BS and the internal arts.

[Buka]

How do you handle a line backer coming at you with full speed and force.

In football I was a running back/receiver. If I was already moving fast, he's going to miss. They usually did. If I hadn't got up a good head of steam yet, I'm watching his feet. I'm going to hip fake in the opposite direction of where his front step is landing just as we're meeting each other, then go the other way as he adjusts. (right when he has that, "Oh, crap moment) If I had blockers, I'm following them until I see daylight or they're going too slow.

If the question applies to fighting, it depends. It's relatively easy to make big, strong, running guys miss. I also might just tackle him, dive into his legs, I don't care how fast he's going. I have found that fast aggressive people do not do well when you attack them in a straight line, they're not used to it and it messes them up. Especially if once you get there you know how to fight. Football players only know how to fight other football players, drunks and innocents. I'm no innocent. But I do love football and fighting.

And, yes, it's force meeting force, but not really. It would be if I was crashing my upper body into his upper body, but I want his legs. And I want to meet them with great force. Sidestepping is easier, though. But then you have to go chase him.

 

[Xue Sheng]

One of my security jobs I had a pro-wrestler charge at me like a bull. Luckily he put his head down and ran forward at me. I side stepped and he just fell down..... at least the police, that were there, said that is what happened . also since they were there, I did not even have to get into the who restraint bits, they handled that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

to absorb and redirect standing stationary is not practical.

This is why I believe any MA skill that you train along with your footwork will give you more benefit than just to train "without moving your feet".

 

[oaktree]

The question I posted was more in the lines of taking force directly from a push from a line backer as in standing there attempting to be pushed and not moving off the line of attack. However, I am glad that most people find the idea of meeting force that is extreme that you could not absorb it dead on and redirect. And even if you could that doing so has a higher chance of failure

 

[oaktree]

This is why I believe any MA skill that you train along with your footwork will give you more benefit than just to train "without moving your feet".

Which is why I am more of a Baguazhang guy then a Taijiquan player because there is more practicality in it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Which is why I am more of a Baguazhang guy then ...

Shuai Chiao also likes to "move out of the attacking path". You take over your opponent's original spot. You also let your opponent to fall down at your original spot.

In the following clip, the "stealing step" was used in all 3 moves. Also the position change (I take over your space, you take over my space) are shown in all 3 moves.

 

[oaktree]

One of my security jobs I had a pro-wrestler charge at me like a bull. Luckily he put his head down and ran forward at me. I side stepped and he just fell down..... at least the police, that were there, said that is what happened . also since they were there, I did not even have to get into the who restraint bits, they handled that.

So let me ask this question, do you feel if he rushed you and say you couldn't side step do you think absorbing it head on and then redirecting it would be practical.
We see a lot of tuishou done stationary to teach absorption and redirecting of force which I think teaches a degree of unrealistic applications case in point vs a line backer type of guy who would have the force and speed to generate power, as internal artist, to have say a fragile eldery lady absorb it seems reckless in my opinion.
It is why in the first palm application when I teach Baguazhang, is to get off the line of attack similar to how a bull fighter fights a bull. The more I think about Taijiquan and applications I find some of its views, training, and principles to be unrealistic approaches to engagement of an opponent.
I can agree with the principles step right step left and lu I just disagree with standing stationary trying to do ward off or peng as a line backer rushes in to hit you think you are going to fa jin him back.

 

[oaktree]

Shuai Chiao also likes to "move out of the attacking path". You take over your opponent's original spot. You also let your opponent to fall down at your original spot.

In the following clip, the "stealing step" was used in all 3 moves. Also the position change (I take over your space, you take over my space) are shown in all 3 moves.

Which is why the Baguazhang I do has it's roots in that system over say yin style which is more for striking. In the escrima I do we step at angle steps. When I box I don't box straight line I always throw my punches be it straight or hooks always from an angle.
It makes boxing me more difficult because my foot work allows me to enter the range from 45 degrees while the opponent goes into a straight line. It's geometry. Or ok algebra line and intercept.

 

[mograph]

We see a lot of tuishou done stationary to teach absorption and redirecting of force which I think teaches a degree of unrealistic applications case in point vs a line backer type of guy who would have the force and speed to generate power, as internal artist, to have say a fragile eldery lady absorb it seems reckless in my opinion.

In that case, taijiquan is being taught badly, or interpreted badly by his students who think that peng & bouncing is the only way to approach an interaction.

It is why in the first palm application when I teach Baguazhang, is to get off the line of attack similar to how a bull fighter fights a bull. The more I think about Taijiquan and applications I find some of its views, training, and principles to be unrealistic approaches to engagement of an opponent.
I can agree with the principles step right step left and lu I just disagree with standing stationary trying to do ward off or peng as a line backer rushes in to hit you think you are going to fa jin him back.

As I wrote, if that is what is being taught, that's wrong. Keep in mind that a lot of Tai Chi types think it's a magical art, and that its particular point of view is all that should be taught. No, peng and bouncy stuff should be taught in addition to common sense stuff like "move out of the way."

To put it another way: some people think that in order to "do tai chi" somebody has to only do bouncy-pengy tai chi stuff. Not me: even if he does ten other things that are common to multiple arts, if he does any bouncy-pengy stuff, he's doing Tai Chi (as well as the other stuff). I think that Tai Chi's perspective can enhance, not replace other martial practices. Maybe that's just me ...

Again, check out my go-to clip of Ian Sinclair for tai chi interactions. You'll see that he moves around quite a bit:

 

[oaktree]

In that case, taijiquan is being taught badly, or interpreted badly by his students who think that peng & bouncing is the only way to approach an interaction.

As I wrote, if that is what is being taught, that's wrong. Keep in mind that a lot of Tai Chi types think it's a magical art, and that its particular point of view is all that should be taught. No, peng and bouncy stuff should be taught in addition to common sense stuff like "move out of the way."

To put it another way: some people think that in order to "do tai chi" somebody has to only do bouncy-pengy tai chi stuff. Not me: even if he does ten other things that are common to multiple arts, if he does any bouncy-pengy stuff, he's doing Tai Chi (as well as the other stuff). I think that Tai Chi's perspective can enhance, not replace other martial practices. Maybe that's just me ...

Again, check out my go-to clip of Ian Sinclair for tai chi interactions:

Hehe figures he is a Chen stylist
I agree with what you said and that is exactly what I mean people are taught to take the force and use peng to push him back in a ward off position which is bs against a line backer.now with someone of equal weight then yes perhaps it will work, against someone lighter more then likely. I am not criticizing Taijiquan as an art I am criticizing some of the way it is taught and some of the principles of it that may not apply to certain opponents which maybe I should have articulated myself better.

 

[Zeny]

I am not particularly impressed with the ian sinclair clip.

1) if he has attained good skill in taijiquan, he should do the demo in 'free pushing' style with the partner giving him real (but non-violent) pushes

2) his posture shows a lot of defects

3) his movements are too big, he should be able to use smaller, more subtle movements

4) lots of external arm and leg applications, very little 'internal' methods, taiji done properly will not look 'logical' but will look 'magical' to an untrained person. For 'magical' example look at Adam Mizner clips which show movements that look 'magical' due to the internal methods being applied. Taichi at its highest levels (100pc sung and where the opponent will only feel complete emptiness) will look completely bewildering.

 

[Zeny]

This is what i mean by a proper taijiquan demo. This video was stated to be taken in 2007. My class visited him last year and it was immediately apparent that his skill is of an extremely high level. Last i heard he has seven taijiquan schools, one in Malaysia and six in China.

 

[oaktree]

"if he has attained good skill in taijiquan, he shoulddo the demo in 'free pushing' style with the partner giving him real (but non-violent) pushes."
I can't comment on the demo if he should have used a more free push, in demos the idea is to show possible applications and for the one receiving to make the other guy look good. I personally May have gone this route as the guy isn't my student so if we went all out who knows what may occur.

his posture shows a lot of defects

His form was recognized enough to know it's Chen style. As far as it being defective well I have seen worse. Liam cough cough video cough cough.

his movements are too big, he should be able to use smaller, more subtle movements

Maybe God I suck at using quote function martial talk really has changed....in Chen style we tend to go large then smaller so I don't know what context he was using it.

lots of external arm and leg applications, very little 'internal' methods, taiji done properly will not look 'logical' but will look 'magical' to an untrained person

Oh you want the throwing that looks like b.s. wet noodles. Well he didn't have a couch.

 

[mograph]

Maybe God I suck at using quote function martial talk really

We gotta use square brackets around each QUOTE instance, but the second one needs a forward slash between the square bracket and the Q. Yeah, the function isn't very forgiving.

Hey, you fixed it! Excellent!

 

[oaktree]

This is what i mean by a proper taijiquan demo. This video was stated to be taken in 2007. My class visited him last year and it was immediately apparent that his skill is of an extremely high level. Last i heard he has seven taijiquan schools, one in Malaysia and six in China.

Maybe he does have high skill or compliance students. We can at least measure the other video...ever see my video I'm terrible at making videos also my wife made me do it

 

[oaktree]

We gotta use square brackets around each QUOTE instance, but the second one needs a forward slash between the square bracket and the Q. Yeah, the function isn't very forgiving.

I'm a Baguazhang guy I like roundness because I'm cool not square
I remember the old days of martial talk so much easier for the learning disabled martial artist as myself to use

 

[Xue Sheng]

So let me ask this question, do you feel if he rushed you and say you couldn't side step do you think absorbing it head on and then redirecting it would be practical.
We see a lot of tuishou done stationary to teach absorption and redirecting of force which I think teaches a degree of unrealistic applications case in point vs a line backer type of guy who would have the force and speed to generate power, as internal artist, to have say a fragile eldery lady absorb it seems reckless in my opinion.
It is why in the first palm application when I teach Baguazhang, is to get off the line of attack similar to how a bull fighter fights a bull. The more I think about Taijiquan and applications I find some of its views, training, and principles to be unrealistic approaches to engagement of an opponent.
I can agree with the principles step right step left and lu I just disagree with standing stationary trying to do ward off or peng as a line backer rushes in to hit you think you are going to fa jin him back.

Taiji would redirect in that case, not absorb. I redirected and kind of..... mistakenly on purpose, left my foot there. Teaching absorption of the force of a 250lbs muscle bound bull is not a real good idea. Some one teaching that to an elderly woman is either a bad teacher or caught up in the mythology and hype

 

[mograph]

I redirected and kind of..... mistakenly on purpose, left my foot there.

Mud step application?

 

[oaktree]

Taiji would redirect in that case, not absorb. I redirected and kind of..... mistakenly on purpose, left my foot there. Teaching absorption of the force of a 250lbs muscle bound bull is not a real good idea. Some one teaching that to an elderly woman is either a bad teacher or caught up in the mythology and hype

Thank you for clearing that up and that is precisely the point I was making that there are people who truly believe and teach this.
And hence why there is bs in internal arts that hopefully this thread can clean up some of those mythical and hype.

 

[mograph]

... hopefully this thread can clean up some of those mythical and hype.

... but there will always be resistance. (shrug)