understanding, but what caused the change? Dueling? battlefield combat? Styles of dress? I guess what I’m asking is, were there similar reasons for people to change the type of sword they carried? In looking at the various types of swords used on the battlefield, it seems to me that the saber was the last type commonly used. How come? Cut vs. thrust? I’m rambling here because I clearly don’t know what I’m talking about. Apologies.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Nah.  Ask.  It builds the discussion.


Oh and are the way these weapons are used similar?


----------



## bill miller

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Oh and are the way these weapons are used similar?


I would think that a slashing weapon would be easier to use for someone with a limited amount of training, and would probably do more damage. To me, with a thrusting weapon, you would need to be much more accurate on the strike to hit something vital.


----------



## dvcochran

bill miller said:


> I would think that a slashing weapon would be easier to use for someone with a limited amount of training, and would probably do more damage. To me, with a thrusting weapon, you would need to be much more accurate on the strike to hit something vital.


Agree. Part of what I was taught in Kali was to slash, slash, slash. Then if necessary deal a finishing blow/stab.


----------



## Dirty Dog

bill miller said:


> I would think that a slashing weapon would be easier to use for someone with a limited amount of training, and would probably do more damage. To me, with a thrusting weapon, you would need to be much more accurate on the strike to hit something vital.


Slashing attacks are messy, but they just are not as dangerous as a thrust. Proof? Ask yourself when dueling was banned. The answer: when thrusting weapons came into wide use. Because people died instead of going home to heal.
Get sliced up today. Odds are good we will be stitching you up and sending you on your way. Get one stab wound to the torso and the odds are good you'll be seeing the OR.
A persons vital bits are just not that easy to hit with a slash.


----------



## Flying Crane

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Ok here goes. is this discussion of cut vs. thrust from Jian vs. Dao allegorical to European sword evolution or styles? Say side sword vs small sword vs rapier for example. One led to another over a period of time in Europe is my limited understanding, but what caused the change? Dueling? battlefield combat? Styles of dress? I guess what I’m asking is, were there similar reasons for people to change the type of sword they carried? In looking at the various types of swords used on the battlefield, it seems to me that the saber was the last type commonly used. How come? Cut vs. thrust? I’m rambling here because I clearly don’t know what I’m talking about. Apologies.


Good questions, and honestly I do not have a well researched answer for you.  However, I believe it is safe to say that weapons and armor have evolved hand-in-hand, the one to counter the other.  I believe this is well documented in Europe, and I have to believe something similar happened in Asia.  Weapons were developed, and armor was then developed to protect against those weapons. And the weapons were altered to defeat that armor, and the armor was altered in turn.  I suspect this was an on-going process and happened repeatedly over history.  Generally, as armor became more effective, cuts became less effective and thrusts more likely to be effective at least in comparison to cuts.  So swords gradually evolved to focus more on thrusting meaning they had a narrower profile and a thicker, more robust point.  Somewhere along the way swords took on a shape that attempted to effectively be both a cut-and-thrust weapon.  These had reasonably wide blades (a wider blade is better for cutting) with a more sharply tapered point.  Eventually they became overall more pointed as tough plate armor (in Europe) became more common.  

I believe that in China, there was a difference between a weapon that would be carried on the battlefield, vs. one carried by a civilian for self defense.  The battlefield weapon would be more robust to withstand the rigor of the battlefield and to be effective against armor, while the civilian weapon would be less likely to need to be so robust given that civilians would be unlikely to be wearing armor, and a civilian self defense encounter would probably be brief and would not need to engage repeatedly against many enemies, some of them using heavy military pole-arms and such.  I suspect technique and training methods would also reflect these differences in the weapons, there likely being different methodologies employed by the military vs. those employed by civilians. 

In the modern age in the practice of traditional Chinese martial arts, it is unclear to me how well the weapon designs match history, and how well the technique and practice methods match the weapons with which they were historically developed.  It is further unclear to me if it matters at all, on any functional level, so long as the practitioner is using a weapon that fits them well (enough).

But at any rate, I suspect that at least on some level the modern makers in China (at least those making them in quantity) are using designs that are easy to reproduce, with some amount of suspected historical accuracy, but may be driven more by profit and sales as long as the design meets at least a superficial historical satisfaction, but without heavy interest in strict historical accuracy.  I myself am less interested in my weapons satisfying any historical accuracy, and more that they are simply robust and solidly constructed and functional.  

I believe that for a time these weapons were being over-built, resulting in heavy, cumbersome weapons.  I think the makers at the time (like the 1960s-1990s) did not understand how tough a properly made, lighter and thinner blade could be.  As their understanding improved, the more recently made weapons reflect that understanding.  They tend to be lighter and much more maneuverable, at least those made in the European designs.  But the opposite end of that of course is the super-light junk made for Modern Wushu.  This stuff is utter garbage and is nothing more than a stage-prop in the shape of a sword.  I think there is still a lot of over-heavy stuff coming out of China, but some makers are getting better at making quality, well weighted and well balanced swords. 

Regarding sabers, a curved blade is better for cutting,  it is often less effective at the thrust.  However, it can still thrust effectively if the tip lines up in a straight line with the grip.  I believe sabers came into high use in the cavalry because on a galloping horse a cut was preferred, taking advantage of the momentum.  A thrust into an enemy could result in a lost sword as it would be difficult to withdraw the weapon when galloping at speed.


----------



## Flying Crane

bill miller said:


> I would think that a slashing weapon would be easier to use for someone with a limited amount of training, and would probably do more damage. To me, with a thrusting weapon, you would need to be much more accurate on the strike to hit something vital.


In Chinese martial arts, the dao is always considered easier to learn, with the jian more difficult.  In my opinion, this is true but is often overstated.  I feel the jian can be learned with good instruction and dedicated practice, just like anything else.  It is not out of reach within a reasonable amount of time.


----------



## Flying Crane

The first photo is two jian made in Lung Chuan, a Chinese village famous for sword making.  I rebuilt the hilts, replacing the absolute junk that was put on in China, and putting on a European influenced cross type hilt because I find that I simply prefer it.  They have a double edge for the full length of the blades.  These were made in probably the 1970s, and are quite heavy, reflecting what I believe was consistent in how they were made during that time (see my post above).  I tend to view them as heavy practice pieces, good for the workout, but too heavy to be quite appropriate on the battlefield.  I would use them if I had no other options in the zombie apocalypse. 

The second photo is of four swords made by Angus Trim in a European style, but I built the hilts.  Two are done in steel cross-guard and two are done in cast bronze, with my own creativity in the design.  Two are long swords and two I would classify as arming swords.  These are more properly weighted and would be my go-to items during the zombie apocalypse. 

If you compare the photos, you will see that the profile of these blades is very similar.  I would not classify the jian as anything similar to a rapier, in my limited understanding of what a rapier is.  The long jian is essentially identical to a long sword, and the short jian is essentially identical to a bastard sword, meaning a blade sized as an arming sword but with an extra long hilt to be used two-handed if desired.


----------



## Flying Crane

Tony Dismukes said:


> The rapier is a family of swords as well, although the variety of the rapier family doesn't exactly map to the variety of the jian family.
> 
> This is the sort of jian I was thinking of when I compared it to a rapier:


I agree, this particular jian shares a similar size and shape with a rapier.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> thing to know about the jian as compared to a rapier. The rapier is a specific sword. the Jian is a family of swords. The Chinese put things into categories that the europeans did not. We tend to see only one Chinese sword, called a jian...
> 
> but there are several different versions that fall under that name
> these are also fall under the category of Jian


These appear to be fully bronze cast, which would make them very very old, from the Bronze Age, with the exception of the one on the far left of the second photo, that appears to be a rusting steel blade, possibly also very old.  Bronze is very different from steel.  It is a tough, durable metal and by the end of the Bronze Age, it was being alloyed to a point that was very nearly equivalent to the performance of iron.  However it never performed as a sword, in a way to rival a quality steel sword.  

Bronze is denser than steel, so a bronze sword will automatically be heavier than an identical steel sword.  In order to be durable as a sword, it was made more robust than a later steel sword needed to be.  This put limitations on the size of bronze swords, they tended to be shorter than later steel swords could be.  As steel came into use, it was found to be much stronger and tougher than bronze, and could be deliberately made much thinner and longer, while retaining superior strength and durability than the bronze precursors.  It is my feeling that bronze swords were a different animal from steel swords, and ought to be considered something else.  They would perform and handle very differently.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> And a lot of jian material has large cuts as well.  The way I see it, the use of jian runs the range as it did in Europe.  Methods probably developed and changed, as aspects of society changed and the needs changed.  So depending on the era, likely technical use would have been different.  In my opinion, jian is a cut-and- thrust sword.  Some variants may emphasize cut more, others thrust more.  That we be evident in their physical design and in the methods practiced.  But impossible to say “jian is THIS and not THAT”.



If you go back to the older, wider blade jian, most certainly. the newer thinner blade, based on forms I do, not so much slashing. The newer thinner blade that we have today, as far as I know, was never used in warfare. However the longer two handed jian not so sure of its exact usage


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> These appear to be fully bronze cast, which would make them very very old, from the Bronze Age, with the exception of the one on the far left of the second photo, that appears to be a rusting steel blade, possibly also very old.  Bronze is very different from steel.  It is a tough, durable metal and by the end of the Bronze Age, it was being alloyed to a point that was very nearly equivalent to the performance of iron.  However it never performed as a sword, in a way to rival a quality steel sword.
> 
> Bronze is denser than steel, so a bronze sword will automatically be heavier than an identical steel sword.  In order to be durable as a sword, it was made more robust than a later steel sword needed to be.  This put limitations on the size of bronze swords, they tended to be shorter than later steel swords could be.  As steel came into use, it was found to be much stronger and tougher than bronze, and could be deliberately made much thinner and longer, while retaining superior strength and durability than the bronze precursors.  It is my feeling that bronze swords were a different animal from steel swords, and ought to be considered something else.  They would perform and handle very differently.



Bronze or steel, they still categorize that type of sword a jian


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> If you go back to the older, wider blade jian, most certainly. the newer thinner blade, based on forms I do, not so much slashing. The newer thinner blade that we have today, as far as I know, was never used in warfare. However the longer two handed jian not so sure of its exact usage


The Yang taiji and Chen taiji sword work in particular that I have done, has a lot of wide, sweeping cuts.

I will also add that as much as I have no interest in Modern Wushu, it was based on older fighting methods.  Jian forms in Modern Wushu have a lot of sweeping cuts, so I believe it is reasonable to believe that the historical base material did as well.  I have not trained that material, so cannot speak from direct experience.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Bronze or steel, they still categorize that type of sword a jian


Sure, no argument.  But I think historically they were probably handled quite differently than in later eras.  This is old enough that I am very doubtful that any trustworthy records exist for how they were actually handled and trained.  But the different performance of the material, likely cause it a very different approach to handling, I think just really puts it in a category of its own.  Still a jian, sure.  But a very different kind.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> The Yang taiji and Chen taiji sword work in particular that I have done, has a lot of wide, sweeping cuts.
> 
> I will also add that as much as I have no interest in Modern Wushu, it was based on older fighting methods.  Jian forms in Modern Wushu have a lot of sweeping cuts, so I believe it is reasonable to believe that the historical base material did as well.  I have not trained that material, so cannot speak from direct experience.



I've did a Chen jian form years ago, but actually do not remember much of it. But I do remember the Yang Jian form and it is not Modern Wushu, it is traditional. Wide sweeping cuts, are not, at least to me, slashing. There are blocks, cuts to the neck and a whole lot of jabs. The Dao is much more aggressive. Ergo the saying the jian is for the scholar the dao is for the butcher..... and since i prefer the Dao, I guess I'm a butcher. But the jian of old, compared to the jian we see today, is not exactly the same sword either.

Did the Qin slash with their Bronze Jian, in a major battle...probably. Did the Han slash with their jian...very likely. But those are heavier Dao then what we tend to use today or the last 100 years for that matter. The Chinese military in WW 2 carried a sword, carried a few actually but it was mainly the Dadao


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> Sure, no argument.  But I think historically they were probably handled quite differently than in later eras.  This is old enough that I am very doubtful that any trustworthy records exist for how they were actually handled and trained.  But the different performance of the material, likely cause it a very different approach to handling, I think just really puts it in a category of its own.  Still a jian, sure.  But a very different kind.



Actually it was the Qin Dynasty Bronze weapons that had a lot to do with them taking over China.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> I've did a Chen jian form years ago, but actually do not remember much of it. But I do remember the Yang Jian form and it is not Modern Wushu, it is traditional. Wide sweeping cuts, are not, at least to me, slashing. There are blocks, cuts to the neck and a whole lot of jabs. The Dao is much more aggressive. Ergo the saying the jian is for the scholar the dao is for the butcher..... and since i prefer the Dao, I guess I'm a butcher. But the jian of old, compared to the jian we see today, is not exactly the same sword either.
> 
> Did the Qin slash with their Bronze Jian, in a major battle...probably. Did the Han slash with their jian...very likely. But those are heavier Dao then what we tend to use today or the last 100 years for that matter. The Chinese military in WW 2 carried a sword, carried a few actually but it was mainly the Dadao


I guess I’m not sure how you define slashing.  I’ve been using the term wide sweeping cuts, to distinguish from thrusting.  In my experience there is plenty of both in jian.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Actually it was the Qin Dynasty Bronze weapons that had a lot to do with them taking over China.


I’m not saying they were poor weapons.  In fact, bronze was cutting edge technology for a long time.


----------



## Oily Dragon

Flying Crane said:


> And a lot of jian material has large cuts as well.  The way I see it, the use of jian runs the range as it did in Europe.  Methods probably developed and changed, as aspects of society changed and the needs changed.  So depending on the era, likely technical use would have been different.  In my opinion, jian is a cut-and- thrust sword.  Some variants may emphasize cut more, others thrust more.  That we be evident in their physical design and in the methods practiced.  But impossible to say “jian is THIS and not THAT”.


The entirety of my experience with rapiers comes from watching The Princess Bride, but I do know a thing or two about Chinese swords.

The rapier also has cuts for the same reason.  You have to cut through air first, to kill a man with a sword from a distance.  I think that's why jian forms are so graceful.  These are lethal killing instruments, in dance form.

The dao is not nearly as agile.  Sure I can cut a watermelon in half with it, but signing a legible Z would be tough.

Still...the Single Moon Flowing Saber (Hang Yuet Dahn Do) is pretty rad.  Now that I think about it, this form already contains the right techniques to make a decent Z.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

bill miller said:


> I would think that a slashing weapon would be easier to use for someone with a limited amount of training, and would probably do more damage. To me, with a thrusting weapon, you would need to be much more accurate on the strike to hit something vital.


makes sense


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Good questions, and honestly I do not have a well researched answer for you.  However, I believe it is safe to say that weapons and armor have evolved hand-in-hand, the one to counter the other.  I believe this is well documented in Europe, and I have to believe something similar happened in Asia.  Weapons were developed, and armor was then developed to protect against those weapons. And the weapons were altered to defeat that armor, and the armor was altered in turn.  I suspect this was an on-going process and happened repeatedly over history.  Generally, as armor became more effective, cuts became less effective and thrusts more likely to be effective at least in comparison to cuts.  So swords gradually evolved to focus more on thrusting meaning they had a narrower profile and a thicker, more robust point.  Somewhere along the way swords took on a shape that attempted to effectively be both a cut-and-thrust weapon.  These had reasonably wide blades (a wider blade is better for cutting) with a more sharply tapered point.  Eventually they became overall more pointed as tough plate armor (in Europe) became more common.
> 
> I believe that in China, there was a difference between a weapon that would be carried on the battlefield, vs. one carried by a civilian for self defense.  The battlefield weapon would be more robust to withstand the rigor of the battlefield and to be effective against armor, while the civilian weapon would be less likely to need to be so robust given that civilians would be unlikely to be wearing armor, and a civilian self defense encounter would probably be brief and would not need to engage repeatedly against many enemies, some of them using heavy military pole-arms and such.  I suspect technique and training methods would also reflect these differences in the weapons, there likely being different methodologies employed by the military vs. those employed by civilians.
> 
> In the modern age in the practice of traditional Chinese martial arts, it is unclear to me how well the weapon designs match history, and how well the technique and practice methods match the weapons with which they were historically developed.  It is further unclear to me if it matters at all, on any functional level, so long as the practitioner is using a weapon that fits them well (enough).
> 
> But at any rate, I suspect that at least on some level the modern makers in China (at least those making them in quantity) are using designs that are easy to reproduce, with some amount of suspected historical accuracy, but may be driven more by profit and sales as long as the design meets at least a superficial historical satisfaction, but without heavy interest in strict historical accuracy.  I myself am less interested in my weapons satisfying any historical accuracy, and more that they are simply robust and solidly constructed and functional.
> 
> I believe that for a time these weapons were being over-built, resulting in heavy, cumbersome weapons.  I think the makers at the time (like the 1960s-1990s) did not understand how tough a properly made, lighter and thinner blade could be.  As their understanding improved, the more recently made weapons reflect that understanding.  They tend to be lighter and much more maneuverable, at least those made in the European designs.  But the opposite end of that of course is the super-light junk made for Modern Wushu.  This stuff is utter garbage and is nothing more than a stage-prop in the shape of a sword.  I think there is still a lot of over-heavy stuff coming out of China, but some makers are getting better at making quality, well weighted and well balanced swords.
> 
> Regarding sabers, a curved blade is better for cutting,  it is often less effective at the thrust.  However, it can still thrust effectively if the tip lines up in a straight line with the grip.  I believe sabers came into high use in the cavalry because on a galloping horse a cut was preferred, taking advantage of the momentum.  A thrust into an enemy could result in a lost sword as it would be difficult to withdraw the weapon when galloping at speed.


All that makes sense


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> The first photo is two jian made in Lung Chuan, a Chinese village famous for sword making.  I rebuilt the hilts, replacing the absolute junk that was put on in China, and putting on a European influenced cross type hilt because I find that I simply prefer it.  They have a double edge for the full length of the blades.  These were made in probably the 1970s, and are quite heavy, reflecting what I believe was consistent in how they were made during that time (see my post above).  I tend to view them as heavy practice pieces, good for the workout, but too heavy to be quite appropriate on the battlefield.  I would use them if I had no other options in the zombie apocalypse.
> 
> The second photo is of four swords made by Angus Trim in a European style, but I built the hilts.  Two are done in steel cross-guard and two are done in cast bronze, with my own creativity in the design.  Two are long swords and two I would classify as arming swords.  These are more properly weighted and would be my go-to items during the zombie apocalypse.
> 
> If you compare the photos, you will see that the profile of these blades is very similar.  I would not classify the jian as anything similar to a rapier, in my limited understanding of what a rapier is.  The long jian is essentially identical to a long sword, and the short jian is essentially identical to a bastard sword, meaning a blade sized as an arming sword but with an extra long hilt to be used two-handed if desired.


Thanks!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Flying Crane said:


> Good questions, and honestly I do not have a well researched answer for you.  However, I believe it is safe to say that weapons and armor have evolved hand-in-hand, the one to counter the other.  I believe this is well documented in Europe, and I have to believe something similar happened in Asia.  Weapons were developed, and armor was then developed to protect against those weapons. And the weapons were altered to defeat that armor, and the armor was altered in turn.  I suspect this was an on-going process and happened repeatedly over history.  Generally, as armor became more effective, cuts became less effective and thrusts more likely to be effective at least in comparison to cuts.  So swords gradually evolved to focus more on thrusting meaning they had a narrower profile and a thicker, more robust point.  Somewhere along the way swords took on a shape that attempted to effectively be both a cut-and-thrust weapon.  These had reasonably wide blades (a wider blade is better for cutting) with a more sharply tapered point.  Eventually they became overall more pointed as tough plate armor (in Europe) became more common.
> 
> I believe that in China, there was a difference between a weapon that would be carried on the battlefield, vs. one carried by a civilian for self defense.  The battlefield weapon would be more robust to withstand the rigor of the battlefield and to be effective against armor, while the civilian weapon would be less likely to need to be so robust given that civilians would be unlikely to be wearing armor, and a civilian self defense encounter would probably be brief and would not need to engage repeatedly against many enemies, some of them using heavy military pole-arms and such.  I suspect technique and training methods would also reflect these differences in the weapons, there likely being different methodologies employed by the military vs. those employed by civilians.
> 
> In the modern age in the practice of traditional Chinese martial arts, it is unclear to me how well the weapon designs match history, and how well the technique and practice methods match the weapons with which they were historically developed.  It is further unclear to me if it matters at all, on any functional level, so long as the practitioner is using a weapon that fits them well (enough).
> 
> But at any rate, I suspect that at least on some level the modern makers in China (at least those making them in quantity) are using designs that are easy to reproduce, with some amount of suspected historical accuracy, but may be driven more by profit and sales as long as the design meets at least a superficial historical satisfaction, but without heavy interest in strict historical accuracy.  I myself am less interested in my weapons satisfying any historical accuracy, and more that they are simply robust and solidly constructed and functional.
> 
> I believe that for a time these weapons were being over-built, resulting in heavy, cumbersome weapons.  I think the makers at the time (like the 1960s-1990s) did not understand how tough a properly made, lighter and thinner blade could be.  As their understanding improved, the more recently made weapons reflect that understanding.  They tend to be lighter and much more maneuverable, at least those made in the European designs.  But the opposite end of that of course is the super-light junk made for Modern Wushu.  This stuff is utter garbage and is nothing more than a stage-prop in the shape of a sword.  I think there is still a lot of over-heavy stuff coming out of China, but some makers are getting better at making quality, well weighted and well balanced swords.
> 
> Regarding sabers, a curved blade is better for cutting,  it is often less effective at the thrust.  However, it can still thrust effectively if the tip lines up in a straight line with the grip.  I believe sabers came into high use in the cavalry because on a galloping horse a cut was preferred, taking advantage of the momentum.  A thrust into an enemy could result in a lost sword as it would be difficult to withdraw the weapon when galloping at speed.


Thank you for that!


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> I guess I’m not sure how you define slashing.  I’ve been using the term wide sweeping cuts, to distinguish from thrusting.  In my experience there is plenty of both in jian.



Look at traditional Dao forms you will see a difference. But then, maybe I am being to circumscript in my definition of a slash too. 

I guess all I can then say for sure is the Dao tends to be less brittle and more sturdy than a Jian


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Look at traditional Dao forms you will see a difference. But then, maybe I am being to circumscript in my definition of a slash too.
> 
> I guess all I can then say for sure is the Dao tends to be less brittle and more sturdy than a Jian


I have a traditional dao set as part of my practice, so am definitely familiar.  Honestly, I can see a difference between dao slashes and jian sweeping cuts, but part of me wonders if they aren’t just different flavors of the same thing.  Outside of the forms, when I work through my basics for each of these weapons, there is a lot that is the same.  

I believe that in general, dao are more robust than jian, but specific examples can vary.  I have handled very heavy and robust examples of both, as well as very light examples of both.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> I have a traditional dao set as part of my practice, so am definitely familiar.  Honestly, I can see a difference between dao slashes and jian sweeping cuts, but part of me wonders if they aren’t just different flavors of the same thing.  Outside of the forms, when I work through my basics for each of these weapons, there is a lot that is the same.
> 
> I believe that in general, dao are more robust than jian, but specific examples can vary.  I have handled very heavy and robust examples of both, as well as very light examples of both.



My comparison is between the historic Jian and Dao, not the modern versions. I too have handed flimsy versions of both. I am currently considering a more substantial jian, if my knee ever recovers. I despise the lighter versions of either of them. My Dao is heavy, can be sharpened and used as a weapon, I accidentally cut a brass bracket in the basement of my previous house with my Dao, just missed the water pipe, thankfully. it did not damage the blade and it was not (and is not) sharpened. My jian is heavier than most, but still would never be able to hold an edge....or cut a bracket


----------



## Steve

Oily Dragon said:


> The entirety of my experience with rapiers comes from watching The Princess Bride, but I do know a thing or two about Chinese swords.
> 
> The rapier also has cuts for the same reason.  You have to cut through air first, to kill a man with a sword from a distance.  I think that's why jian forms are so graceful.  These are lethal killing instruments, in dance form.
> 
> The dao is not nearly as agile.  Sure I can cut a watermelon in half with it, but signing a legible Z would be tough.
> 
> Still...the Single Moon Flowing Saber (Hang Yuet Dahn Do) is pretty rad.  Now that I think about it, this form already contains the right techniques to make a decent Z.


"I see you are using Bonetti's defense against me."

I love the Princess Bride.  Holds up really well, too.  Watched it with my youngest a few years back, and she loved it too.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Steve said:


> "I see you are using Bonetti's defense against me."
> 
> I love the Princess Bride.  Holds up really well, too.  Watched it with my youngest a few years back, and she loved it too.


Everyone should be required to watch The Princess Bride and Goonies.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

Dirty Dog said:


> Everyone should be required to watch The Princess Bride and Goonies.


And Christmas story!


----------



## Wing Woo Gar

You’ll shoot your eye out!


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> My comparison is between the historic Jian and Dao, not the modern versions. I too have handed flimsy versions of both. I am currently considering a more substantial jian, if my knee ever recovers. I despise the lighter versions of either of them. My Dao is heavy, can be sharpened and used as a weapon, I accidentally cut a brass bracket in the basement of my previous house with my Dao, just missed the water pipe, thankfully. it did not damage the blade and it was not (and is not) sharpened. My jian is heavier than most, but still would never be able to hold an edge....or cut a bracket


I am curious what kind of jian you have, and why you feel it would never be able to hold an edge?  If it was properly heat treated then it should hold an edge.  If it has a blunt edge, then a sharp edge can be put on it.


----------



## bill miller

Steve said:


> "I see you are using Bonetti's defense against me."


So you are the dread pirate Roberts!!??


----------



## Dirty Dog

Flying Crane said:


> I am curious what kind of jian you have, and why you feel it would never be able to hold an edge?  If it was properly heat treated then it should hold an edge.  If it has a blunt edge, then a sharp edge can be put on it.


Speculating, since I've never seen @Xue Sheng's weapons.
"[P]roperly heat treated" doesn't tell you much (if anything) about edge holding ability. Because proper heat treating depends in large part on intended function. If the blade was never intended to be sharpened, then it is entirely possible that the materials and/or heat treating would reflect that. Even if the materials would otherwise be suitable for a sharpened blade, a significantly softer heat treatment might well be chosen to decrease brittleness.


----------



## Flying Crane

Dirty Dog said:


> Speculating, since I've never seen @Xue Sheng's weapons.
> "[P]roperly heat treated" doesn't tell you much (if anything) about edge holding ability. Because proper heat treating depends in large part on intended function. If the blade was never intended to be sharpened, then it is entirely possible that the materials and/or heat treating would reflect that. Even if the materials would otherwise be suitable for a sharpened blade, a significantly softer heat treatment might well be chosen to decrease brittleness.


This is true.  I guess what I meant to say was, if the steel is an appropriate blade steel, and if the heat treatment was proper for a functional blade.  Granted, if it is something coming out of one of the mass producers in China, it is probably impossible to know what kind of steel it is or what kind of heat treatment it was given. 

So I say, sharpen that fellow up and see what happens.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> I am curious what kind of jian you have, and why you feel it would never be able to hold an edge?  If it was properly heat treated then it should hold an edge.  If it has a blunt edge, then a sharp edge can be put on it.



The metal it is made out of, and the fact it is so light. It is a solid blade, not the flimsy wushu blade, I just doubt it would work as a combat sword. And since I don't plan on taking it into combat, it is not that important. I just like the weight of the actual steel Jian


----------



## Oily Dragon

Flying Crane said:


> This is true.  I guess what I meant to say was, if the steel is an appropriate blade steel, and if the heat treatment was proper for a functional blade.  Granted, if it is something coming out of one of the mass producers in China, it is probably impossible to know what kind of steel it is or what kind of heat treatment it was given.
> 
> So I say, sharpen that fellow up and see what happens.


This is why it's really important to know your importer.

Wing Lam, for instance, sells quality stuff.  I'm sure the occasional crap leaks in, but overall I consider them trustworthy.









						Wing Lam Enterprises | High Quality Martial Arts Supplies | WLE
					

Shop from the world's largest selection and best deals for traditional weapons. Shop with confidence at Wing Lam Enterprises store! High quality weapons, apparel, training materials, and more.




					wle.com


----------



## Flying Crane

Oily Dragon said:


> This is why it's really important to know your importer.
> 
> Wing Lam, for instance, sells quality stuff.  I'm sure the occasional crap leaks in, but overall I consider them trustworthy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wing Lam Enterprises | High Quality Martial Arts Supplies | WLE
> 
> 
> Shop from the world's largest selection and best deals for traditional weapons. Shop with confidence at Wing Lam Enterprises store! High quality weapons, apparel, training materials, and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wle.com


He does, but a lot of this stuff comes from Lung Chuan and very little further information is given.  Lung Chuan stuff is available From a lot of places, and the city/region is famous for sword making, I believe historically as well as currently.  The Lung Chuan swords tend to look very much the same, but I don’t know how many actual makers are there, if they all pool their stuff together for sale or if there is any way to distinguish one from the other, or if it matters in this case.  Maybe they are all being made to the same standard.  

I have seen on Wing Lam’s website and on others, a claim to have a higher grade of steel delivered to the manufacturers, to be used exclusively for them.  Since Ive seen this claim made by more than one retailer, I don’t know what to make of it.  Maybe it is true, maybe it’s just something that they say knowing that most of us are in no position to investigate.  

I’ve bought a couple blades from WLE for which I built new hilts.  One was a gift for my Wing Chun Sifu, the club paid for the materials and I did the work.  The other, I still have and I do like it. But I am not in a position to state with certainty if either of these are of superior quality steel and heat treatments. 

The only ones that I own, that I can say with confidence they are quality steel and workmanship, are the blades made by Angus Trim.  He is from the Pacific Northwest, I don’t know if he is still making them at all, but I believe his work is well respected in the European sword groups.  

For those that come from China, at least the Lung Chuan, I sort of take it on faith.  There are some smaller craftsmen in China that have begun making swords, perhaps their work is more documented and information shared with the public, so one could know with more certainty.  From what I’ve seen, they can also be rather expensive. But sometimes you get what you pay for.


----------



## Xue Sheng

The only other issue besides quality is the Jians that are, for lack of a better word, real. seem to range in price from $400 to $40,000. But I suspect the gold on the wooden sheath of the $40,000 one is real gold


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> The only other issue besides quality is the Jians that are, for lack of a better word, real. seem to range in price from $400 to $40,000. But I suspect the gold on the wooden sheath of the $40,000 one is real gold


For that price, it had better be.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> The only other issue besides quality is the Jians that are, for lack of a better word, real. seem to range in price from $400 to $40,000. But I suspect the gold on the wooden sheath of the $40,000 one is real gold


When I began rebuilding swords I had visions of making elaborate masterpieces, guards shaped like cranes with spread wings, cast in silver with ruby or sapphires set into the eyes, stuff like that.  I even did a couple of hilts in cast sterling, but they were simple designs.  Funny how that fancy stuff never really materialized for me, and I recently took the silver off those two and redid them in steel.  I find that there is an elegant beauty in the functional simplicity.  Curly maple is beautiful, but that is a natural thing.  I don’t need to add a bunch of fancy stuff and expensive materials.  That would make me afraid to use any of it.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Flying Crane said:


> When I began rebuilding swords I had visions of making elaborate masterpieces, guards shaped like cranes with spread wings, cast in silver with ruby or sapphires set into the eyes, stuff like that.  I even did a couple of hilts in cast sterling, but they were simple designs.  Funny how that fancy stuff never really materialized for me, and I recently took the silver off those two and redid them in steel.  I find that there is an elegant beauty in the functional simplicity.  Curly maple is beautiful, but that is a natural thing.  I don’t need to add a bunch of fancy stuff and expensive materials.  That would make me afraid to use any of it.


Agreed. If it's too pretty to use...
The blades I make are intended to be functional, even if they will never be used. So I don't very often do things like a mirror polish.


----------



## Flying Crane

Dirty Dog said:


> Agreed. If it's too pretty to use...
> The blades I make are intended to be functional, even if they will never be used. So I don't very often do things like a mirror polish.


I do tend to try and get the steel to near mirror Polish.  I may be wrong about this, but I believe that the more highly polished it is, the fewer tiny crevasses in which moisture can hide, and it resists rust somewhat better.  Of course the blade is always oiled and in the scabbard when not being used, so perhaps it’s more important on the guard and pommel, if it matters at all.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Flying Crane said:


> I do tend to try and get the steel to near mirror Polish.  I may be wrong about this, but I believe that the more highly polished it is, the fewer tiny crevasses in which moisture can hide, and it resists rust somewhat better.  Of course the blade is always oiled and in the scabbard when not being used, so perhaps it’s more important on the guard and pommel, if it matters at all.


I just think it's more work than it's worth for something that will absolutely get scratched the first time it's used. I'm certainly not opposed to anybody spending as much time polishing as they want. I can't say anyone has done anything scientific, but my feeling is that corrosion resistance is going to be more a matter of materials, even with just basic care.


----------



## Flying Crane

Dirty Dog said:


> I just think it's more work than it's worth for something that will absolutely get scratched the first time it's used. I'm certainly not opposed to anybody spending as much time polishing as they want. I can't say anyone has done anything scientific, but my feeling is that corrosion resistance is going to be more a matter of materials, even with just basic care.


Fair points, and I’m only doing forms/non-contact training at this point so I can keep them shinier for now.


----------



## Old Happy Tiger

bill miller said:


> I have been attending a Tai Chi class twice a week at the local senior center, lead by a very good instructor, whose agenda is based on the health aspects only. Every now and then, he will describe a martial application, but, due to the guidelines. I don't have a problem with this, but some of his students actually want to see some basic techniques, while a few have no interest at learning the so called "dark side"of Tai Chi,as one of them put it. After class, a few weeks ago,a couple of my classmates approached me, and we set up a time to work outside the class room. They knew that I had been training for ages, and even though I never claimed to be an expert, and will be a perpetual student with what time I have left, I started to show some basic applications to them, just to help them understand what can be done with and in between the postures. I am not wanting undermine our instructor by any means, so am I wrong to show them a glimpse of the so called "dark side" ?


I read this post, and I had to respond to it. The main thing to realize is there are a lot of Tai Chi Chuan instructors out there that only know and practice the form and that is all. Many, do not even know how to do push hands or even any traditional weapons. I learned a short Yang Tai Chi Chuan (TaijiQuan) form with one set of instructors, they also knew push hands but that was all. And please understand that I am grateful in what I what I learned from them. My other instructor knew the long old Yang Tai Chi Chuan (TaijQuan) form and taught it like a martial art with real applications from the movements of the form, push hands and also traditional weapons. Over in the U.S.A here, it is VERY rare to find that sort of training when finding Tai Chi Chuan being taught, it again is usually just the form that is it. I currently practice a very short Yang Tai Chi Chuan form. I also practice the individual postures alone as that is the older traditional way as well as self defense applications after that. I don't think there is anything wrong with people wanting to learn any family style of Tai Chi Chuan as exercise, that is great if that is what the individual wants... But anyone saying that self-defense applications is "the dark side" is 100% wrong. Tai Chi Chuan has always been a martial art, and many years ago.. In the past I've actually used it to defend myself... As with anything, constant practice is the main thing. My two cents.


----------

