Tai Chi as a combat art?

[Shadow Hunter]

Originally posted by Larry
Was it always this way? I don't think so. I believe taiji originally might have been a combat art, but lost its edge due to the way Chinese urban society works. Much of taiji now is based on the idea of meeting a solitary challenger and then symbolically "defeating" him in a round of push hands.

That has been my opinion of Chinese arts in general. Through the ages, the most popular instructors/ styles have been ones who can defeat a challenger in a match. The arts that specialize in getting into a ring and beating somone else into road kill are the ones that have done the best. Surpise attacks, weapons, multiple attackers and the like just are not part of the program.

But at the same time, I have learned a lot from Chinese arts, and Taiji in particular. I think that if someone comes into a DECENT CLASS with some experience behind him in more combat oriented arts, he will benifit a lot. The problems are A) there are so many idiots who do not know what they are doing when they teach tiaji- let alone the comabt applications and B) many arts have principles that run counter to what you do in taiji. So you have to throw everything away to start learning the art properly. Sometimes you just can not do that. The habits are too well ingrained.

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

Originally posted by MountainSage
Kaith,
I read an article that made the arguement that a person is limited in the time they can participate in a hard art, where as, in a soft art the time of participation is not limited. I can see this in my chosen art of TKD. My body won't take the abuse forever, so I'd recommend any of the chinese arts, they seem to promote active practice for many years. In most hard arts it seems after a given age or rank active practice turns to more talk than show. I've not seen many high ranked, older TKD MA that can go one on one with a younger and stronger person. Thoughts and opinions.

Mountain Sage

Your name suits you. I always find deformed, broken TKD people switching to Tai Chi.

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

Originally posted by progressivetactics
I learned a pattern many years ago, i still practice, called the 8 gates of bagua. IS this a standard pattern in Tai Chi? I was told by someone else that seen the form they learned it in Tai Chi, same version. I was taught through Aka Shai Kai Kempo, Soke-Clement Reidner. I figured it was borrowed from maybe BaguaZhang, but do the chinese have forms that are resemblent of one another like the Jap/oki systems do?

I would estimate it's a crossover. Did you study in the 8 Step Praying Mantis school? They probably do this.

 

[7starmantis]

The problem with the idea of switching to a softer style when your old is that Tai Chi takes so many years to learn that you don't have much time to master it if you wait until your old to start.

Originally posted by Randy Strausbaugh
You'll find that most Chinese styles tend to be deficient in groundwork. While the Monkey and Ditang styles both have extensive rolling techniques, what I've seen of them appears to emphasize rolling back up to your feet. Even Shuai Chiao lacks groundwork. The only Chinese style I've heard of which emphasizes groundwork is the Dog style. In one of Robert Smith's books, an instructor tells him that the only way to fight a Dog stylist is to stand back and throw things at him. This probably is changing (at least in the US) since groundfighting has come into fashion.

Trying to avoid life's potholes,
Randy Strausbaugh

This is a common misunderstanding of CMA in general. Many CMA are taught leaving out the groundwork, but that doesn't mean CMA are lacking in groundwork. The same principles of standing apply to ground fighting. I study 7 star preying mantis and we do extensive groundwork in our system.

7sm

 

[Kodanjaclay]

Could you tell me more about mantis? Feel free to email me at [email protected].

Thanks

 

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by Kodanjaclay
Could you tell me more about mantis? Feel free to email me at [email protected].

Thanks

I sent you an email, feel free to email me back or come visit in the CMA section of Martialtalk, there are several of us mantis guys there.

7sm

 

[Kodanjaclay]

Thank you. Please feel free to have any other mantis people, particularly any near Thousand Oaks, CA, contact me.

 

[Shadow Hunter]

Originally posted by 7starmantis
The problem with the idea of switching to a softer style when your old is that Tai Chi takes so many years to learn that you don't have much time to master it if you wait until your old to start.

But there are certain arts that lend themselves well to being studied prior to Taiji. I was told when I first started that in China, you traditionally had to study a "hard" style while you were young before you eventually started training in Taiji. I had done some Chuan 'Fa before I started training and did pretty damn good. The same things my Chuan 'Fa teacher advised me about were the same as what my Taiji teacher pointed out.

Some arts lend themsleves well to training. Study jujutsu, silat, aikido or some other art like that and you will probably find that Taiji adds to the skills you already have and makes them more effective and subtle. Kyokushinkai, TKD, boxing, combatives and many arts that put great importance on competition are arts that have principles counter to that which you find in Taiji. Before you get good at Taiji you have to get rid of all the skills you have built up so far.

But if you study the right art, then you can make a smooth transition to Taiji and will probably be much better than the typical student who studies the watered down version you so so often now.

 

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by Shadow Hunter
But there are certain arts that lend themselves well to being studied prior to Taiji. I was told when I first started that in China, you traditionally had to study a "hard" style while you were young before you eventually started training in Taiji. I had done some Chuan 'Fa before I started training and did pretty damn good. The same things my Chuan 'Fa teacher advised me about were the same as what my Taiji teacher pointed out.

I believe that it is really the inverse that is true. Taiji is in reality the basis of all Chinese MArtial Arts and in that most MA in general. That is why you see so much of the same principles, however, I think studying taiji will add to your other arts and not your other arts adding to your taiji. In Kung Fu our principles are very similar, but studying taiji as well I get a better understanding of them. Better then if I studied kung fu for several years then went to taiji.

Also, a "hard" system in CMA is not the same a what we think of a hard system today. Hung Gar was considered a hard system in China many years ago.

7sm

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

It's easy to transition from Chinese Arts, but Japanese ones have a very different body kenisiology. A lot of habits to overcome.

 

[Shadow Hunter]

Originally posted by Ken JP Stuczynski
It's easy to transition from Chinese Arts, but Japanese ones have a very different body kenisiology. A lot of habits to overcome.

I don't know about that. A lot of people classify Taiji along with Hsing-I and Bagua as internal arts and study them together. However, the fact that bagua turns the lead foot inwards really changes the kenisiology from taiji. Just that one little thing is like the tip of an iceburg with all the signifigent differences between the two arts.

Yet people have no problem studying both Bagua and Taiji at the same time since they are both internal arts and supposably compliment each other.

Of course, are we talking about Japanese arts such as karate, or Japanese arts such as jujutsu?

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

Originally posted by Shadow Hunter
I don't know about that. A lot of people classify Taiji along with Hsing-I and Bagua as internal arts and study them together. However, the fact that bagua turns the lead foot inwards really changes the kenisiology from taiji. Just that one little thing is like the tip of an iceburg with all the signifigent differences between the two arts.

Yet people have no problem studying both Bagua and Taiji at the same time since they are both internal arts and supposably compliment each other.

Of course, are we talking about Japanese arts such as karate, or Japanese arts such as jujutsu?

The main difference (a generality, I know) is that Japanese styles tend to center their gravity between their legs, even when there is a lead leg. Chinese stances are more transitory, with weight shifting from one leg to the other more often, and with weight predominantly on one or the other. Yes there are exception to both, but I think this is true in general.

Many movements found in Tai Chi & Bagua are also found in mainstream kung fu. The most similar equivalents in Karate are more rigid and linear, especially the closer you get to mainland Japan.

As for jujitsu, I'm not sure ... don't they use kendo foorwork similar to karate?

There's lot of other points, too, such as pivoting, degree of limb extension, etc.. that can tell you if a style is more Chinese or Japanese.

 

[Shadow Hunter]

Yes there are diffeernces between Japanese styles and Chinese styles as well as between Idonsian arts and Chinese styles. But the differences between even some internal Chinese arts are pretty big and some arts from other countries may be actually closer.

I am not really qualified to talk much about Japanese styles, but look at the way a Ba gua practicioner moves compared to a Taiji player. To my eye, they are about as different as night and day. Springy steps with the knee turned in compared to very solid steps with the entire body energy going in the same direction as the bending of the knee.

Yet a person would not hesitate to study both of them. So why should an art like aikido that also uses the knee in the same way as taiji be a bad habit, while bagua is not considered a bad habit?

 

[Taiji fan]

but look at the way a Ba gua practicioner moves compared to a Taiji player. To my eye, they are about as different as night and day.

that is so true.... bagua also tends to separate upper and lower body, which is an essential part of creating power (keeping them united that is) I studied Tang Soo Do for a while and to be honest I found huge similarlities to taiji, one or two postures may have been different but the basic principles were the same even if they wern't teaching it in the same way, the higher grades all moved very connected and this reflected in their power delivery, like taiji, very little muscular effort.

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

If there is a "right way" it is as in most Tai Chi I've seen -- your hips face the bent knee. Otherwise you are twisting the knee and are losing efficiency in both muscular ability and chi flow.

Principles of arts can differ, but there IS a "wrong" way to move the body from a health perspective. That's why some arts (and sports, and certain forms of dance) produce cripples if you do them long enough.

 

[Taiji fan]

If there is a "right way" it is as in most Tai Chi I've seen -- your hips face the bent knee. Otherwise you are twisting the knee and are losing efficiency in both muscular ability and chi flow

there are two postures in taiji...open body and closed body and these depend on which arm is leading. Eg in single whip, both arm and leg on the same side are leading so the postur is open....ie the hips are not squared forward, but actually open to te diagonal, hips and shoulders are still lined up with each other and in postures like this it is important that the front knee does not collapse inward, any weekeness in the kua will cause this. In a closed body posture such as the end frame of brush and push...opposite arm and leg are leading so in this case the hips and shoulders are squared to the front.........this is from a traditional Yang persepective....

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
there are two postures in taiji...open body and closed body and these depend on which arm is leading. Eg in single whip, both arm and leg on the same side are leading so the postur is open....ie the hips are not squared forward, but actually open to te diagonal, hips and shoulders are still lined up with each other and in postures like this it is important that the front knee does not collapse inward, any weekeness in the kua will cause this. In a closed body posture such as the end frame of brush and push...opposite arm and leg are leading so in this case the hips and shoulders are squared to the front.........this is from a traditional Yang persepective....

I was not aware closed and opened had anything to do with which side is leading. Brush Knee and Ward Off are done on both sides, use either opposite or same side for hand/leg leading, and are both "open".

Single whip is closed, and the hips are not turned all the way, but only to the angle of the lead leg.

At least that's the way I've seen it in a few styles, and it makes the most sense to me.

 

[Taiji fan]

I was not aware closed and opened had anything to do with which side is leading.

fundamental biomechanics of Yang style.....

Single whip is closed, and the hips are not turned all the way, but only to the angle of the lead leg.

single whip is biomechnically correct when it is performed open. Some style such as cheng man ching style close off, weakening the whole structure.

The end frame in brush knee is closed, the ward off is open...this way the body remains connected. Remove the leading hand leg alignments and your scaffolding all goes to pot. Its down to power through posture, if the structure is not correct, there is no taijiquan. I have seen some pretty crappy taiji too most of it come down to the person not understanding the body requirments, but then as I have also found out, not many people actually teach them..

 

[East Winds]

Ken,

Sorry. You have a basic mis-understanding of the mechanics and application of Single Whip. Single Whip is an open posture with energy being issued in two directions. If you close the hips, it is impossible to issue fa jing with the right hand. (Typical Taoist Tai Chi)

And yes, Tajifan is correct : open and closed postures depend on which hand is leading. Same hand same leg leading - open posture. opposite hand opposite leg - closed posture.

Regards

Alistair Sutherland

 

[Ken JP Stuczynski]

These are interesting and helpful observations ... it is entirely possible I was taught wrong, or never went into enough detail with my own (somewhat limited) training.