# Tai Chi vs. MMA from Daoist Gate - Blog Post



## Xue Sheng

Tai Chi vs. MMA from Daoist Gate


----------



## drop bear

You should never have to take someone's word that you can use martial arts to fight with.

It is like an adult creepy version of this.


----------



## JowGaWolf

My look on it is you can either train to fight or don't.  Just don't lie to yourself about which one you are doing. 

It is not realistic to think that you can be really good at something you don't train.  That's the story that China needs to stop telling.  Even after the embarrassment they claim that kung fu is a killing art.


----------



## Flying Crane

Apparently a video went viral and sent ripples thru the martial arts community?  I didn't get the memo.  Or the virus...


----------



## Kurt L.

The guy was a masseuse by trade, wasn't he?  I'm pretty new to Tai Chi, but it sounds like the "woo woo" was held to account.


----------



## mograph

As a former tai chi guy, I find these events uncomfortable on a number of levels:

truth: most tai chi teachers know nothing of martial arts.
tai chi as a fighting art is dying, and I don't know if it will survive.
tai chi people have been embarrassed by the MMA artist, and as above, we are embarrassed because of the truth.
there is a childish disrespect and self-aggrandizement shown by this man and many MMA followers, which, along with an increased desire for immediate gratification, I see increasing in the industrialized world. There's nothing wrong with MMA, I just don't like how it seems to attract more a-holes than traditional CMA/JMA/FMA and so on do. Patience and diligence seems to be dying. Maybe this is nothing new, since other arts used to attract a-holes. Maybe the whole process is just faster now.

self-aggrandizement is also present in traditional martial arts (TMA), only it seems to be realized in "I'm slower and more careful than you, therefore I am better." Maybe this hubris is helping to kill TMA -- it was surely the downfall of the TMA artist humbled by the MMA artist.
We need more of what we see in this video, I think. Here's Ian Sinclair again:


----------



## Flying Crane

Honestly, this does not bother me at all.  And I too am an ex-Taiji guy.


----------



## Headhunter

No one cares people will carry on doing tai chi just as people have carried on doing every martial art through every different era


----------



## Flying Crane

Let's be honest:  most people can't fight, no matter what system they train.  Most people don't train realistically.  That's life.

But that is a fault of the individual and how it has been passed along to him, and the failings in the instruction he has received and in his own training methods.  It is not an endictment of the system itself.

Really honestly, so what?  This means nothing.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Did Xu, all by himself, with his video, upset me so much that I made the posts I made and linked the sites I linked????

no..... It just seems to be the straw that broke the camels back......


----------



## Steve

Flying Crane said:


> Let's be honest:  most people can't fight, no matter what system they train.  Most people don't train realistically.  That's life.
> 
> But that is a fault of the individual and how it has been passed along to him, and the failings in the instruction he has received and in his own training methods.  It is not an endictment of the system itself.
> 
> Really honestly, so what?  This means nothing.


I disagree.  I think most people who train boxing, BJJ, wrestling, judo, Muay Thai, MMA, or any other sport oriented art can fight.   Doesn't mean they are war machines or lack gaps in their training.   Doesn't mean they have no bad habits.   But if you apply what you're learning, it will be there when you need it.   people who train the styles above can do those styles under pressure.  Other styles?  I guess it's up to the individual.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Steve, not all BJJ, MMA, Muay Thai guys can fight.  I have been in plenty a gym where there is a massive hierarchy between the good practitioner's and those that come in once in a while and treat it like a hobby.  This is particularly true in mma gyms I have checked out here in Las Vegas.  A little less in BJJ and a lot, lot, lot less in Muay Thai.  Still there are guys that can't fight practicing sporting based martial arts.  Most that I have encountered are the once or twice a week hobbyists though.


----------



## Headhunter

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Steve, not all BJJ, MMA, Muay Thai guys can fight.  I have been in plenty a gym where there is a massive hierarchy between the good practitioner's and those that come in once in a while and treat it like a hobby.  This is particularly true in mma gyms I have checked out here in Las Vegas.  A little less in BJJ and a lot, lot, lot less in Muay Thai.  Still there are guys that can't fight practicing sporting based martial arts.  Most that I have encountered are the once or twice a week hobbyists though.


Absolutely I've been in gyms where guys have been training for 10 years and are total garbage and couldn't fight at all but they still come and train and take part because they just enjoy themselves there's nothing wrong with that. People think because you do martial arts you can fight. That's nonsense there's loads of people who've never done a class in there life who can fight. Some people are fighters some aren't and no training will ever change that


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Did Xu, all by himself, with his video, upset me so much that I made the posts I made and linked the sites I linked????
> 
> no..... It just seems to be the straw that broke the camels back......


The failings of some guy is only an example to you of how to not do it, and there are always variables.  Beyond that, it means nothing.

The success of some guy is only an example of how it might be done, and there are always variables.   Beyond that, it means nothing.

How YOU do it will determine if you fail or succeed.  And yes, you guessed it, there are always variables.  Take the lessons where they may be found.  And then do YOURS.

Beyond that, it means nothing.

Really, I mean that.  It means nothing.


----------



## Martial D

Flying Crane said:


> The failings of some guy is only an example to you of how to not do it, and there are always variables.  Beyond that, it means nothing.
> 
> The success of some guy is only an example of how it might be done, and there are always variables.   Beyond that, it means nothing.
> 
> How YOU do it will determine if you fail or succeed.  And yes, you guessed it, there are always variables.  Take the lessons where they may be found.  And then do YOURS.
> 
> Beyond that, it means nothing.
> 
> Really, I mean that.  It means nothing.


Over the years I've taught many younger fellows the tricks I have learned, whether it be boxing, Wing Chun,  The way of no way(what I took from jkd), how to flip someone etcetc..you get the picture.

But here's the thing - some caught on right off, some never did. Some people are naturally aggressive and fearless, others more cautious and timid. Some were naturally coordinated and physically gifted, while some tripped over their own feet.

Some left knowing how to effectively use their body as a weapon, others not so much.

And this is to say nothing on the matter of strength and conditioning.

And all that is only one side of the coin. On the other, you have what is taught. The art itself. Is it workable? And within that, if it is, is it being trained and applied in a practical way?

So you can teach a strong and agile kid total bullshido, and have him fight a clumsy out of shape, or timid kid with decent training and the latter will still get mauled most of the time.

That is to say nothing of the 'style', which is best understood as a category of loosly similar techniques anyway.


----------



## Flying Crane

Martial D said:


> Over the years I've taught many younger fellows the tricks I have learned over my years, whether it be boxing, Wing Chun,  The way of no way(what I took from jkd), how to flip someone etcetc..you get the picture.
> 
> But here's the thing - some caught on right off, some never did. Some people are naturally aggressive and fearless, others more cautious and timid. Some were naturally coordinated and physically gifted, while some tripped over their own feet.
> 
> Some left knowing how to effectively use their body as a weapon, others not so much.
> 
> And this is to say nothing on the matter of strength and conditioning.
> 
> And all that is only one side of the coin. On the other, you have what is taught. The art itself. Is it works be? And within that, if it is, is it being trained and applied in a practical way.
> 
> So you can teach a strong and agile kid total bullshido, and have him fight a clumsy out of shape, or timid kid with decent training and the latter will still get mauled most of the time.
> 
> That is to say nothing of the 'style', which is best understood as a category of loosly similar techniques anyway.


In my opinion, a style has a body of principles that guide how all techniques are done.  The techniques are a physical embodiment of the principles.  The principles matter more than the specific techniques, but I guess that could be seen as "loosely similar".


----------



## Martial D

Flying Crane said:


> In my opinion, a style has a body of principles that guide how all techniques are done.  The techniques are a physical embodiment of the principles.  The principles matter more than the specific techniques, but I guess that could be seen as "loosely similar".


Agreed, I could have worded it better. But even within styles there can be wildly different principles at play manifesting as wildly different techniques.  Compare say, traditional boxing with 52, and compare that to the pugilist style of the early 20th century. It's all boxing right? The same is certainly true of wing Chun as well.


----------



## Blindside

Flying Crane said:


> Let's be honest:  most people can't fight, no matter what system they train.  Most people don't train realistically.  That's life.
> 
> But that is a fault of the individual and how it has been passed along to him, and the failings in the instruction he has received and in his own training methods.  It is not an endictment of the system itself.
> 
> Really honestly, so what?  This means nothing.



So you have two groups of 5 martial arts students, all you know is that one is a group taken from a boxing gym and one is a group taken from a kung fu school.  They are going to do some stand up fighting under san shou rules.  Best of five gives the group the win.  Which group would you bet on to win?


----------



## drop bear

Flying Crane said:


> Let's be honest:  most people can't fight, no matter what system they train.  Most people don't train realistically.  That's life.
> 
> But that is a fault of the individual and how it has been passed along to him, and the failings in the instruction he has received and in his own training methods.  It is not an endictment of the system itself.
> 
> Really honestly, so what?  This means nothing.



The system should kind of work though. 

I mean if it doesn't it is going to be a pretty big road block on the path to being able to fight.


----------



## Kurt L.

mograph said:


> As a former tai chi guy, I find these events uncomfortable on a number of levels:



Are you training anything else?  Why the change, if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## Flying Crane

Blindside said:


> So you have two groups of 5 martial arts students, all you know is that one is a group taken from a boxing gym and one is a group taken from a kung fu school.  They are going to do some stand up fighting under san shou rules.  Best of five gives the group the win.  Which group would you bet on to win?


I would not bet on any of them.  Most likely, they all suck.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> The failings of some guy is only an example to you of how to not do it, and there are always variables.  Beyond that, it means nothing.
> 
> The success of some guy is only an example of how it might be done, and there are always variables.   Beyond that, it means nothing.
> 
> How YOU do it will determine if you fail or succeed.  And yes, you guessed it, there are always variables.  Take the lessons where they may be found.  And then do YOURS.
> 
> Beyond that, it means nothing.
> 
> Really, I mean that.  It means nothing.



Understood, and I agree, but this is just one straw that has been added to all the others that have been building up as it applies to 25 years of Taijiquan and how things have changed in that time as well as how the practitioners have change over that same period.

about 20 years ago, I was once in a class that was doing the taiji two person form. Basically it is a drill that switches back and forth between attacker and defender. It is also choreographed so it is not reality as it applies to a fight, but it is not meant to be, it is a drill, that is all. However it does require you do the forms properly. I was training with a gentleman who was very hung up in the mythology of taijiquan, but his form was rather sloppy. We went back and forth for a while and then I stopped him. I told him that if he continued doing the forms the way he was doing that it would not train him correctly as to how to respond to attack. He needed to complete each movement, not just do the thing half way. His angry response to me was "I don't DO martial arts...I DO TAI CHI" This was the first time I ran into this attitude. He was convinced that by simply going through the motions that somehow, magically, he would be indestructible and that his "Internal Tai Chi Chuan" was so far superior to any other art that it was beneath him to even think about anything he deemed "Marital Arts". I have run into this many times since. After that I started running into the Tai is not a martial art crowd, it is simply moving meditation. And I had no problem with that group if that is what they wanted. However, over time, that changed to anger when it was even mentioned that Taijiquan was a martial art. Had a woman storm out of my class, and never return, once when another student asked me about the marital arts of it.

Here is the thing, Xu beat up another deluded Taijiquan guy, that is all, nothing more. But the over all attitude about and view of taiji has changed drastically over the last 25 years and I am simply tired of dealing with it as well as trying to get the point across that it is ok if all you want is forms, but it is a martial art. More recently, a year or 2 ago I was helping my shifu teach the dao form and a couple of students asked me what was happening with the Dao and why it moved that way. I told them it was blocking a spear, hand grabs the spear, Dao hits the other guy in the neck. They were rather shocked, never asked me about applications again, but I will say this, they like learning forms from me over anyone else helping my shifu. Was also recently asked to come back to class by another person who helps my shifu teach, but I just can't bring myself to go back and spend 2 hours only doing the taiji dance.


----------



## mograph

Kurt L. said:


> Are you training anything else?  Why the change, if you don't mind me asking?


I was studying tai chi with a group that had no idea what it were doing -- nice people at the grass roots level, but lousy tai chi. Luckily, I had met a gentleman who does know what he's doing. Now I study qigong, yiquan and xingyiquan with him. If I have time, I'll join a Chen (Jack Yan) or Wu (Eddie Wu) school to complement those studies.


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> I was studying tai chi with a group that had no idea what it were doing -- nice people at the grass roots level, but lousy tai chi. Luckily, I had met a gentleman who does know what he's doing. Now I study qigong, yiquan and xingyiquan with him. If I have time, I'll join a Chen (Jack Yan) or Wu (Eddie Wu) school to complement those studies.



I'd vote Eddie Wu, but then I don't know Jack Yan. I like the fact that part of Eddie Wu's curriculum is learning how to do a break fall.


----------



## mograph

Flying Crane said:


> Let's be honest:  most people can't fight, no matter what system they train.  Most people don't train realistically.  That's life.
> 
> But that is a fault of the individual and how it has been passed along to him, and the failings in the instruction he has received and in his own training methods.  It is not an indictment of the system itself.
> 
> Really honestly, so what?  This means nothing.


Mmnh, not necessarily, if the system can be defined as teacher + material + student (in the aggregate). If a pattern of poor instruction and poor learning can be demonstrated, then that should be sufficient in spite of the initially valuable state of the material. This is because the poor student becomes the poor teacher, who then teaches poor material. Result? Poor system.

However, if the system is defined by that as _originally_ set out by the founder, then the quality of the students and teachers is _independent_ of the system as defined. To me, that doesn't represent the _current_ state of the system, but its _potential_ or _ideal_ state.

So, are we discussing the value of the _current_ state of taijiquan or the value of its _ideal_ state?


----------



## mograph

Xue Sheng said:


> I'd vote Eddie Wu, but then I don't know Jack Yan. I like the fact that part of Eddie Wu's curriculum is learning how to do a break fall.


Jack Yan is a disciple of Chen Zhenglei; and Dr. Shin Lin, who studies bioelectricity and qi at UC Irvine (California), studies with Jack when he can. Wu's school isn't far -- just need to find the time.


----------



## Xue Sheng

mograph said:


> Jack Yan is a disciple of Chen Zhenglei; and Dr. Shin Lin, who studies bioelectricity and qi at UC Irvine (California), studies with Jack when he can. Wu's school isn't far -- just need to find the time.



I have become rather intrigued by two styles of late; Wu and Sun.

Wu because of Eddie Wu's curriculum and the fact that any applications I have seen from him make sense. And the Northern Wu version is supposed to be what came from Wu Quanyou who was in the Imperial Guards (Qing Dynasty China) so he knew how to fight before he ever began training with Yang Luchan and Banhou. However my Yang shifu absolutely hates anything Wu taijiquan.

Sun because of its Xingyi connection and it just makes sense to me and I have discussed Sun Lutang recently with a couple of people from China and they maintain that Sun was a fighter. His Taiji may have been deemed great for old people, but Sun could use it for fighting, as could his sons. But that fighting comes mostly from Xingyiquan

But if I lived in your area I would likely be checking out Eddie Wu's school


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Understood, and I agree, but this is just one straw that has been added to all the others that have been building up as it applies to 25 years of Taijiquan and how things have changed in that time as well as how the practitioners have change over that same period.
> 
> about 20 years ago, I was once in a class that was doing the taiji two person form. Basically it is a drill that switches back and forth between attacker and defender. It is also choreographed so it is not reality as it applies to a fight, but it is not meant to be, it is a drill, that is all. However it does require you do the forms properly. I was training with a gentleman who was very hung up in the mythology of taijiquan, but his form was rather sloppy. We went back and forth for a while and then I stopped him. I told him that if he continued doing the forms the way he was doing that it would not train him correctly as to how to respond to attack. He needed to complete each movement, not just do the thing half way. His angry response to me was "I don't DO martial arts...I DO TAI CHI" This was the first time I ran into this attitude. He was convinced that by simply going through the motions that somehow, magically, he would be indestructible and that his "Internal Tai Chi Chuan" was so far superior to any other art that it was beneath him to even think about anything he deemed "Marital Arts". I have run into this many times since. After that I started running into the Tai is not a martial art crowd, it is simply moving meditation. And I had no problem with that group if that is what they wanted. However, over time, that changed to anger when it was even mentioned that Taijiquan was a martial art. Had a woman storm out of my class, and never return, once when another student asked me about the marital arts of it.
> 
> Here is the thing, Xu beat up another deluded Taijiquan guy, that is all, nothing more. But the over all attitude about and view of taiji has changed drastically over the last 25 years and I am simply tired of dealing with it as well as trying to get the point across that it is ok if all you want is forms, but it is a martial art. More recently, a year or 2 ago I was helping my shifu teach the dao form and a couple of students asked me what was happening with the Dao and why it moved that way. I told them it was blocking a spear, hand grabs the spear, Dao hits the other guy in the neck. They were rather shocked, never asked me about applications again, but I will say this, they like learning forms from me over anyone else helping my shifu. Was also recently asked to come back to class by another person who helps my shifu teach, but I just can't bring myself to go back and spend 2 hours only doing the taiji dance.


Do YOUR stuff, and don't apologize for the system to anybody.

What a bunch of yokels on the internet think of it means nothing.


----------



## Flying Crane

mograph said:


> Mmnh, not necessarily, if the system can be defined as teacher + material + student (in the aggregate). If a pattern of poor instruction and poor learning can be demonstrated, then that should be sufficient in spite of the initially valuable state of the material. This is because the poor student becomes the poor teacher, who then teaches poor material. Result? Poor system.
> 
> However, if the system is defined by that as _originally_ set out by the founder, then the quality of the students and teachers is _independent_ of the system as defined. To me, that doesn't represent the _current_ state of the system, but its _potential_ or _ideal_ state.
> 
> So, are we discussing the value of the _current_ state of taijiquan or the value of its _ideal_ state?


Or the state of a particular lineage?  The downstream from a poor instructor will not get better on its own.

One or a thousand lousy practitioners is not reperesentative of them all.

And yes, there are a lot of lousy ones.

The trick is, find a good one, taiji or otherwise.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> Do YOUR stuff, and don't apologize for the system to anybody.
> 
> What a bunch of yokels on the internet think of it means nothing.



Agreed, I am not referring to people on the internet, I am referring to the majority of the taijiquan community these days


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Agreed, I am not referring to people on the internet, I am referring to the majority of the taijiquan community these days


Fair enough.  But still, if what you have is better, keep it.  Yes, there is a lot of crap out there.  It's been that way for as long as I've been involved in the martial arts, no denying it.

Hell, I've seen maybe one or two videos on YT of my system, that I felt had merit or had potential.  All others have been crap.  But I feel that what I have is amazing, i received good instruction.  I wont change what I am doing simply because a lot of other people suck. 

Let them suck.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> Fair enough.  But still, if what you have is better, keep it.  Yes, there is a lot of crap out there.  It's been that way for as long as I've been involved in the martial arts, no denying it.
> 
> Hell, I've seen maybe one or two videos on YT of my system, that I felt had merit or had potential.  All others have been crap.  But I feel that what I have is amazing, i received good instruction.  I wont change what I am doing simply because a lot of other people suck.
> 
> Let them suck.



Working at it, just hard to do without anyone who is interested in working at it as well.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Working at it, just hard to do without anyone who is interested in working at it as well.


I understand the difficulties.  I have them too.

But I would choose to quit altogether rather than go join an MMA gym.  Yuck.

I'll keep muddling through it on my own, if that's all I have.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> I understand the difficulties.  I have them too.
> 
> But I would choose to quit altogether rather than go join an MMA gym.  Yuck.
> 
> I'll keep muddling through it on my own, if that's all I have.



Not promoting going to MMA at all, nothing against it if that is what someone wants though. What I do feel about this whole Xu issue is that it should have been a wake up call for much of the martial arts in China and not an excuse for the government and MA orgs to suppress Xu. But with that said, I am not from China but even I know, you do what Xu did and you are just asking for government intervention.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Xue Sheng said:


> Working at it, just hard to do without anyone who is interested in working at it as well.


Too bad you're not closer. I would love to learn Tai Chi from someone who understood it as a martial art. I think it would complement other aspects of what I do.


----------



## Flying Crane

Xue Sheng said:


> Not promoting going to MMA at all, nothing against it if that is what someone wants though. What I do feel about this whole Xu issue is that it should have been a wake up call for much of the martial arts in China and not an excuse for the government and MA orgs to suppress Xu. But with that said, I am not from China but even I know, you do what Xu did and you are just asking for government intervention.


Sure, and I didn't think you were advocating an MMA gym.  I'm just saying, I know where my interests are, and where they are not, and I stick with my stuff, regardless of the garbage floating around.

As for China, well since they pushed Modern Wushu, pretty much everyone in recent times has understood that stuff isn't even intended to be combat effective, even if the Chinese government might pretend otherwise.  So who would be shocked by any of this?.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Tony Dismukes said:


> Too bad you're not closer. I would love to learn Tai Chi from someone who understood it as a martial art. I think it would complement other aspects of what I do.



What!!! you're not willing to commute......You have offended my family and you have offended the Shaolin Temple


----------



## JowGaWolf

Blindside said:


> So you have two groups of 5 martial arts students, all you know is that one is a group taken from a boxing gym and one is a group taken from a kung fu school.  They are going to do some stand up fighting under san shou rules.  Best of five gives the group the win.  Which group would you bet on to win?





Tony Dismukes said:


> Too bad you're not closer. I would love to learn Tai Chi from someone who understood it as a martial art. I think it would complement other aspects of what I do.


It has helped me in the areas of sensitivity and awareness of my opponent. I don't know how to fight with the techniques but there are things in the training that helps with fighting in general.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

JowGaWolf said:


> It has helped me in the areas of sensitivity and awareness of my opponent. I don't know how to fight with the techniques but there are things in the training that helps with fighting in general.


Honestly, when I try new styles these days it's mostly for the sake of developing attributes or understanding of certain concepts through the training rather than learning any new techniques. I do try to test whether I can fight with the techniques I learn, but that's mostly just a check on how well I've internalized the concepts. It doesn't necessarily mean those techniques will become part of my regular toolbox. More often the attributes and conceptual understanding I develop are used to improve my primary skill sets.


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Steve, not all BJJ, MMA, Muay Thai guys can fight.  I have been in plenty a gym where there is a massive hierarchy between the good practitioner's and those that come in once in a while and treat it like a hobby.  This is particularly true in mma gyms I have checked out here in Las Vegas.  A little less in BJJ and a lot, lot, lot less in Muay Thai.  Still there are guys that can't fight practicing sporting based martial arts.  Most that I have encountered are the once or twice a week hobbyists though.


When I say, "I think most people who train boxing, BJJ, wrestling, judo, Muay Thai, MMA, or any other sport oriented art can fight," I have in mind someone who is free from any mental or physical impairments that would prevent them from engaging fully in the training, and who trains regularly, which in my opinion is three or more times each week in a school under a qualified instructor.  This even applies to 'hobbyists.'     I really didn't think this needed to be spelled out.

All of the other disclaimers I included in my last post still apply.  A BJJ guy who can't strike and focuses on the ground will have gaps which can be a problem outside of the BJJ school.

Once again, the point is that a person who applies what they learn is developing actual skills which will be there under pressure.

I've said in other threads many times that the solution to overcoming the limitations of pressure and competition isn't to eliminate competition.  if you want to address a shortcoming in the training, you expand the competition so that it tests the right things.  A guy who trains in BJJ only and doesn't compete will progress slower than a guy who trains in BJJ and competes in an IBJJF rule set.  That guy would be more well rounded if he competes in IBJJF and Sub only along with other rule sets.  And THAT guy would be more well rounded if he trains in striking arts and competes in those rule sets.  And THAT guy would be more well rounded if he expands his competition to include MMA.


----------



## Martial D

Blindside said:


> So you have two groups of 5 martial arts students, all you know is that one is a group taken from a boxing gym and one is a group taken from a kung fu school.  They are going to do some stand up fighting under san shou rules.  Best of five gives the group the win.  Which group would you bet on to win?


The boxers, but only because under San Shou rules wearing pants is illegal. Who does Kung Fu in shorts?

Well that and the ban on knee strikes joint manipulation and strikes to the back of the head.

This is of course assuming all things are equal and the Kung Fu school trains for combat and not gymnastics.


----------



## Buka

I like Tai-chi a lot. Liked it from the very first time I did it, long ago. Wish I had done it every day, instead of just here and there.

Never really considered the fighting aspects to it _while_ I was practicing it, didn't really care, I just love the way it feels, always have. But I tell you what, it helped me with pushing. Pushes have always been part of my repertoire. I love to push.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Buka said:


> I like Tai-chi a lot. Liked it from the very first time I did it, long ago. Wish I had done it every day, instead of just here and there.
> 
> Never really considered the fighting aspects to it _while_ I was practicing it, didn't really care, I just love the way it feels, always have. But I tell you what, it helped me with pushing. Pushes have always been part of my repertoire. I love to push.



Good root, good upper and lower unification..... relax and...push...


----------



## Buka

Xue Sheng said:


> Good root, good upper and lower unification..... relax and...push...



Yeah, maybe, not really sure how to explain it. Kind of a slightly upward force, at least it feels that way to me, not sure.


----------



## drop bear

Buka said:


> Yeah, maybe, not really sure how to explain it. Kind of a slightly upward force, at least it feels that way to me, not sure.



People naturally push bum going backwards and elbows flared. Which makes a lot of your weight go backwards.

So you lock your hips under and use your base


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Steve said:


> When I say, "I think most people who train boxing, BJJ, wrestling, judo, Muay Thai, MMA, or any other sport oriented art can fight," I have in mind someone who is free from any mental or physical impairments that would prevent them from engaging fully in the training, and who trains regularly, which in my opinion is three or more times each week in a school under a qualified instructor.  This even applies to 'hobbyists.'     I really didn't think this needed to be spelled out.
> 
> All of the other disclaimers I included in my last post still apply.  A BJJ guy who can't strike and focuses on the ground will have gaps which can be a problem outside of the BJJ school.
> 
> Once again, the point is that a person who applies what they learn is developing actual skills which will be there under pressure.
> 
> I've said in other threads many times that the solution to overcoming the limitations of pressure and competition isn't to eliminate competition.  if you want to address a shortcoming in the training, you expand the competition so that it tests the right things.  A guy who trains in BJJ only and doesn't compete will progress slower than a guy who trains in BJJ and competes in an IBJJF rule set.  That guy would be more well rounded if he competes in IBJJF and Sub only along with other rule sets.  And THAT guy would be more well rounded if he trains in striking arts and competes in those rule sets.  And THAT guy would be more well rounded if he expands his competition to include MMA.



Steve, plenty of people free of physical or mental impairments couldn't fight to save their lives regardless of where or what they trained.  Some people just do not have it!  They don't have the mental or physical characteristics often necessary in a fight.  In many an mma gym I have been in there have been some posers and hangers on.  This is especially true here in Vegas but it is not the only place where this occurs. (I have encountered it else where)  In BJJ there are less and in Muay Thai there are even less. (repercussions are worse) 

Now, you and I agree on many, many levels that competition is good.  In my system we spar empty handed, with weapons, roll empty handed and incorporate weapons.  However, sparring is just one methodology to utilize.  Scenario based training is used repeatedly and more often by law enforcement and every military that I know of.  When I went through the academy almost thirty years ago we did a lot of scenario based training and guess what just a little bit of competitive boxing.  This hasn't really changed either based on talking with the LEO trainers that I personally know.  In many cases the sporting methodology will get people hurt as in the BJJ guy who only trains BJJ and has a weak striking game and has no clue about weapons or how to deal with the realities of a street fight.  Same for the MMA guy or the Muay Thai guy.  Remember world class Muay Thai gym owner Fairtex chasing after someone on foot who hit his vehicle and being shot because of it.  Over property?  Should have just reported it to the police and insurance but he did not understand the realities of violence.  What I have always said and advocated is having overall balance in your martial training.  Weapons/Tools, Kicking, Hand Strikes, Trapping and Joint Manipulation and Grappling with a heavy emphasis on Awareness, Avoidance, De-escalation techniques and Legal Knowledge to understand what you can and cannot do in regards to legally protecting oneself.  ( Weapons training would include a strong firearms background)  The above would also include Scenario Based Training, Sparring, Rolling with and without weapons/tools and more of course to achieve some sort of balance...  If you have balance and sound training then you have a chance but... that is all you have nothing more a chance!  In the moment it is on you...


----------



## Xue Sheng

Buka said:


> Yeah, maybe, not really sure how to explain it. Kind of a slightly upward force, at least it feels that way to me, not sure.


 
You got it


----------



## Buka

drop bear said:


> People naturally push bum going backwards and elbows flared. Which makes a lot of your weight go backwards.
> 
> So you lock your hips under and use your base



Haven't flared my elbows since I was in short pants. And the only way my bum is going backwards is to throw you. Not YOU, personally, just saying.


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Steve, plenty of people free of physical or mental impairments couldn't fight to save their lives regardless of where or what they trained.  Some people just do not have it!  They don't have the mental or physical characteristics often necessary in a fight.  In many an mma gym I have been in there have been some posers and hangers on.  This is especially true here in Vegas but it is not the only place where this occurs. (I have encountered it else where)  In BJJ there are less and in Muay Thai there are even less. (repercussions are worse)


for petes sake Brian.  Come on.   Posers and hangers on... that's what you're talking about now?   Please just stop.





> Now, you and I agree on many, many levels that competition is good.  In my system we spar empty handed, with weapons, roll empty handed and incorporate weapons.  However, sparring is just one methodology to utilize.  Scenario based training is used repeatedly and more often by law enforcement and every military that I know of.  When I went through the academy almost thirty years ago we did a lot of scenario based training and guess what just a little bit of competitive boxing.  This hasn't really changed either based on talking with the LEO trainers that I personally know.  In many cases the sporting methodology will get people hurt as in the BJJ guy who only trains BJJ and has a weak striking game and has no clue about weapons or how to deal with the realities of a street fight.  Same for the MMA guy or the Muay Thai guy.  Remember world class Muay Thai gym owner Fairtex chasing after someone on foot who hit his vehicle and being shot because of it.  Over property?  Should have just reported it to the police and insurance but he did not understand the realities of violence.  What I have always said and advocated is having overall balance in your martial training.  Weapons/Tools, Kicking, Hand Strikes, Trapping and Joint Manipulation and Grappling with a heavy emphasis on Awareness, Avoidance, De-escalation techniques and Legal Knowledge to understand what you can and cannot do in regards to legally protecting oneself.  ( Weapons training would include a strong firearms background)  The above would also include Scenario Based Training, Sparring, Rolling with and without weapons/tools and more of course to achieve some sort of balance...  If you have balance and sound training then you have a chance but... that is all you have nothing more a chance!  In the moment it is on you...


Who's talking about sparring?  For love sake, Brian.  Come on.   and being a cop is applying technique in context, although it's a means of application that is not available to anyone who isn't a cop.  You get that.  Right?   Or are you suggesting that the best way to learn real world defense is to be a cop?

I also went out of my way to acknowledge that every style has weaknesses.  You read that... right? 

Brian, it really irritates me when you use my name, suggesting you are responding to something I said, but say things that make me wonder if you read my words at all.   Do you do this in purpose?


----------



## drop bear

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Steve, plenty of people free of physical or mental impairments couldn't fight to save their lives regardless of where or what they trained.  Some people just do not have it!  They don't have the mental or physical characteristics often necessary in a fight.  In many an mma gym I have been in there have been some posers and hangers on.  This is especially true here in Vegas but it is not the only place where this occurs. (I have encountered it else where)  In BJJ there are less and in Muay Thai there are even less. (repercussions are worse)
> 
> Now, you and I agree on many, many levels that competition is good.  In my system we spar empty handed, with weapons, roll empty handed and incorporate weapons.  However, sparring is just one methodology to utilize.  Scenario based training is used repeatedly and more often by law enforcement and every military that I know of.  When I went through the academy almost thirty years ago we did a lot of scenario based training and guess what just a little bit of competitive boxing.  This hasn't really changed either based on talking with the LEO trainers that I personally know.  In many cases the sporting methodology will get people hurt as in the BJJ guy who only trains BJJ and has a weak striking game and has no clue about weapons or how to deal with the realities of a street fight.  Same for the MMA guy or the Muay Thai guy.  Remember world class Muay Thai gym owner Fairtex chasing after someone on foot who hit his vehicle and being shot because of it.  Over property?  Should have just reported it to the police and insurance but he did not understand the realities of violence.  What I have always said and advocated is having overall balance in your martial training.  Weapons/Tools, Kicking, Hand Strikes, Trapping and Joint Manipulation and Grappling with a heavy emphasis on Awareness, Avoidance, De-escalation techniques and Legal Knowledge to understand what you can and cannot do in regards to legally protecting oneself.  ( Weapons training would include a strong firearms background)  The above would also include Scenario Based Training, Sparring, Rolling with and without weapons/tools and more of course to achieve some sort of balance...  If you have balance and sound training then you have a chance but... that is all you have nothing more a chance!  In the moment it is on you...



A few interesting logic leaps there. 

Because that is the way police and military have always done it isnt really an endorsement. We just dont know how effective that training really is. 

The martial artist that go shot is kind of a strange one as well. If that martial artists training is suspect because he got shot. I imagine police get shot. So their training is suspect? Or does that argument suddenly change?


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Actually Drop Bear the military has a very good idea of what has worked well for them in the past.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*For Pete's sake Steve*, what I articulated was that LEO's and our Military have utilized scenario based training as one methodology of their training!   They have a broad based approach to their training.  This is good and effective.  Yes, they also use competition and that is good as well.  Yet, they do not rely on only one methodology.  The methodology of competition.  This seems to be the methodology that several posters here believe is the end all be all.  While I am totally a believer of competition I have also been around long enough to realize that it is not the only way.  I am just giving a counter point to that being the only methodology.  There are other methods that also work!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*You, I and Drop Bear agree on most points*.  Where we disagree is when you guys push that their is only one methodology.  Which if you are not self aware comes through repeatedly in your posts and other MartialTalk members notice it.


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *For Pete's sake Steve*, what I articulated was that LEO's and our Military have utilized scenario based training as one methodology of their training!   They have a broad based approach to their training.  This is good and effective.  Yes, they also use competition and that is good as well.  Yet, they do not rely on only one methodology.  The methodology of competition.  This seems to be the methodology that several posters here believe is the end all be all.  While I am totally a believer of competition I have also been around long enough to realize that it is not the only way.  I am just giving a counter point to that being the only methodology.  There are other methods that also work!


Cops apply what they learn on the job.  Soldiers apply what they learn in combat.  An accountant will apply what he or she learns... where? 

Please read this carefully, and by all means ask questions if you don't get it, because frankly, I'm tired of you creating strawman arguments and putting my name on them.  It's exasperating. 

Scenario based training is great.  The operative word is "training."  It's training.  It's like sparring, kata and everything else.  If you think I'm not completely supportive of it, you are wrong.  But it's training.  And like ALL training, it will only get you to the cusp of application.  In order to develop reliable expertise, you have to have some outlet for application. 

If you train to be a cop, and are actually a cop, great.  That works.  If you train to be a soldier and go out and actually soldier, great.  That also works.  But if you're a teacher and you train to be a cop, and then go out and work in an elementary school, there is a disconnect. 

Competition is a safe (relatively speaking), reliable and accessible form of application.  Competition is application.  It is not training.  It is a way to apply training in a context in order to develop skill. 

Now, I understand that this is where you say, "But Steve.  Competition isn't "real life self defense."  There are rules and bad guys don't play by the rules."  I get it.  And you're right.  However, being a cop also has rules, and being a cop is also not "real life self defense."  Because the experience a cop has is nothing like how most people go through their lives.  Being a soldier also has rules, and is not "real life self defense."  

I understand that any form of competition has rules, and truly, that's okay. 

I really think that you and others fundamentally misunderstand my points.  I am not suggesting that competition is better training than anything else.  I'm suggesting that competition is not training at all.  It is the product of training... the end result.  And you NEED an end result in order to develop real skill.  Every training has an end result (which I have referred to as application).  The problem is, some people don't know what that end result is.  They think it's 'self defense' when in reality, it's 'kata' or something else. 

In cop training, it's working professionally as a cop.  In soldier training, it's combat.  In civilian self defense training, it's... what?  more training?  Training is the means to the end.


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *You, I and Drop Bear agree on most points*.  Where we disagree is when you guys push that their is only one methodology.  Which if you are not self aware comes through repeatedly in your posts and other MartialTalk members notice it.


Here's something I hope you'll consider.  Competition is not training.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*Steve*, we go round and round on this and you also go round and round on this with other posters.  If you look at your second to last post I would advise you to look at your posting style and try to figure out why you get so much push back.  Personally, if you feel like you are not communicating effectively it may be that you are not.  Or you have alienated posters based on past posting style.  My advice would be to look for inwards rather than outwards.

One item of personal note: when you say something like ask questions if you don't get it or for pete's sake which I used back at you after you used it at me. (to see if you would get it)  You have to understand that people will totally write off what you continue to say.  *It is a very ineffective communication tool!  *It is something that you have mentioned you don't like in regards to another poster.

Now, if we look at the overall quantity of your post you and I agree on almost everything.  Where we disagree is that a system that does not have competition cannot be effective.  This was pushed early on in Renzo Gracie's first book and he is wrong as is anyone else who pushes this.  Why?  Because, humans have throughout time risen to the occasion and performed feats without having had competition as their only mainstay.  This in no way invalidates competition because like you I believe in it as well to have balance in training.  Yet, people can effectively defend themselves without competition.  Soldiers can effectively perform in combat without competition.  LEO's can effectively perform their duties without regular competition.  *Though in my opinion it would be good if they had some competition as a regular part of their advancing their skills.*  There are other training methodologies that work and can be utilized.


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *Steve*, we go round and round on this and you also go round and round on this with other posters.  If you look at your second to last post I would advise you to look at your posting style and try to figure out why you get so much push back.  Personally, if you feel like you are not communicating effectively it may be that you are not.  Or you have alienated posters based on past posting style.  My advice would be to look for inwards rather than outwards.
> 
> One item of personal note: when you say something like ask questions if you don't get it or for pete's sake which I used back at you after you used it at me. (to see if you would get it)  You have to understand that people will totally write off what you continue to say.  *It is a very ineffective communication tool!  *It is something that you have mentioned you don't like in regards to another poster.
> 
> Now, if we look at the overall quantity of your post you and I agree on almost everything.  Where we disagree is that a system that does not have competition cannot be effective.  This was pushed early on in Renzo Gracie's first book and he is wrong as is anyone else who pushes this.  Why?  Because, humans have throughout time risen to the occasion and performed feats without having had competition as their only mainstay.  This in no way invalidates competition because like you I believe in it as well to have balance in training.  Yet, people can effectively defend themselves without competition.  Soldiers can effectively perform in combat without competition.  LEO's can effectively perform their duties without regular competition.  *Though in my opinion it would be good if they had some competition as a regular part of their advancing their skills.*  There are other training methodologies that work and can be utilized.


If MT administration has concerns about my posting style, a PM would be appreciated. 

Whether you appreciate my posting style or not, it's not okay to put words in my mouth.  I have no problems being accountable for my own words, but I can't accept responsibility for what you invent in your noggin, but ascribe to me.  You say you and I agree.  I have no way to know that based on what you actually write.  

Do you understand what I mean when I say that competition is not training?  If you don't, maybe that's a good place to start.   Think about it like this.  A competitor is a role, like cop.  Competing is the application of training, like policing.  Scenario based training, kata/bunkai, drills, sparring, road work... that's training.  Those are all ways to prepare for application, which can be policing or competing.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*You see Steve, look at your post above*.  It is argumentative and or condescending.  I am not sure if you realize you do this.  it makes it hard to want to even read your post and have a conversation with you.

In regards to competition/training.  They are not the same.  They are different.  Yet they can be found together working in concert regularly.  Where you are make a mistake is that Scenario Based Training can have a elements of competition in it.  It doesn't have to be only for adrenalizing a partner.   A scenario can start off as a role playing situation and quickly advance to full on competition to dominate the other individual in the scenario.  Happens all the time.  Especially when someone gets really adrenalized and gets after it.  It can be very competitive then. Kata training ie. the two person kind can also become very competitive as well depending on the level of the practitioner's.  Two person kata can be very scary when done right.  Adrenaline can flow and the partner can actually be trying to take your head off even if you are working on very structured skill sets.  Things are not so black and white there are shades of grey here and that is what I believe you miss.

Like I said you and I agree on almost everything but... you seem to be locked into there is only one way to do this and that is just not correct.


----------



## Buka

Brian and Steve, you two don't care much for each other's opinions and writing styles. (I can tell these things, it's a gift, what can I say) 

I think you both need to do some two man Tai-chi together or something. Or just have a rock fight. My particular problem is I've always liked reading both of your thoughts. Still do, just makes it more difficult with the arguing. Especially when you both seem to agree on so much. 

See, now I'm so upset I'm going to go eat the rest of that lemon tart with another cup of Kona coffee. And I'm putting whipped cream on it. And this is breakfast. Bastahs!


----------



## Steve

Brian, can you please show me the post where I said that scenario based training is not quality training?  Because I am very sure I can find you several posts in several threads where I have said just the opposite. 

If you don't mind, I'll try to stick to the substance and would appreciate it if you would do the same.  And once again, if you or any other MT administrative staff have concerns about my posting style, the polite thing to do is address it in private.  PM is the right way to do this. 

Scenario based training, like sparring, drills, and every other way to train, has a role.  There is more than one way to skin a cat, as they say. Sparring has elements of competition in it, as well, and that's a part of why it's so helpful for people who are preparing to compete. 

All training does get to some kind of application.  The problem is when you think it's something that it is not.  For example, if you think you're training for "self defense" but are actually training to be really good at sparring, you've got problems.  If you think you're training to be a cop, but are actually training for competition, you have problems.   This is what I think you are getting at.  A cop may compete, and it may be helpful to a cop, but competition isn't going to be critical to a cop, because he or she has a practical venue for applying technique in context, which is the profession of being a cop.  A marine may or may not compete.  It might be helpful for a marine to participate in a competitive martial art, but not critical, because marines are training for combat.  And if they serve in a combat arena, they will be applying what they've learned on the job. 

Once again, a teacher or an accountant has no means for applying what they're learning.  They aren't going to go out and work nights as a narcotics detective or an infantryman.  They can, however, prepare for competition.  That's a reasonable end goal.  

If you can find a way to avoid wagging your finger at me for being condescending and spend some time addressing what I'm actually writing, I would appreciate it.  I also realize that this is somewhat off topic, so if it belongs in another thread, that's fine too.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

You and I agree on your last post. We agree on most things.  It would seem that we are closer to understanding each other than we some times let on...


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> You and I agree on your last post. We agree on most things.  It would seem that we are closer to understanding each other than we some times let on...


My last post represents the same position as my first post.  It's not new.   But if you now understand that you agree with me, I'm glad. 

I disagree with you on one thing, which is your mischaracterization of my position.  As I said earlier, if you would focus less on wagging your finger at me and more on actually trying to understand what I'm saying, we'd get along great.


----------



## Buka

You call that a finger wag?

_This_ is a finger wag.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

...

*Like I have mentioned before we agree on most things but definitely not everything.*  Over time and in multiple threads it is easy to read your position and why you get push back from posters here at MartialTalk.


----------



## Steve

Brian R. VanCise said:


> ...
> 
> *Like I have mentioned before we agree on most things but definitely not everything.*  Over time and in multiple threads it is easy to read your position and why you get push back from posters here at MartialTalk.


I think we agree on most things.  You just don't realize it yet.   I will get you there.  I haven't given up on you yet, Brian.


----------

