Is Trad. Taijiquan any good?

[Brad]

A bit of a troll post(esp. the title :D), I know, but I was just curious how many taiji guys out there can really fight who don't have previous martial arts experience? Seems like most taiji people I know of teach it as a dance or a supplement or part of something else(a larger school curriculum).

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

I have over 15 years in traditional Martial Arts (Karate, Kung-Fu, Aikido, etc...) and the last 15 years in Taiji.. i have found Taiji to be sufficient for all my combat purposes (and at my school that is a bunch).. do not mistake Taiji "forms" for Taiji principles.. Taiji principles will carry the day in combat, Taiji "forms" might get your a$$ handed to you on a platter.. yet, the principles are internalized through the forms.. odd, huh?

Speaking of "dance".. whenever your training has led you to the place where combat seems like a "dance", where you reach a level of pure enjoyment from the movements, where your opponent seems more like a willing dance partner.. then, you can finally see the beauty in the Art..

Be well...

[GLW]

Interestingly enough, in over 25 years, I have NEVER met someone that does Taijiquan that can use it that does not also do another martial art....and did not come to Taijiquan from another martial art.

[yenhoi]

You've probably never met anyone who didnt crawl before they walked either.

:eek:

[scotty1]

jesus christ, YES!!

If you've only seen forms or dances, or gentle push hands, then you haven't seen trad. taiji.

Trained properly it's got the same methods as any other effective MA. ie. two person drills, bag/pad work, sparring (yes it's heavy) and strength training and conditioning methods.

It's about neutralising the attack, hitting the opponent and moving in to finish them off with strikes/throwing/taking down/locking/pulling of balance/pushing to the floor/all of the above/loads of other cool/nasty stuff too.

In short, if the training is hard enough to be realistic, the principles and the freedom contained within them are great.

I've come to taiji after about 4 years cumulative experience in other arts. Everything I previously knew has been dropped in favour of what I'm being taught now.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

However unfortunate it may be, if we had prior experience in other martial arts it is almost impossible to remove those years of training and dedication.. yet, i, and others of similar persuasion are willing to discount former teachings for newer insights..

GLW: what is the point you insist upon? is it your contention that Taiji alone is ineffective? how would you know? as you have stated, "I have NEVER met someone that does Taijiquan that can use it that does not also do another martial art....and did not come to Taijiquan from another martial art." As if to suggest that it must be the other martial arts that add validity to Taiji.. and, i never met a race-car driver that didn't drive another car before racing.. most people evolve into Taiji (to their detriment) others, more fortunate, start there...

Do you suggest that you have sufficient knowledge and experience to assert Taiji's ineffectiveness? What of those that you haven't met?.. is it not possible to rely solely Taiji regardless of prior training? I will gladly introduce you to students i have trained with that had no prior experience and are, today, competent martial artists..

Mostly, what i sense is frustration in many of those that discount Taiji and the internal arts.. people who selectively judge according to their particular experiences and training histories.. they simply cannot acquiesce that such a seemingly docile discipline could possibly challenge their hard work.. oh well, it can..

The only addition, and i don't see it as an addition myself, in my instruction of Taiji is Qinna.. aside from that Taiji and its principles are sufficient for the vast majority of combat/self-defense purposes..

Be well..

[Meat Shake]

Ive met a couple of taiji practitioners with amazing chin na skills.

[Judge Pen]

Question: How many of you all actually do bag work and drills in your tai chi class? How many do more than gentle push-hands sparring?

[norther practitioner]

I do bagwork at home, trying to keep taiji principles in mind. Don't get as much sparring in now as I'd like, but thats a different issue for me. I'm doing about 85% taiji, 15% gong fu and wushu now.

[Liokault]

Is Trad Taijiquan any good?

NO! Trad Tai Chi is crap on a stick.......if by trad you mean hippy

And if by hippy you mean stinking bead wearing, 'doobie' smoking, soap avoiding peace niks.



If one more person, at the end of their first class, says:

"well I thought that we would just be moving around slowley and feeling chi and stuff....I didnt think that I would sweat, or that someone would try to brake my arm" .

Well I dont know what i will do but you get the point.

[GLW]

"GLW: what is the point you insist upon? is it your contention that Taiji alone is ineffective? how would you know? as you have stated, "I have NEVER met someone that does Taijiquan that can use it that does not also do another martial art....and did not come to Taijiquan from another martial art." As if to suggest that it must be the other martial arts that add validity to Taiji.. and, i never met a race-car driver that didn't drive another car before racing.. most people evolve into Taiji (to their detriment) others, more fortunate, start there... "

I LOVE the defensiveness of the responses on this type of thing :)

I happen to LOVE Taijiquan...but I am a realist.

Pick a well known Taijiquan person...

William CC Chen - Boxing first.
Yang Jwing Ming - White Crane and Long Fist,
Liang Shouyu - NUMEROUS styles and shuai Jiao
and I could list many others.

The need for contact and HARD and EXTERNAL training for fighting is never discounted by external stylists...and not by Xingyi or Bagua folks...but I HAVE heard it talked down A LOT by Taijiquan folks.

That is a hallway you HAVE to walk down to have an understanding of force, speed, and power.

However, with those that do other styles as their base, when they get to it, are they doing Taijiquan with an understanding bought from their external training or are they doing their external with some Taijiquan concepts?

I am making no value judgements since I too fall into the category of one that started with an external style...and still do both.

However, it is still amusing to me how irate folks get if you bring this up. If one is secure in what they do, anger or defensiveness is not usually the reaction to a statement or question.

[norther practitioner]

Always stirring up that pot aren't you GLW.


I'm not sure I know anyone who has had taiji as there first ma and gone on to fight, I'm not saying there isn't anyone, but I just don't know of any.

[hasayfu]

GLW,

It's an interesting question you pose. I'll say the same thing I say about Hung Gar. You can not judge a style by the average practitioner but judge it by it's best. IT's too easy for the norm to be lazy and not really get it. Especially with Taiji which has the a steep initial learning curve.

That said, I too have never played with a pure taiji player that could fight. I have, however, met Chen Xiao-Wang and I beleive he could fight. You'd have to agree he is about as pure taiji as it gets.

If you go to Chen village, you won't see a bunch of tree huggers. They are doing hard physical contact using taiji concepts.

You say you love Taiji. Then love it and don't give the impression you think it's useless for fighting. The principles are deep and quite effective for combat.

I, for one, find that Hung Gar share many of the principles with a more pragmatic approach. ;)

[GLW]

I LOVE the way a simple post that is a statement of experience is turned into a value judgement.

Interpret what you wish.

I DO have to qualify that a bit...the Chen style folks _ some of them anyway - may be exceptions.

However, the quality of that skill would have to be measured against...say someone who was equally as good at Shuai Jiao - enough similarities there....

It all boils down to Da Ti shuia Na...and if a person actually trains them.

but many Taijiquan folks often ask for this...even with many of them using a totally sloppy and incorrect translation of Taijiquan.

[Chang Style Novice]

I think its a really good question. I don't know if I'm any case to go by (I haven't ever really tested myself against other schools, and am by any measure a quarter-assed practitioner at best) but basically all I've ever studied is my teacher's own hybridized taiji. He seems to do pretty well by himself, but he's also got some background in baji, shaolin, xingyi, bagua and (mostly) shuai chiao.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Saying xingyi or bagua are more realistic is like sayin wing chun or karate is more realistic. LOL

[scotty1]

Question: How many of you all actually do bag work and drills in your tai chi class? How many do more than gentle push-hands sparring?

We do bag work and drills in class with focus pads.
Our push hands is definitely not gentle.

GLW "It all boils down to Da Ti shuia Na...and if a person actually trains them." yep.

"but many Taijiquan folks often ask for this...even with many of them using a totally sloppy and incorrect translation of Taijiquan."

Sorry, not quite sure what you mean here. Would you mind explaining what it is that folks often ask for, and how that's related to their translation of taijiquan?

[GLW]

By that I am talking about the arrogance that some Taijiquan folks have - they go so far as to translate the characters one at a time

They end up with Supreme Ultimate Fist - and then they take it to the next level and claim this means that Taijiquan is the highest and best martial art.

In actuality, you have to break Taijiquan into Taiji and Quan. While the characters Tai and Ji do have literal translations, when you put them together, they refer to the Supreme Ultimate, the Grand Terminus, the Yin and Yang - in short, the translation of Supreme Ultimate is not in relation to Quan but rather in referring to the Ultimate concept of yin and yang.

A more direct or meaningful translation would be "the Fist style based upon the concepts of Yin and Yang" - a bit wordy but fairly clear.

The ones that I have run into that use the Supreme Ultimate Fist also tend to be the ones that think if you simply practice the form for years you will miraculously be able to use it.

And sitting on one of the arcade games doing motorcycle racing for years will make you an expert on two wheels the very first time you raise the REAL kickstand.

[Midnight]

Originally posted by GLW
However, with those that do other styles as their base, when they get to it, are they doing Taijiquan with an understanding bought from their external training or are they doing their external with some Taijiquan concepts?


I am a diligent student of Tai Chi, so when I found this thread, of course I was drawn to it.
TCB has touched on many items that need not be repeated, as he is correct.


However this responce to one of TCB's posts caught my eye.

One must understand when comparing martial arts, that all martial arts inevitably came from one original concept. And Tai Chi is no exception to that. So in answering if Tai Chi helps the external, or if external helps the Tai Chi. Please take into consideration that Tai Chi was spawned from military fighting methods that soldiers used during war. Some say it perfected them, some say it simply added to them.

Personally, I began training in both wing chun and taijiquan at the sametime. It certainly didn't take me long to understand Tai Chi was suiting my needs more so than wing chun. I practice everything from forms, to push hands (hard or soft), to bag drills.

[scotty1]

Makes sense, thanks.

[Shaolinlueb]

a punch is a punch. a punch to the chest was the same as it was 2/300 years ago. if you can use tai chi to defend yourself then yes its practical, you have trained good and your taiji is good. it all goes back to the practioner. too many hippy taiji people these days. but the emphasis of martial arts has changed these days.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

As a former hippy (and not prone to discard the philosophy).. it is discriminatory to assume that poor Taiji is domain of "hippies".. i will gladly offer my own "hippy" Taiji skills for comparison.. oh, although i do favor peaceful resolutions to conflicts, i have spent over 30 years of my life training for the possibility that a peaceful resolution might not be an option (just had to get that off my chest).. hippies are less of a threat than arrogant prejudiced self-pontificating Taiji know-it-alls.. I suggest that we each evaluate each other as individuals based on the direct experiences, not some preconceived notions.. otherwise, you will likely discount some "hippy-looking" dude as lousy Taiji.. just as he hands you your a$$ on a platter..

Now, the Taiji Symbol (yin/yang) means change.. to the general Oriental mind that is the concept of the symbol, change.. Taiji is many things, the least of which is a literal translation of some words.. for me, the "change" was from external to internal.. i try to "change" an opponents intentions by "changing" my own responses accordingly.. I try to "change" my perspective to accomodate the perspectives of others, even though i may not agree.. i can afford them the right to their beliefs (in so much as that does no harm to others)..

Indeed, Taiji was spawned from martial arts, and as such cannot be separated from it.. yet, much can be added without losing its original intent.. purists will kill the art as surely as "hippies".. like all things an Art must evolve.. otherwise it will stagnate and die..

Be well..

[Fu-Pow]

I think the confusion about Taiji comes from the fact that people compare it (or worse yet try to apply it) like "kick and punch" type martial arts. Taiji has kicking and punching in it. But it is much more useful at close range.

I would classify it as more as a "grappling and bump" art rather than a "kick and punch" type art.

Both types of arts have there strengths and weakness.

I was watching some female greco-roman wrestlers on the Today show this morning. I noticed how much muscular force they employ while at a close range. These girls were beefy and pure muscle.

This type of grappling is antithetical to Taiji. The premise of Taiji is that if you rely on being bigger and stronger than your opponent you will ultimately encounter some that is bigger and stronger and they will overpower you with there strength.

Taiji avoids this by "leading the opponent to emptiness." In simpler terms it means staying with your opponent but never giving them anywhere to apply force and not applying your own force...... until an opportune time.

When they are off balance or locked up then you apply "bump" (which can take the form of a punch, kick, knee,elbow, rending motion, etc) which finishes the encounter.

"Kick and punch" type martial arts, what we all typically think of in terms of kung fu, rely on striking your opponent fast and hard and then finishing the encounter or moving out of the way before he can counter.

I've often thought. What would an encounter between my Taiji teacher and my Choy Lay Fut teacher look like?

If my Choy Lay Fut teacher got the first strike in on my Taiji teacher it would be over. Choy Lay Fut closes the gap fast, hits fast and hard and doesn't let up with strikes until the opponent is down.

However, if my Taiji teacher was able to make contact before my CLF teacher could strike him then I think that my CLF teacher would have a lot of trouble maintaining his balance and would get all "tied up" in Taiji teacher. It would be curtains for him.


Different arts, different strategies. :D

[Chang Style Novice]

Um, you DO know that many of the most famous taiji masters are big strong guys, right?

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Chang Style Novice
Um, you DO know that many of the most famous taiji masters are big strong guys, right?

Doesn't really matter if they're "strong" or not. That's my point. My Taiji teacher is rail thin. I'm much bigger and much more muscular than him. Yet he can put me on my ass if he wants to, using the principles of IMAs. It has nothing to do with strength.

People in IMA's who don't really have mastery over the principles must rely on strength to compensate. But the ones who really understand the principle don't need it. It won't help and it won't hurt either. It's neutral in that regard.

And what's with the habit of everybody prefacing they're posts with "um"?

It makes you sound like an arrogant tool. Not that you are...just makes you sound like it.

;)

[Chang Style Novice]

I only use the 'um' preface when challenging presumptions that I think are exceptionally stupid.

Again, I ask - if strength is useless in taiji as you claim, what's the dilly-o with Cheng Man Ching and Chang Tung Sheng (to name the two that spring most readily to mind.)

[Brad]

Cheng Man Ching was a little tiny guy :confused:

[Chang Style Novice]

Who am I thinking of then, the guy who looks like Oliver Hardy?

I'm terrible with names.

To clarify - I'm not saying that Taiji isn't designed to neutralize the opponent's strength. I'm saying that in any martial context, strength is an asset. It can be overcome, but you're better off with it. It's great if you don't have to use it, but all else equal, the guy with more strength wins. Great skill can overcome this inequity, sure, but strength will only improve the effectiveness of your skill.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow


Doesn't really matter if they're "strong" or not. That's my point. My Taiji teacher is rail thin. I'm much bigger and much more muscular than him. Yet he can put me on my ass if he wants to, )

Maybe you are just a wuss.




...um

[Brad]

Who am I thinking of then, the guy who looks like Oliver Hardy?
I know who you're talking about... can't recall the name at the moment either, lol.

[scotty1]

Um, CSN is correct.

Fu - your taiji teacher isn't neccessarily not strong just because he's thin.

[jon]

You cant learn to fight by only practicing form, although you can learn to mimic it.

Learning to fight always requires actualy training with that in mind.

Having said that if you can find a Tai Chi teacher who likes to scrap than you can sometimes be onto a good thing.

[Chang Style Novice]

Remembered the name of the Oliver Hardy lookalike badass I was thinking of. Wang Shu Jin.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Chang Style Novice
I only use the 'um' preface when challenging presumptions that I think are exceptionally stupid.



Oh sorry...you ARE an arrogant tool!


Originally posted by Chang Style Novice

Cheng Man Ching was a little tiny guy



And a wrong one at that!! :rolleyes:

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by scotty1
Um, CSN is correct.

Fu - your taiji teacher isn't neccessarily not strong just because he's thin.

Um....f-off for using "Um".

And all I'm saying is that my teacher does not look strong, doesn't "cross train", doesn't lift weights, etc, etc, etc.

In fact he looks exactly like what everyone on here makes fun of....a "taiji hippy."

But his knowledge and fighting skills are excellent.



:D

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by unkokusai


Maybe you are just a wuss.




...um

And maybe you are a troll....um...delete maybe.:p

[Chang Style Novice]

The kind of "arrogant tool" who describes himself as "I haven't ever really tested myself against other schools, and am by any measure a quarter-assed practitioner at best"? Interesting definition, nitwit.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

LMAO. Forms teach skill, which in the end is most important

[Chang Style Novice]

I disagree - I think it was Bob who said that forms teach principals, but sparring teaches skill. That sounds right based on my practice.

I do agree that skill is most important, but nothing can be entirely discounted as a factor.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
People in IMA's who don't really have mastery over the principles must rely on strength to compensate. But the ones who really understand the principle don't need it. It won't help and it won't hurt either. It's neutral in that regard.

Um.....That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

[norther practitioner]

I think you are failing to see the needed yang to make the yin work.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

"People in IMA's who don't really have mastery over the principles must rely on strength to compensate."

Agreed.

"But the ones who really understand the principle don't need it. It won't help and it won't hurt either. It's neutral in that regard."

Mostly disagree.. unless you are speaking of those few genuine masters that can truly "listen and sense" you better than you can sense yourself.. they are out there, but not likely bothering with the nonsense rampant in this forum.. Otherwise, i sense that there is a certain correlation of physics and body mechanics that we must attend to on our way to finding our own mastery.. although, if someone at +/- 150 lbs. wants to climb in the cage with Frank Shamrock and take him down with purely Taiji principles, i am an eager audience..

I sense that there is a fine balance of strength and softness that best suits the vast majority of Taiji players.. i also have experienced the elusive qualities of Taiji that are what legends are made of.. unfortunately, i was on the receiving end..

Be well...

[Meat Shake]

Um.....

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

What is the exact definition of strength. Taiji uses firmness, which uses strength, but not like most people use it. The wierd thing is, you can't actually be firm, unless you can accept, and take the opponents force, while totally relaxed.



Is there no one here who can say, that, my little chinese master from china, throws me around easily, without hardly moving. Well, I guess Fu Pow is one.

Where are those BlackTaoist guys? Is their teacher not better than them? He's just a little guy

[bamboo_ leaf]

(I sense that there is a fine balance of strength and softness that best suits the vast majority of Taiji players.. i also have experienced the elusive qualities of Taiji that are what legends are made of.. unfortunately, i was on the receiving end..)


well said;) , i would add that for those who have met such people it clearly difines where and what ones practice should be moveing to. it is often difficult to talk about such experiences because they are so out of the norm that for the most part, people either disbelieve or are very skeptical.

if you manage to get a small part of it, and are able to use it people tend to really understand that taiji is really very different.

[Christopher M]

I think some of the bemusement here is coming from the apparent failure of some to recognize that all martial arts intend to provide a skill which compensates for raw athleticism.

Do the neijia offer a characteristic solution to this problem? Sure they do, and this solution is great! But this does not, in any way, demean the characteristic solutions offered by boxing, BJJ, or countless other martial arts.

The neijia do not have to be elevated to the realm of the superhuman in order to appreciated. Their usefulness should be immediately obvious to anyone touching hands with a skilled practitioner, in the same way that this is true of other arts.

[Chang Style Novice]

No, my little chinese teacher potato-sacks me around real good without much apparent effort.

Thing is, I don't have much skill, and although he's much smaller than me, dude is still strong as an ox.

Back to basics:

By strength, I mean muscular force.

Martial arts is at its essence, about the movement of the body.

Muscles accomplish the movement of the body.

There is no movement - NONE! - without at least some amount of strength behind it.

When movement is resisted, superior strength may overcome it.

When movement is initiated, tactile 'listening' and sensitivity may be used to follow, stick and neutralize it. This is MUCH more difficult that overcoming with superior strength, and relies much more heavily on a lack of the same qualties of sensitiviy, following, and sticking in the opponent.

Strength and skill are apples and oranges so can't easily be compared. Even so, in my experience, I would say it takes more skill to overcome strength than it takes strength to overcome skill.

To rephrase - skill is better, but strength is easier.

Strength and skill is best of all.

[Fu-Pow]

Nice backtracking CSN. The voices of reason arrived by the likes of 3rdrateIMAkilla, Taijibob and bambooleaf and now your back tracking.

The point is that Taiji does not counter strength with strengths. So how important could it be to it?

You even contradict the Taiji classics. :rolleyes:

[Brad]

I think strong muscle's are still necisary for taiji quan. Like CSN said in the his last post, muscular strength is part of everything we do. Strength is how strong your body is and skill is how effeciently you use it. I think real taijiquan should emphasize both strengthening your body and correct movement equally. I also think some people are mistaking muscular strength with force.

[bamboo_ leaf]

(I think real taijiquan should emphasize both strengthening your body and correct movement equally. I also think some people are mistaking muscular strength with force.)

I don’t know what real taijiquan is but I can say that maybe a different way of looking at it is, that the idea of strength is replaced by another idea that requires much strength to reach and then be discarded.

Until one really knows how to release tension in the body, the range of movement and sinking will be limited by only using isolated muscles to align and support the body. there is another way:cool:

This other way is what most of the training is about, it takes awhile before this can really be achieved and is the work of many yrs, it is also why most teachers will tell their students their still not relaxed or (song) enough.

We can see this with people with very little muscle development or slight builds using very deep stance or realtivly high stances.
they seem to be very relaxed, stable with out useing any type of hard force they are empty in the sense that there is no tension in their bodies. nothing for you to apply force to.

To someone trying to achieve the same thing it might feel like it takes a lot of strength to do until the real relaxation is achieved and the proper alignments mental and physical are found in ones self.

The mistake that I feel people make is to assume that by directly strengthen isolated body parts, somehow this will translate into core skills need for taiji. The real strength of taiji is one of the mind over the body. This is what most if not all the training is about.

As some one posted this does not make taiji any better then any other art, but it does make it a rather unique approach to MA studies in my experience. I might add the success rate of people actually acquiring the skills that many have spoken of is quite small, if one is only interested in MA there are many good arts that are easer to acquire and use

[Chang Style Novice]

Please use quotes to show where I have contradicted myself, nitwit.

As for contradicting the taiji classics - I dunno, maybe I have. I've never read them.

[scotty1]

Neither have I. Well, bits of them, but I don't think my practice has suffered through not, as my instructors have.

Bob:

"I sense that there is a fine balance of strength and softness that best suits the vast majority of Taiji players..
if someone at +/- 150 lbs. wants to climb in the cage with Frank Shamrock and take him down with purely Taiji principles, i am an eager audience.."

Well said.

Right, Fu Pow: Um

You are wrong, sorry.

"f-off for using "Um"."

Um, **** off for having no sense of humour.

"And all I'm saying is that my teacher does not look strong, doesn't "cross train", doesn't lift weights, etc, etc, etc. "

That doesn't mean he's not strong. I don't do any of those things either, but I'm still stronger than I was before starting taijiquan.

"In fact he looks exactly like what everyone on here makes fun of....a "taiji hippy." "

I currently have 80s hair and a full beard, so I suppose I do too.
I'm on the look out for a Slayer headband to add to the effect, but I don't think they exist. In all seriousness, Iron, GDA, if you can help me out...

"he point is that Taiji does not counter strength with strengths. "

Agreed.

"So how important could it be to it?"

Because at some point you are going to need to damage your opponent. You're not going to do that without using force, of which strength is a part. And what if you miss your contact and end up getting smacked in the face, thrown or whatever? You need to be strong and tough to fight, end of story.

You don't need to be strong or tough to successfully demonstrate Taiji principles in a demo however.

[bamboo_ leaf]

(Because at some point you are going to need to damage your opponent. You're not going to do that without using force)

The point is (for me, my experience) is that your own force is used against you. In this case the ability listen, sink and change is more important then having the ability to directly damage the opponent using your own force. Yes, you can be hurt pretty badly with your own force or intent. next time you jam your fingers or have a wrench slip and damage your hand please think of this.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

bamboo_ leaf .. excellent analogies.. on point.. insights appreciated..

Be well..

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by scotty1
Neither have I. Well, bits of them, but I don't think my practice has suffered through not, as my instructors have.

Bob:

"I sense that there is a fine balance of strength and softness that best suits the vast majority of Taiji players..
if someone at +/- 150 lbs. wants to climb in the cage with Frank Shamrock and take him down with purely Taiji principles, i am an eager audience.."

Well said.

Right, Fu Pow: Um

You are wrong, sorry.

"f-off for using "Um"."

Um, **** off for having no sense of humour.

"And all I'm saying is that my teacher does not look strong, doesn't "cross train", doesn't lift weights, etc, etc, etc. "

That doesn't mean he's not strong. I don't do any of those things either, but I'm still stronger than I was before starting taijiquan.

"In fact he looks exactly like what everyone on here makes fun of....a "taiji hippy." "

I currently have 80s hair and a full beard, so I suppose I do too.
I'm on the look out for a Slayer headband to add to the effect, but I don't think they exist. In all seriousness, Iron, GDA, if you can help me out...

"he point is that Taiji does not counter strength with strengths. "

Agreed.

"So how important could it be to it?"

Because at some point you are going to need to damage your opponent. You're not going to do that without using force, of which strength is a part. And what if you miss your contact and end up getting smacked in the face, thrown or whatever? You need to be strong and tough to fight, end of story.

You don't need to be strong or tough to successfully demonstrate Taiji principles in a demo however.


Do you need strength to damage your opponent. Again, this goes against what the Taiji classics say. There is not one way to use the body for defense and one for attack. Both are the same. Both are not force against force.

[scotty1]

Again, this goes against what the Taiji classics say

Quote them then.

[kungfu cowboy]

To alter the path of an object along a desired route, you need to apply a "good" force at an angle which allows for redirection. If there is no force to change the direction of travel, there is no resistance to it's movement, and the object will continue along it's original course unimpeded.

If you meet the force head on with no angle for deflection (deflection here means "controlled" change; not just random hit away) then that is actually more along the lines of "bad" force. So really, it seems that the real issue is not actually the force that is applied, as you can't help but apply a force to any object if you want to interact with it, but actually the angle and intent motivating it.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings...

Sometimes we need to be practical.. force, energy, strength, whatever the desired label, is essential to movement.. is essential to moving objects.. the refinement or quality of structure and force working in unison can greatly economize on the amount of energy required to move an object.. physics lends a helping hand if we study the principles of fulcrums, by adjusting the placement of the fulcrum we can maximixe the effect of force.. by adjusting the placement of force and using our bodies as fulcrums we can achieve maximum results.. by understanding skeletal alignment we can discover the most productive places to apply the forces that up-root and off-balance a partner..

Some people advocate the minimal use of force, they disdain muscular development as counterproductive to Taiji.. what, then, do we offer the student that requires muscles and strength in their occupations? i suggest that Taiji teaches us how to maximize the tools we have, whatever they may be.. i do agree that over-developed muscles can be a hindrance as in restricted range of motion.. but, similarly, i have seen quite a few well-muscled (in shape) players that are relaxed and excellent Taiji examples.. except in the case of extremes i think that Taiji is not discrimnatory due to body types..

I take out the garbage, i paddle my canoe, i move furniture, i do many things that benefit from a certain amount of muscular development.. beyond what is reasonable in daily life i have no need to add muscle-mass to the equation.. cardio-vascular maintenance is essential and will add a certain tone and character to one's physique and i find no contraindications in that discipline and Taiji.. i think that too many people take the intended metaphors of the classics too literally.. "eyes follow hand" doesnt mean to look at your hand, it means to stay focused on your "intention", hand is a metaphor for what you are "doing".. "concentrate on nose", does not mean to look cross-eyed at your nose, it means to focus on your breathing, nose is a metaphor for breath.. relaxed and soft are reminders that rigidity and brutishness are self-defeating, not a directive to be limp and without substance..

If you examine your Taiji forms you will see many applications that imply the use of force.. a Taiji punch has no effect without a certain amount of energy.. like spaghetti, uncooked it is hard and brittle, easily broken.. too cooked it is soft and mushy.. try pushing a billiard ball with over-cooked spaghetti (heck, it won't even hold a straight form to push with).. somewhere in the middle, the spaghetti is both flexible and substantive.. you push the billiard ball and it yeilds (bends) as it stores energy, then, as the billiard ball begins to move (breaks the grip of inertia) the stored energy in the "bend" adds to the pushing force applied to the BB and you have a Taiji effect..

Add to all of this the "intention" of the player, the refinement of one's life-forces (Qi), the faith that there is value in the Art itself, the internalized principles and applications of the form from dedication and practice.. and, you have Taiji with flavor and gusto.. it can hurt, it can heal.. it is Yin AND Yang.. soft AND hard.. even the extremes need balance to be effective..

Be well..

[scotty1]

Tai Chi Bob, rockin' the correctamundo. :)