a question from an ignorant brother

[chufeng]

I would be particularly interested in how you make 24 step and 48 step Taijiquan into effective martial arts?

Kind of hard to do over the internet...

Incidentally, why did your founder ignore the most potent of the internal arts, Liu Ho Pa Fa which in itself is a synthesis of Taiji, Bagua and Xing-Yi

Sifu Starr is the founder of YiLiQuan...
Why did he "ignore" LiuHoPaFa? He didn't, but why study that when he inherited a system called PaiXingQuan from Master Chen Wing Chou?...Paixing was comprised of Northern Shaolin, XingYiQuan, and BaGuaChang...it was well over 400 years old when Master Chen trained in it. PaiXing has had a tremendous influence on the development of YiLiQuan.

I also asked the question previously which was studiously ignored. How do you train Jings (Jins) in Yiliquan

They are developed through training in the system as a whole...
Don't think that TaiJi is the only art capable of generating "the jings," as you put it.

What makes you think that anyone who does not practise Yiliquan is an "armchair warrior"

He doesn't...if that is your interpretation of his comments, you clearly missed the point. Sifu Starr was the chairman of the AAU Chinese Martial Arts division for the entire United States, at one time. He met MANY of the leaders of Chinese martial arts from coast to coast...he was able to talk with, train with, and observe many of the big names and their students...I think he is more than qualified to sum up what he saw, on the average...
He also travelled to China as part of a "martial arts delegation" back in 1981...many of the old masters there told him that what was being practiced in China (that is the wushu stuff, anyways) was ineffective for combat...They did acknowledge that there were teachers who still taught the REAL thing, but they were mostly underground...If I were to say that 95% of the people who practice TaiJi today didn't have a clue as to the REAL combat applications of the postures, would you argue with me? Truth is, there are only a handful of people who really know what they are doing. You may be among them...I don't know.
But, the forms we train in, even though they were not originally intended for the purpose of combat, have been modified to make them useful...

If you have further questions, I'm sure Sifu Starr will be more than happy to address them, or YiLiQuan1, or myself...

Good training sir,
:asian:
chufeng

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by East Winds
Yilisifu,

(Incidentally, why did your founder ignore the most potent of the internal arts, Liu Ho Pa Fa which in itself is a synthesis of Taiji, Bagua and Xing-Yi)?

Not really a question of ignoring Liu Ho Ba Fa so much so as developing Baixingquan similarly but with different influences... Baixing evolved into Yili over time. Baixing was taught with Xingyi, Taiji and Bagua taught "on the side." Sifu Starr decided that this wasn't a very efficient method of instruction, and over the years redundant exercises and similar obstacles to training were removed or remodeled to make the overall instruction more streamlined and efficient. This absorbtion of material into one homogenous method is what gave birth to Yili... kind of...

I would be particularly interested in how you make 24 step and 48 step Taijiquan into effective martial arts? However if your only exposure to taijiquan is 24 step or 48 step, then I can understand why you would consider them ineffectual martial arts. They were never developed as such! They were developed by committees to resolve two specific problems. 1. Provide a Taiji set that could be learned quickly, be performed in a small space and improve the health of the Chinese population (24 step). And 2. provide a form which could be used as a standard for judging competition Taiji. (48 step). Nothing more!!

The postures are as they are. The patterns in which the postures are assembled, though still of significant note, are less important to a certain degree than the method by which the postures and their martial applications are understood. The martial applications of the postures remain, though the pattern in which they are practiced has been modified or adjusted by the creators of the 24 and 48 set. Whatever. After significant forms practice, people don't apply techniques or postures from the forms exactly as they are assembled in the form's pattern anyway... The pattern gives an indication of the method of application, but is not a final "end all" guide for their application. And so it is with the 24 set (which is the only "# set" I know). The form is still useful for the basic application of Taiji postures.

And Yiliquan is not a Taiji school, nor a Xingyi or Bagua school for that matter. We use their methods to develop certain attributes that are expressed through Yili methods.

I also asked the question previously which was studiously ignored. How do you train Jings (Jins) in Yiliquan. Because if don't train jings, then you cannot possibly be practising Taiji for anything other than health.

You have your opinions, and they may well be valid. However, I would submit that it is incorrect to state that the "jings" are unable to be developed outside of Taiji's methods of instruction. One of our Yili seniors who is currently also a yondan in Isshin-ryu Karate (and the successor to Sensei Sherm Harrill) is capable of some extraordinary feats...

What makes you think that anyone who does not practise Yiliquan is an "armchair warrior"

You mean they're not?

Yiliquan is one way of doing things. After studying a number of arts, I feel it is one of the most complete that is available. We develop the ability to lay some serious smack down on the baddie, to suck up impressive hits from the baddie and be none the worse for wear, we are able to tie him up with his own limbs and toss him on his ear with little effort. Other arts are able to develop the same in their students. But since I (and others) study Yiliquan, we provide our information within that context. I think it is very safe to say that, without information to the contrary, most of the alleged Xingyi, Taiji and Bagua schools out there (and we have this on first hand account - both from watching as well as studying with some of the folks professing to teach these arts) are extremely watered down, to the point that there is no longer any alcohol in the drink, just warm ice...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[yilisifu]

I never intended for my comments to be taken to mean that people who don't train in Yili are "armchair warriors." I don't think I really even implied that.

However, I think if I randomly selected, say, a dozen Taiji seniors from different schools, a dozen from Xingyi, and a dozen from Bagua, I might end up with one that could actually apply his art in a true combative situation. Sadly, the internals arts as taught in many (and perhaps most) schools nowadays is a very sterilized version of what they once were. This may not be the case in the school from which you come...if it is not, then you are most fortunate, but in the minority.

 

[East Winds]

Thanks for the responses Yili guys,

I was not knocking Yiliquan nor its practitioners. I was merely highlighting what to me, at any rate, seemed a paradox in your arguments. You complain than Taijiquan has become "extremely watered down" or that the forms taught are "sterilized versions" of the originals. But isn't that exactly what 24 step and 48 step Taiji is? Isn't that exactly why they were developed? To be a "Simplified Peking Form" (24 step). or a "48 Step Competition Form?"

I have trained now for over 15 years in Traditional Yang Family Taijiquan. Much of that time with a lineaged holder of the style. For a large part of my working life, I was a ranking officer in one of the U'K's hardest prisons. I have had plenty of experience of facing "angry men" and of using Taijiquan in a practical situation. But of course, the internal part of the training means that conflict is not inevitable every time!

Very best wishes

When asked about breathing in Tai Chi, my master replied "Yes, keep doing it"

 

[yilisifu]

You're most fortunate in having a good teacher who knows what he's doing, cares about what he teaches, and teaches the real thing.

Most modern Taiji teachers don't. For instance, we have the "fluffy" 24 step form and so forth. That's what we rail against. So many people are being taught this "new agey" version of Taiji and their instructors insist that it's the real thing but as you and I know, that's not even close to being true.

The same kind of problems exists in Bagua and Xingyi where many teachers and practicioners prefer to intellectualize about their respective arts rather than get on the floor and sweat into their socks. My friend, Master Oyata, used to call these people the "mushi bushi" ("mouth warriors").

Many there are, too, who puff out their chests because they train in an INTERNAL art...they belittle what they consider to be HARD stylists (karate and so forth)...but they never practice fighting with them. I have never seen one of these people climb into the competition ring and last for more than a few seconds.

Unfortunately, this has led many people to conclude that internal stylists are wimps or that their arts are something less than effective. Such a conclusion is, of course, very wrong...but how can we defend ourselves when they point to a group of new-age crispies in the park doing their "fluffy" forms and never breaking a sweat?

It is this kind of thing that I refer to when I speak of "breathing new life" into these marvelous arts. It's more than that; it's "breathing SOME life" into them! I remember many eons ago when I sat with my friend Roger Dung (who was, in those days, a well-known practicioner from Shanghai) at a national tournament and watched a Taiji demonstration. He shook his head and said, "That's what we call 'dead man' Taiji. It has no life in it." And that was close to 30 years ago. Things have only worsened since then.

It's important for internal stylists who know the real art to show it to the public and keep these arts alive. Otherwise, we're doomed.

As a dear friend of mine (Chris Smaby, 6th dan JKA) once remarked as he watched a pitiful martial arts demonstration, "You know, there are some people who really don't have a clue...and then there are those who don't even suspect."
:shrug:

 

[Taiji fan]

The martial applications of the postures remain, though the pattern in which they are practiced has been modified or adjusted by the creators of the 24 and 48 set. Whatever. After significant forms practice, people don't apply techniques or postures from the forms exactly as they are assembled in the form's pattern anyway... The pattern gives an indication of the method of application, but is not a final "end all" guide for their application. And so it is with the 24 set (which is the only "# set" I know). The form is still useful for the basic application of Taiji postures.

The postures were certainly adjusted by the creators of the 24 and 48 step forms. Mostly in the over emphasis in over large movemnts that vapourise the usefulness of teh application. Unfortunately the 'competition' aspect has caused the 'performance' aspect and aesthetic value to be regarded higher than the smaller, more compact and effective movemnts. The actual sequence of the moves is pretty much irelevent as far as fighting is concernered, but as with most aspects of taijiquan it is a training aid, it teaches the control and balance and rooting required (amongst other things). We do pad work in the taijiclass, we do fitness in the taiji class and emphasis that the 'health benefits' are the by product of correct practice, we still have more older students than younger ones but at least they know the score.....

The same kind of problems exists in Bagua and Xingyi where many teachers and practicioners prefer to intellectualize about their respective arts rather than get on the floor and sweat into their socks.

sounds like my first teacher

Many there are, too, who puff out their chests because they train in an INTERNAL art...they belittle what they consider to be HARD stylists (karate and so forth)...but they never practice fighting with them.

I have trained in both and have the utmost respect for 'hard stylists'....especially at high levels.

Unfortunately, this has led many people to conclude that internal stylists are wimps or that their arts are something less than effective. Such a conclusion is, of course, very wrong...but how can we defend ourselves when they point to a group of new-age crispies in the park doing their "fluffy" forms and never breaking a sweat?

it is so hard to get it accross to people, we are constantly fighting against this kind of publicity...every health magazine features this kind of stuff.

It is this kind of thing that I refer to when I speak of "breathing new life" into these marvelous arts.

thats interesting because we call it spirit and a simple misaligment in the body or a glazed expression and the spirit is gone (if it was even there in the first place) My teacher can tell instantly at a glance if the movemnt has spirit, infact I was having a private session with her and even in the first move I was made to repeat it many times until I was able to maintain spirit throughout the first move.......
The tide is turing...taiji has been crap for many years......the Cheng Man Ching revolution is over as more and more people seek the 'truth' as long as we keep chipping away we cannot help but get the message across.

East Winds.....what prison did you work in?

 

[East Winds]

Taijifan,

For the last 5 years of my career I worked in Shotts Prison Lanarkshire and saw through 3 full scale riots. Calming or what?

Best wishes

When asked about breathing in Tai Chi my Master replied, "Yes keep doing it"

 

[Taiji fan]

Shotts eh...thats one of the ones with the toughest rep! No wonder you took up taiji

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Brother John
I am a Kenpoist. Our style emphasizes the ability to apply our art's skills in a life or death situation.
I appreciate the internal styles as well, but confess a profound ignorance of them. I know that they are excellent for maintaining health, cultivating Chi/Ki, and assist in developing a serene mind: BUT...
Does Tai Chi help one in a self-defense situation??
I do not claim that a martial art must address real combat training, or be applicable in a fight, to be a good and valid martial art. We don't all study/train for the same reasons right? But I was wondering about a Tai Chi practitioners self defense skills. If it does help one in this area, how?
With all respect...
Your Brother
John

Well first you should understand "kenpo" essentially is Tai Chi (taiji) which by most accounts is the essential mother of all Chinese Fightiing Arts. The applications aspect is not as well known outside of China and is contained in the second part of the actual name. "Tai Chi" is the health, exercise, and internal energy component . When you add the self defense applications, it becomes "Tai Chi Chaun" (Taiji Quon). Tai Chi is not meant to be self defense, but Tai Chi Chaun is all about fighting applications. A loose translation would be Tai Chi or "Grand Ultimate." Chaun or Quon is "Fist." So to get the good stuff you have to study "Grand Ultimate Fist," or Tai Chi Quon. I am of the opinion (and so was Parker) that ultimately you would have to approach your Kenpo generally the same if you wanted the same long term benefits. Not necessarily slow or anything like that, but you must learn to move correctly in harmony with the body. The bad news is expediate motion does not always do that.

 

[Matt Stone]

Never having studied kenpo (though I have seen it performed, and watched a class at a school once), can you tell me how kenpo is "essentially" Taiji? They look nothing alike, and from what I could tell, have little in common in exterior teaching...

Caveat that with the statement that I do believe that All are One in the end, but I just don't see how kenpo could ever be confused with or mistaken for Taiji...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[Johnathan Napalm]

Originally posted by Doc
Well first you should understand "kenpo" essentially is Tai Chi (taiji) which by most accounts is the essential mother of all Chinese Fightiing Arts. The applications aspect is not as well known outside of China and is contained in the second part of the actual name. "Tai Chi" is the health, exercise, and internal energy component . When you add the self defense applications, it becomes "Tai Chi Chaun" (Taiji Quon). Tai Chi is not meant to be self defense, but Tai Chi Chaun is all about fighting applications. A loose translation would be Tai Chi or "Grand Ultimate." Chaun or Quon is "Fist." So to get the good stuff you have to study "Grand Ultimate Fist," or Tai Chi Quon. I am of the opinion (and so was Parker) that ultimately you would have to approach your Kenpo generally the same if you wanted the same long term benefits. Not necessarily slow or anything like that, but you must learn to move correctly in harmony with the body. The bad news is expediate motion does not always do that.

Sounds like Tai Ji is the Chinese's attempt at coming up with the Unifying theory that explains everything and ties everything together.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Never having studied kenpo (though I have seen it performed, and watched a class at a school once), can you tell me how kenpo is "essentially" Taiji? They look nothing alike, and from what I could tell, have little in common in exterior teaching...

Fair question but I said Kenpo is essentially Taiji Quon, NOT Taiji. Have you ever seen Taji Quon applied? You may have but didn't realize it. Having only seen kenpo once, you probably were at a commercial school somewhere looking at a commercial interpretation.

I also have a sense you have an idea of Tai Chi firmly planted in your mind of a bunch of us old folks moving sloooowly through a movement. Tai Chi Chun/Taiji Quon is fast and explosive, but is rarely seen in this country and when it is, most don't recognize it for what it is.

Kenpo is very much Taiji Quon when taught from that perspective of proper body mechanics enroute to applications , instead of the quick self defense skills, in the popular version.

Want to see Tai Ji Quon/Chinese Kenpo? Dig up any of the later footage of Ed Parker performing a technque before he passed. That's why nobody moved like Parker. What HE did was different from what HE taught most after he created a commercial version of his art. Remember the "master' is always ahead of what he teaches.

It's easy to be confused, especially if you've never really seen either.

 

[Matt Stone]

Actually, my understanding of Taijiquan comes from having praciticed it, Xingyiquan and Baguazhang for the last 16 + years...

I do not have a preset idea in my head of old men in parks practicing in slow motion. I do, however, have an understanding of what I have seen of many arts. I stated previously that I know that All are One at a certain level. That having been said, the perception of All being One doesn't necessarily hinge on them all looking the same, and kenpo looks nothing like Taiji...

Please point me in the direction of some links to video of Mr. Parker doing whatever it was he did that you thought resembled Taiji. I would enjoy seeing it.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Actually, my understanding of Taijiquan comes from having praciticed it, Xingyiquan and Baguazhang for the last 16 + years...

I do not have a preset idea in my head of old men in parks practicing in slow motion. I do, however, have an understanding of what I have seen of many arts. I stated previously that I know that All are One at a certain level. That having been said, the perception of All being One doesn't necessarily hinge on them all looking the same, and kenpo looks nothing like Taiji...

Please point me in the direction of some links to video of Mr. Parker doing whatever it was he did that you thought resembled Taiji. I would enjoy seeing it.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

To my knowledge there are no video links of Ed Parker on the net. Perhaps someone could share some video with you.

However I am surprised you didn't seem to know the difference between Taiji and its Quon application.

 

[chufeng]

Hey Doc,

However I am surprised you didn't seem to know the difference between Taiji and its Quon application.

I hate to break it to you, but what you are typing makes NO sense...
Someone obviously fed you a line of feces somewhere along your path...
When people refer to TaiJi, they are just abbreviating the full term TaiJiQuan...

in the philosophical sense, the term TaiJi can be discussed from a metaphysical perspective, a Taoist perspective, or several other ways...but don't confuse philosophy with the art of TaiJi...

The fact is, there are many who practice TaiJiQuan in a "new age crispy" way...they THINK they are doing TaiJiQuan but they are only doing a poor imitation of it...Yes, real TaiJiQuan uses full speed attacks and defenses in its training, they also use push hands, static postures, qigong, and forms work...problem is, very few TaiJiQuan schools teach it that way...

No, I don't think Yiliquan1 is confused, I think you are...
Ed Parker's Kempo is not TaiJiQuan...sorry.

:asian:
chufeng

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by chufeng
Hey Doc,



I hate to break it to you, but what you are typing makes NO sense...
Someone obviously fed you a line of feces somewhere along your path...
When people refer to TaiJi, they are just abbreviating the full term TaiJiQuan...

in the philosophical sense, the term TaiJi can be discussed from a metaphysical perspective, a Taoist perspective, or several other ways...but don't confuse philosophy with the art of TaiJi...

The fact is, there are many who practice TaiJiQuan in a "new age crispy" way...they THINK they are doing TaiJiQuan but they are only doing a poor imitation of it...Yes, real TaiJiQuan uses full speed attacks and defenses in its training, they also use push hands, static postures, qigong, and forms work...problem is, very few TaiJiQuan schools teach it that way...

No, I don't think Yiliquan1 is confused, I think you are...
Ed Parker's Kempo is not TaiJiQuan...sorry.

:asian:
chufeng

You're entitled to your opinion although I respectfuly suggest that I just might be more of an authority on Ed Parkers works than you. My information on the Chinese Arts goes back to Grandmaster Ark Wong who was my original teacher. He had a passing knowledge of the Chinese Arts, along with Lefiti, Jame Wing Woo of TaijiQuon, and my old school mate Grandmaster Dounglas Wong. All of them made and make a distinction between the exercise and the applications.

I will concede your opinion is obviously based on what you have seen and learned, and there is a strong probability that I am speaking of something you have never seen or know anything about in Kenpo or Taiji. Now i'm Sorry.

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by Doc
You're entitled to your opinion

As are you.

... although I respectfuly suggest that I just might be more of an authority on Ed Parkers works than you.

I don't think your knowledge of kenpo was ever questioned.

My information on the Chinese Arts goes back to Grandmaster Ark Wong who was my original teacher. He had a passing knowledge of the Chinese Arts, along with Lefiti, Jame Wing Woo of TaijiQuon, and my old school mate Grandmaster Dounglas Wong. All of them made and make a distinction between the exercise and the applications.

Your teacher didn't teach taijiquan, but five animals style. We make a distinction between exercise taiji and "real" taiji as well.

I will concede your opinion is obviously based on what you have seen and learned,

Like having seen and studied taijiquan perhaps?

...and there is a strong probability that I am speaking of something you have never seen or know anything about in Kenpo or Taiji. Now i'm Sorry.

The day that taijiquan looks like kenpo is the day TKD and BJJ start looking similar... I admitted earlier that the ultimate goals of all MAs are identical, and at a very advanced level many arts mimic the effects of other arts (I usually use the phrase "All are One"), but they rarely look the same unless they were closely related in some fashion to begin with.

Taijiquan and kenpo look nothing alike beyond perhaps a very superficial and fleeting appearance due to the finite number of ways in which the human body can move. Eventually, movements may be repeated in one style that are commonly seen in another style. But kenpo "ain't" taiji no matter how you do it...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[chufeng]

Doc,

I understand the idea of all arts being the same...at some level...
I also acknowledge that TaiJiQuan MAY be a refinement of some older art...then again, it is possible that it developed in its own little island of people (sort of like the birds on the Galapagos Isles.)...the only ones that really know are those who have a direct line to the originator...(and there are many who make that claim).

Is it possible that Kempo has moves that are similar (or even identical) to TaiJiQuan? Of course, the body can only move so many ways...

I differentiate between the "exercise" of TaiJiQuan and the combat applications of TaiJiQuan, as well...but leaving the Quan off of the end is not how one differentiates the two...perhaps YOUR teachers made the decision to call one one thing and the other thing something else...we'll never know, will we? since they have both left us...

My teacher may be able to shed some light on the subject, he is
familiar with many of the older Chinese masters in Southern California...he was also taught by a Chinese man who left China during the Communist Revolution (before the Communists actually took power)...

Certainly, you know more about Ed Parker's Kempo than I do...but you are the first to come forward with the claim that Ed Parker's Kempo is the same as TaiJiQuan...

:asian:
chufeng

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by chufeng
...but you are the first to come forward with the claim that Ed Parker's Kempo is the same as TaiJiQuan...

Somehow I think he will be the only one... At least I hope so. I would hate to think that such misunderstanding went deeper than this.

 

[Matt Stone]

Y'know, I got to thinking...

I replied merely to the supposition that somehow EPAK, AK or kenpo in general was the same as Taijiquan...

Doc, would you care to explain how, in specifics, they are the same?