drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
The timing is different.
So he had nothing to enter or get off line of.
You can't use Aikido principles if you can't fight.
Last edited:
The Resurgence of Traditional Martial Arts in Modern Mixed Martial Arts
- Thread starter Xue Sheng
- Start date
So he had nothing to enter or get off line of.
You can't use Aikido principles if you can't fight.
TMA has Sanda that combine kick/punch/throw. If you just add ground game into Sanda, you will get MMA.
So, TMA and MMA are not that far apart at all.
So, TMA and MMA are not that far apart at all.
H
I train System A vs System B and my biggest concern isn't keeping the stylistic traditions. My biggest concern is the natural "cross pollination" that I know will occur. There is no way I can spar against BJJ and not have BJJ bleed into my Jow Ga. As much as I try to keep it just Jow Ga, I know it will happen. We learn from friends and it's only natural that it will happen. The most that I'll be able to do is understand where BJJ begins and where Jow Ga Ends. This will be more difficult with the striking systems.
historically this wasn't always true. The fact that we have so many branch of TMA speaks of not preserving stylistic traditions. The variations of Wing Chun is a good example. I don't think it's possible to preserve historical techniques and stylistic traditions if people are actually using the techniques in the context of System A vs System B. If schools were concerned about their techniques being stolen, then that would also be an example that there was a lot of cross pollination.
I train System A vs System B and my biggest concern isn't keeping the stylistic traditions. My biggest concern is the natural "cross pollination" that I know will occur. There is no way I can spar against BJJ and not have BJJ bleed into my Jow Ga. As much as I try to keep it just Jow Ga, I know it will happen. We learn from friends and it's only natural that it will happen. The most that I'll be able to do is understand where BJJ begins and where Jow Ga Ends. This will be more difficult with the striking systems.
I personally wouldn't use any of his Old Videos of Rokas trying to use Aikido. That video is his low point where he turned against Aikido and traditional martial arts in general. From what I understand he's out of that mindset after having some fighting experience and he now has a more positive mindset about Aikido, and it looks like he has a better understanding of Aikido now.
To me it looks like he had some MMA and BJJ training partners that would spar with him in a way that he could practice applying his Aikido techniques and it looks like that's where most of his skill growth came from. Having that training partner who isn't all about winning makes a big difference when it comes to improving one's martial arts skills. From what I can tell from most Aikido, emphasis is about going with the flow and as a result no one resists. Which doesn't help when they have to find the flow of a resisting opponent.
windwalker099
3rd Black Belt
Agree in principle, though it might be more a case of incomplete training or not having access to those of true ability.
Some thoughts on "resisting opponents":
My background is in Taiji, have interacted with Aikido practitioners long ago.
Depending on the teacher, Taiji might be perceived differently by those observing from the outside. The term 'resisting opponent' is often used to describe perceived shortcomings in training, as observers might wonder why students react the way they do, rather than resisting or countering.
Something that often makes me smile, remembering my teacher's voice saying, 'use all your power.' What he really meant was to use your '意' Yi (intent). Until a student understands "intent" a teacher may ask them to use all their force or resist, as a way to demonstrate principles before the student can grasp the subtler aspects of "intent".
Once "intent" is understood, students tend to use less physical force, reacting to the 'intent' directly and understanding what happens when they don't.
Yes, this is not "fighting" in the sense most teachers do not want to damage a student intentully.
It is a way to decondition a person from instinctive reactions...
In most cases, teachers temper their use of ' intent' to match the student's level, allowing the student to experience the principles without getting hurt. This continues until the student develops the skill to handle stronger applications safely.
In Aikido, this is called ukemi (受け身), the ability to receive force.
In Taiji, it is Hua Jin (化劲), the ability to neutralize force.
Both arts have levels of mastery, true masters are rare.
When encountered, their profound understanding and skill set them apart.
Coming from the other spectrum, I can appreciate these observations,
sharing my own thoughts and experiences, having gone through the process myself.
Last edited:
windwalker099
3rd Black Belt
a few words on "intent"
Courtesy of "Deepseek"
"Chinese "意" (yì):
In martial arts, 意 is critical for mastering techniques. It is not just about physical movement but about the mental focus and energy behind it. For example, in Taiji, 用意不用力 (yòng yì bù yòng lì) means "use intent, not force," highlighting the importance of 意 over brute strength.
English "Intent":
In English, "intent" might be used to describe the purpose behind a technique (e.g., "the intent of this move is to deflect the opponent"), but it does not capture the holistic mind-body-spirit integration implied by 意.
Chinese "意" (yì):
意 is often abstract and subtle, referring to an internal state that is felt rather than explicitly defined. It is something that practitioners cultivate over time through meditation, practice, and introspection.
English "Intent":
"Intent" is more concrete and directly tied to observable actions or decisions. It is easier to articulate and less abstract than 意."
As with many things from a different culture language equivalences are not always the same.
Courtesy of "Deepseek"
"Chinese "意" (yì):
In martial arts, 意 is critical for mastering techniques. It is not just about physical movement but about the mental focus and energy behind it. For example, in Taiji, 用意不用力 (yòng yì bù yòng lì) means "use intent, not force," highlighting the importance of 意 over brute strength.
English "Intent":
In English, "intent" might be used to describe the purpose behind a technique (e.g., "the intent of this move is to deflect the opponent"), but it does not capture the holistic mind-body-spirit integration implied by 意.
Chinese "意" (yì):
意 is often abstract and subtle, referring to an internal state that is felt rather than explicitly defined. It is something that practitioners cultivate over time through meditation, practice, and introspection.
English "Intent":
"Intent" is more concrete and directly tied to observable actions or decisions. It is easier to articulate and less abstract than 意."
As with many things from a different culture language equivalences are not always the same.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
TMA is prospective, not retrospective. The teacher is what makes it “traditional” or not. For example, you and I train in the same school where our teacher emphasizes fidelity to his technique. You go off and faithfully train others as you were taught.
I, on the other hand, want to incorporate my own spin on things. But I insist to my students that they do things exactly as I teach them. Voila, I have invented a new TMA.
Efficacy is kind of off to the side. Does it work? Maybe. But that’s not the priority.
Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
Sweeping generalizations and assumptions, followed by bolstering and self contradictory statements make this whole thread discourse very unpalatable. Let’s at least acknowledge that there are a whole lot of babies being thrown out with the bath water here. Not a single person on this thread is, or ever has been, a professional mma fighter that I’m aware of. Please correct me if one of you has been, or currently is a professional mma fighter. Therefore, these broad strokes of condemnation for TMA in general are being painted by? The conjecture and indictments of pure amateurs and hobbyists about the training and methods or abilities of other pure amateurs and hobbyists. It’s insulting to the hard work and sincere efforts of those TMA who train consistently and legitimately. We cannot know the methods or legitimacy of every TMA practitioner nor every mma practitioner for that matter. There is chicanery in every arena, to be sure, TMA reputation has suffered at the hands of fakes and frauds. If we want to persuade people in our arguments, it’s best to avoid vituperative rhetoric, which simply erodes what could be useful dialogue. If we just want to sling mud thats pretty easy, but very unconvincing as an argument.
As a Taiji teacher, how do you teach your student the "embrace throw" to "use intent, not force"?
Last edited:
Steve
Mostly Harmless
come on. This is silly. If this made any sense, people who had never been professional soccer players couldn’t discuss soccer. Or people who play golf can’t discuss golf unless they have a pga card.
Last edited:
windwalker099
3rd Black Belt
A practitioner (not a teacher), I work with others interested in my practice.
In answer to your question:
By applying force on those I work with, I help them understand that relying on their own strength or resistance cannot prevent a technique from being effective. Then, by allowing them to use force on me, I let them experience how Taiji principles—such as yielding (随, suí), neutralizing force (化劲, huà jìn), and using intent (意, yì)—enable movement without relying on brute force.
This applies to all movement and practice. The work is principle-focused, not technique-oriented.
Some yrs back, "not anyone I know, or knew.".
A park in Taiwan, someone wanted to feel my work.
In this case trying to apply his force.....Being able to dissolve the force (消劲, xiāo jìn)
he was unable to apply his force...
Last edited:
Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
You can discuss as you please. You may disagree as often as you like, but don’t pretend to be an expert and know all about what everyone else is or is not doing. Silly is as silly does. You certainly display an expertise is prevarication if nothing else.
There's no need to know how others train. There are key things that need to be done in order to achieve specific results. We can pick any activity and easily pick out those key things and apply them across a various activities. It will all be the same or at a minimum very similar.
I think it's important to distinguish between technique and principle. The most difficult part will be to show principle through technique. No matter what a person studies be it chess or martial arts. Combining the two is not easy. Science is full of "principles" but it's difficult to show those principles through "technique."A practitioner (not a teacher), I work with others interested in my practice.
In answer to your question:
By applying force on those I work with, I help them understand that relying on their own strength or resistance cannot prevent a technique from being effective. Then, by allowing them to use force on me, I let them experience how Taiji principles—such as yielding (随, suí), neutralizing force (化劲, huà jìn), and using intent (意, yì)—enable movement without relying on brute force.
This applies to all movement and practice. The work is principle-focused, not technique-oriented.
Some yrs back, "not anyone I know, or knew.".
A park in Taiwan, someone wanted to feel my work.
In this case trying to apply his force.....Being able to dissolve the force (消劲, xiāo jìn)
he was unable to apply his force...
According to principles it should work. Using it in application is going to be a bigger challenge. From Ai to rocket technology application is always the tallest mountain to climb.
I think some here may be upset or frustrated because principle vs application.
Last edited:
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Or there will be evidence of success showing that someone's unique method is effective.
I think much of this is communication issues. Those who train principal and those who apply a technique. I think in the discussions we look at these two things separately instead of seeing it as a process.
windwalker099
3rd Black Belt
I was asking if there is no force to borrow and you have to use your own force (such as to push a car), how do you "use intent, not force"?
I'm talking about "use your own force". You are talking about "prevent people from using force". Your answer has nothing to do with my question.
Last edited:
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
windwalker099
3rd Black Belt
There is always "force "
In the context of standing still (站桩 zhàn zhuāng), the reaction force refers to the upward force exerted by the ground ), as described by Newton’s Third Law ): "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."
In Taiji philosophy, this force is not passive—it is actively harmonized through intention (意 yì) and i
nternal alignment (内整 nèi zhěng).
No need to borrow their force
Taiji emphasizes self-rooted power.
By refining the body’s connection to the ground, the practitioner uses their own yi (意) and jin (劲) to:
Root (生根 shēng gēn): Sink the dantian (丹田 dāntián) align bones (骨正 gǔ zhèng)
to channel the ground’s reaction force upward.
Neutralize (化劲 huà jìn): Redirect incoming force via circularity (圆活 yuán huó) and softness (柔 róu), l
letting the ground’s force (地力 dì lì) dissolve opposition.
A person will move themselves, attempting to preserve their own central equilibrium.
Or not be able to move another person, attempting to move them by physical action
through using their own physical force.
Keep in mind this relative, not absolute based on
skill level and focus of practice.
in your example pushing a car
When you push a car, you apply force against the ground, and the ground pushes back (Newton's third law).
The force you generate is linear and direct, using muscular effort to overcome the car's inertia.
"Pushing a car is like hammering a nail (direct force).
Taiji is like steering a sailboat (using wind/currents indirectly)
Pushing a car relies on external force (muscle against mass), while Taiji uses internal coordination (intent + ground reaction + structure) to achieve efficiency.
Taiji’s “reaction force” is not about opposing energy but orchestrating it—like a composer guiding an orchestra rather than a laborer lifting a boulder.
Using this aspect people will either move themselves, or be unable to move someone who can do this
"Use the mind, not force"
(用意不用力 yòng yì bù yòng lì).
Similar threads
