An Old Email About Tai Chi

[Sifu Ken of 8 Tigers]

{From August 2004}

From: Ken Stuczynski
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 10:24 AM
To: ***@*******.net
Subject: RE: Tai Chi Fighting Theory

A***:

I know this isn't addressed to me specifically, and I don't think I'm qualified to speak on this, but I have a few thoughts. I learned Tai Chi (with few applications) after starting studies in more general Kung Fu, and over the years learned to apply it in many ways. I had to bridge technique to application through experimentation and research into traditional texts. However, the following may be helpful.

First, I think part of the problem is a cultural gap. I studied Oriental philosophy since early high school (on my own at first), but most people have no idea what to make out of the "songs" found in the different lineages to explain principles. Therefore, most people who were "taught" never really understood what they had learned.

And this brings up another problem -- we don't like to think in terms of principles, just cause and effect. We don't have patience for more than "this is right, that is wrong" and want to know that some posture and movement does a specific thing, at a specific range, etc..

From my limited experience and research, Tai Chi focuses more on how you react to your environment (i.e. other people) in terms of Yi, Chi, & Li (Intention, Breath, & Muscular Empowerment). This accounts for ANY possibilities, and not just "if my opponent does this in this way, I will do this in that way". This limitless flexibility is consistent with the way I do martial arts as a whole, and perhaps influences my perspective on Tai Chi, but I believe it to be true.

When I teach Tai Chi movements in relation to fighting, I try not to stray from movements as done in the set -- they are fine by themselves and are not modified in the form to "hide" technique. They are simple more "hidden" to us because they have endless applications that are less classifiable as purely pugilistic movements. I would almost dare to say the more developed you become internally, the less the specific postures are important. Your body will simply move naturally, and your breath will react as the active force appropriately to the circumstance. It even seems that range and other factors are irrelevant in that adjustment is possible for these things without specifically training for them.

So my answer, if I have one, is this: There is no fighting strategy, only principles that become continuous, nameless, natural interaction. The idea of fighting strategy misses the point. In fact, even if you learn Tai Chi properly without any martial aspect (which is difficult, as you are staring all the time at one side of the coin), and practice for a number of years, you will be able to defend yourself, even if you have no clue about potential applications -- you will just do it, naturally and effortlessly, as if by magic. (Wax on, wax off, anyone? :^)

Should this discourage you from doing Tai Chi as a martial artist? I do not think so. The principles are perfectly consistent with almost any other TCMA, and will add a depth to your usual set techniques. In fact, it may break the mold a little, and let you adjust to unusual attacks or circumstances where otherwise you would not be able to, especially with a limited number of trained techniques.

Then again, maybe *I'm* missing the point and am in my own little kung fu world. I'd like to hear your thoughts as well.

 

[seasoned]

{From August 2004}

From: Ken Stuczynski
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 10:24 AM
To: ***@*******.net
Subject: RE: Tai Chi Fighting Theory

A***:

First, I think part of the problem is a cultural gap. I studied Oriental philosophy since early high school (on my own at first), but most people have no idea what to make out of the "songs" found in the different lineages to explain principles. Therefore, most people who were "taught" never really understood what they had learned.

I agree, it is hard to learn principles. Even after you learn them, knowing or not, you need repetition over years to "feel".

And this brings up another problem -- we don't like to think in terms of principles, just cause and effect. We don't have patience for more than "this is right, that is wrong" and want to know that some posture and movement does a specific thing, at a specific range, etc...

The saying goes something like this, "don't teach me 1000 techniques, but teach me a few principals I can use in 1000 techniques.

From my limited experience and research, Tai Chi focuses more on how you react to your environment (i.e. other people) in terms of Yi, Chi, & Li (Intention, Breath, & Muscular Empowerment). This accounts for ANY possibilities, and not just "if my opponent does this in this way, I will do this in that way". This limitless flexibility is consistent with the way I do martial arts as a whole, and perhaps influences my perspective on Tai Chi, but I believe it to be true.

I too believe it to be true in all traditional martial arts.

When I teach Tai Chi movements in relation to fighting, I try not to stray from movements as done in the set -- they are fine by themselves and are not modified in the form to "hide" technique. They are simple more "hidden" to us because they have endless applications that are less classifiable as purely pugilistic movements. I would almost dare to say the more developed you become internally, the less the specific postures are important. Your body will simply move naturally, and your breath will react as the active force appropriately to the circumstance. It even seems that range and other factors are irrelevant in that adjustment is possible for these things without specifically training for them.

I do believe the forms are alive and the principles within them account for all manor of inter-action with another person.

So my answer, if I have one, is this: There is no fighting strategy, only principles that become continuous, nameless, natural interaction. The idea of fighting strategy misses the point. In fact, even if you learn Tai Chi properly without any martial aspect (which is difficult, as you are staring all the time at one side of the coin), and practice for a number of years, you will be able to defend yourself, even if you have no clue about potential applications -- you will just do it, naturally and effortlessly, as if by magic. (Wax on, wax off, anyone? :^)

"For in battle, to think is to die". Strategy is ok for a sports competition, but not so in a life and death struggle. Clear the mind and your proper training will lead the way.

Should this discourage you from doing Tai Chi as a martial artist? I do not think so. The principles are perfectly consistent with almost any other TCMA, and will add a depth to your usual set techniques. In fact, it may break the mold a little, and let you adjust to unusual attacks or circumstances where otherwise you would not be able to, especially with a limited number of trained techniques.

I have a book called "The Inner Structure of Tai Chi". I feel this is recommended reading for any serious student of any art.

Then again, maybe *I'm* missing the point and am in my own little kung fu world. I'd like to hear your thoughts as well.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Xue Sheng]

{From August 2004}

From: Ken Stuczynski
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 10:24 AM
To: ***@*******.net
Subject: RE: Tai Chi Fighting Theory

A***:

I know this isn't addressed to me specifically, and I don't think I'm qualified to speak on this, but I have a few thoughts. I learned Tai Chi (with few applications) after starting studies in more general Kung Fu, and over the years learned to apply it in many ways. I had to bridge technique to application through experimentation and research into traditional texts. However, the following may be helpful.

First, I think part of the problem is a cultural gap. I studied Oriental philosophy since early high school (on my own at first), but most people have no idea what to make out of the "songs" found in the different lineages to explain principles. Therefore, most people who were "taught" never really understood what they had learned.

And this brings up another problem -- we don't like to think in terms of principles, just cause and effect. We don't have patience for more than "this is right, that is wrong" and want to know that some posture and movement does a specific thing, at a specific range, etc..

From my limited experience and research, Tai Chi focuses more on how you react to your environment (i.e. other people) in terms of Yi, Chi, & Li (Intention, Breath, & Muscular Empowerment). This accounts for ANY possibilities, and not just "if my opponent does this in this way, I will do this in that way". This limitless flexibility is consistent with the way I do martial arts as a whole, and perhaps influences my perspective on Tai Chi, but I believe it to be true.

When I teach Tai Chi movements in relation to fighting, I try not to stray from movements as done in the set -- they are fine by themselves and are not modified in the form to "hide" technique. They are simple more "hidden" to us because they have endless applications that are less classifiable as purely pugilistic movements. I would almost dare to say the more developed you become internally, the less the specific postures are important. Your body will simply move naturally, and your breath will react as the active force appropriately to the circumstance. It even seems that range and other factors are irrelevant in that adjustment is possible for these things without specifically training for them.

So my answer, if I have one, is this: There is no fighting strategy, only principles that become continuous, nameless, natural interaction. The idea of fighting strategy misses the point. In fact, even if you learn Tai Chi properly without any martial aspect (which is difficult, as you are staring all the time at one side of the coin), and practice for a number of years, you will be able to defend yourself, even if you have no clue about potential applications -- you will just do it, naturally and effortlessly, as if by magic. (Wax on, wax off, anyone? :^)

Should this discourage you from doing Tai Chi as a martial artist? I do not think so. The principles are perfectly consistent with almost any other TCMA, and will add a depth to your usual set techniques. In fact, it may break the mold a little, and let you adjust to unusual attacks or circumstances where otherwise you would not be able to, especially with a limited number of trained techniques.

Then again, maybe *I'm* missing the point and am in my own little kung fu world. I'd like to hear your thoughts as well.

A cultural gap is a big issue in things CMA and, IMO, more so in Internal CMA styles. Also history of the style plays a big part of understanding as well, IMO. And with Taiji that tends to translate into many practitioners who do not really understand it attempting to change it to something they understand instead of trying to understand what it actually is. And that also goes to a lack of patients in many practitioners. They do not want to invest the time to understand what Taiji is or how it really works so they either completely glaze over the martial aspects and substitute new age pseudo science or they apply other martial arts to it which leave you with what may be a effective martial art but it is not taijiquan.

As to Yi, Qi (Chi) Li; this is more in reference to mind (intention) controls Qi and Qi controls muscles. But before you get there (in my flavor of Yang Style) you need to develop Sandao which is to first work on your Shen (Spirit, Mind – NOT SPIRITUALITY). You then need to develop your Yi (Thought, Intention, and Mind) and Shi (posture, position). And going back to the cultural issue it is the term Shen which is translated to spirit that causes all sorts of problems since may in the west take that to mean spirituality.

As to Taiji in a fight, basically it takes a lot of patience and if you are defining strategy as a plan, method, or series of maneuvers or stratagems for obtaining a specific goal or result. Then no there is no real strategy in direct application. You are basically following your opponent, sticking to him and looking for his center and using his energy against himself and since no two opponants are alike it is hard to set any sort of set strategy up to use against all opponants.

And every single form has multiple applications but those applications have more to do with your opponants force than anything else. Yes there in block parry punch there is a block and a punch but there is also an elbow strike and Qinna applications and a few other things as well but you would apply those depending on your opponants force.

And then you start training Tuishou (Push hands) and this is where you learn to feel your opponents force and attempt to find his center and shrink yours. And at that point the forms do become less important but the applications of those forms are still important but again applied based on your opponants force and then, if you have the chance to work with someone who really knows what they are doing, it appears to be magic but in reality it is not. It is many years of proper training.

I have done Tuishou with a few people and spared with others and I can always tell when they are about to go for a joint lock (Qinna) but that does not mean I can counter it. I did Tuishou with Yang Jwing Ming and I felt he was going to apply a lock but there was absolutely no way I could counter it. My Yang Taiji sifu is the only person that I have ever trained with that uses Qinna in such a way that I never feel it coming until I am locked. He is also the only one that there comes a point where you realize it is too late and you are about to fall down, lose your balance or just plain loose all together. When I asked him about the qinna bits and how he can lock me without me knowing it until I am locked he replied “you lock yourself”. Meaning he just takes his time, redirects and absorbs my force until I am in the right place for him to use qinna, he does not force it.

However this is not to say that there is not on occasion some bit of strategy. However this is more to two guys who are pretty equally matched and after things go on for a bit you try to trip him up by using your own force in different ways, while maintaining full control, in order to get a response you can work with :EG: if you will.

OK, I’ve rambled enough

 

[pete]

or, "In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable." - D.Eisenhower