Judo vs Tai Chi [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Wong Fei Hong

08-12-2004, 03:18 PM

Funnily enough , i heard a story from chen xiaowang during a seminar, where a high ranking judoka from japan decided to ridicule him by rushing him (or one of his relatives/one of the other chen lineageholders ???) from behind and throwing him whilst he was demonstrating something.
apparently the judoka grabbed the top part of his body and without realising as a reaction, chenxiaowang elbow struck him with fajing, the blow lifted him off his feet and flipped him over head onto the ground.
from the way he described the guy was top heavy and the low strike added impetus.
I remember he then told us something about how everyone got scared including him the guy would die. However he said something to the extent of if the guy urinated within the next few minutes and blood came out there was fear of severe internal damage. And the leakeage would drain chi and crack his internal system.

Anyhow one thing i found quite amazing was that the fajing had a bouncing effect as opposed to a penetrating effect.

Another incident that actually occured at this seminar, was that some bloke was standing next to chen when he was showing us his fajing sideways this bloke, standing next to him walked a bit too forward and got whacked square in the abdomen , and landed straight on his ass, he didnt buckle over or feel pain , he just sat immediately.

unkokusai

08-15-2004, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by Wong Fei Hong
Funnily enough , i heard a story from chen xiaowang during a seminar, where a high ranking judoka from japan decided to ridicule him by rushing him (or one of his relatives/one of the other chen lineageholders ???) from behind and throwing him whilst he was demonstrating something.
apparently the judoka grabbed the top part of his body and without realising as a reaction, chenxiaowang elbow struck him with fajing, the blow lifted him off his feet and flipped him over head onto the ground.I remember he then told us something about how everyone got scared including him the guy would die. However he said something to the extent of if the guy urinated within the next few minutes and blood came out there was fear of severe internal damage. And the leakeage would drain chi and crack his internal system.Another incident that actually occured at this seminar, was that some bloke was standing next to chen when he was showing us his fajing sideways this bloke, standing next to him walked a bit too forward and got whacked square in the abdomen , and landed straight on his ass, he didnt buckle over or feel pain , he just sat immediately.

:rolleyes: Yeah. Ok.

Miles Teg

08-22-2004, 07:23 PM

It seems kind of strange that a Judo guy would rush a Tai Chi guy from behind unanounced. I cant honestly believe a top ranking Judo guy would do that. Even if he was succssfull it wouldnt show his skill or his superior fighting skill.

SPJ

08-22-2004, 07:59 PM

Agreed.

:)

Doug

08-23-2004, 03:41 AM

What is the confusion here? This incident really happened. Chen Xiaowang has told it enough for anyone to read it in an article or magazine. A high-ranking judo practitioner tried to pull a fast one on the Chen stylist standard bearer, and he failed.

Doug M

Miles Teg

08-23-2004, 05:16 AM

It still reaks of bull.

Imagine that you're a world class fighter and you want to fight some Tai CHi guy that not many people (especially in Japan) have heard of. This is weird in and of itself because Judo people are used to proving themselves in front of large audiences not in seminars where it wouldnt matter to the world what happened.

But anyway imagine you want to prove yourself in some way to show your skill or demonstrate Judo superiority. Would you:
a. Ask the guy to a public challenge, or at least a chanllenge right there and then
b. Try to provoke him enough so he knows he is going to have to fight you
c. Finish the job quickly by rushing up behind him while hes not looking and taking him out

If your a real jerk, you'd go with B. "A" would be something more befitting an actual champion. But C would dictate that the man is seriously disturbed. Judo takes a lot of heart, some intelligence, and hard work. I dont think a Judo guy would get satisfaction or pleassure from defeating an oponent like that.

Also having lived in Japan for 4 years this seems like very odd behaviour for Japanese person.

Water Dragon

08-23-2004, 06:23 AM

I think some of you guys should read this thread (http://www.emptyflower.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=Xing;action=display;num=1093129155)

Doug

08-23-2004, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
It still reaks of bull.

It may seem so to you, someone who holds a high standard to his art, but it happened in a room full of people. It was a public incident. It happened.

A problem here is that you are ascribing too high a standard to the Judo person in question. It is similar to someone claiming that the United States is a promoter of justice and democracy while "ridding the world of terrorism." However, that person misses all the terrorist activities the United States commits. For such a person, the United States can do no wrong, but this person is choosing to ignore facts.

While you may not agree with this event as it happened, it did happen. There are at least several articles available on this event.

Dooug M

SPJ

08-23-2004, 04:35 PM

There are bad apples and oranges in every basket or box.

But that does not mean all apples and all oranges are bad.

On the other hand, a bad ingredient may spoil the whole pot of soup.

Peace.

:D

Miles Teg

08-23-2004, 05:32 PM

Im sure this guy that you guys are talking about is a respectful gentleman and all that. But Im sure there is a lot more to the story than that. Perhaps he asked him to run up behind him, who knows.

You must admit a random rush attack from behind from a top ranking Judo guy sounds very weird.
And what is the name of this top ranking judo guy?

Knifefighter

08-23-2004, 07:54 PM

There are judo clubs in just about any city in almost every country in the world. Most clubs have at least one or two guys who would gladly test your hypothesis about getting their arms broken before being able to enter into the throw. Give it a try and see what happens.

Brad

08-23-2004, 09:23 PM

While you may not agree with this event as it happened, it did happen. There are at least several articles available on this event.
Where at?

SPJ

08-23-2004, 10:21 PM

Here is a story.

My college mate was a high school and college champ in Judo.

One day he challenged me for a game. The winning was a bottle of Japanese plum wine.

That day I showed up with bear back, no clothes on top. So no sleeves, no collar.

I kept my hands in my back. No elbows, no wrists. Just my shoulders in the front.

No matter how fast he approached me. I moved away.

Eventually, he gave up and handed me the wine.

I said you did not lose, because I did not win.

We both had a good laugh and drank the wine together.

The secrets were I was doing following steps. He moved his right foot forward. I moved my right foot back. There was always half of a step distance.

Peace.

:D

Miles Teg

08-23-2004, 11:59 PM

So basically you were running away?

It was clever of you to take you shirt off though!

kungfu cowboy

08-24-2004, 12:07 AM

Here (http://www.geocities.com/bechstein/chippendales2.jpg) is the absolute best outfit for fighting!

Doug

08-24-2004, 01:06 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Im sure this guy that you guys are talking about is a respectful gentleman and all that. But Im sure there is a lot more to the story than that. Perhaps he asked him to run up behind him, who knows.

You must admit a random rush attack from behind from a top ranking Judo guy sounds very weird.
And what is the name of this top ranking judo guy?

He is respected because he can back up his art of Chen Taiji Quan physically as well as mentally and spiritually. At seminars, he gives people the chance to lock him in any position, and he can get out of it and throw the person or people as he likes. I recommend finding an article on him for a reputable source, such as the Journal of Asian Martial Arts. Better yet, attend a seminar with him, and you will see why he is respected. He is a nice man who, according to one article, did not want to hurt the judo practitioner.

If there is more to the story than that, it has not been told. I have been trying to find an article on this incident for the past half hour (and I have a fresh memory of the incident as described in one), but it is lost in the pile. But as Chen Xiaowang described it, he had just demonstrated skill in getting out of a lock when the judo practitioner rushed him. The judo man stated he wanted to test Chen Xiaowang for real, which was why he wanted to catch him by surprise. But it was not planned.

No, it does not sound weird for a judo practitioner to rush someone.

I do not recall the name. I will try to find the article in question and any others (though they are basically the same). I just have other things that are more time consuming to take care of.

Anyone with a reference could be a big help right now. As I recall, JAMA and Kung Fu Magazine reported it.

Doug M

Doug

08-24-2004, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by Brad
Where at?

I do not remember the exact location. I am trying to locate an article in this mess.

DOoug M

Doug

08-24-2004, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
So basically you were running away?

I do not think that qualifies as running away.

Doug M

SPJ

08-24-2004, 05:38 AM

To dodge is to engage.

To dodge is to engage the opponent without body contact.

Every rush will use up some ATP, oxygen reserve and build up lactic acid.

I only have to move away from the opponent's target area a bit.

I move when the opponent moves.

How?

To the left.

To the right.

Back up a step.

If I can dodge 7 times, the opponent will then be out of breath, fatigued, frustrated and feared.

The basic Tai Ji maneuver is to yield with steps.

Or make your front disappear to the side.

The opponent's linear punch or linear rush is met with circular maneuver with steps and waist.

In this case, without hand or arm movement.

I still practice Tai Ji 101.

Peace.

:D

SPJ

08-24-2004, 06:34 AM

I know I cannot out Judo a Judo Champ.

I will lose my shirt.

But I really like to drink the wine. And I like to keep my friend. He is so good in Judo. I only know basic Judo.

That got me thinking.

How to avoid the Judo throw?

What if I take my shirt off----

Peace.

:D

Knifefighter

08-25-2004, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by Doug
He is respected because he can back up his art of Chen Taiji Quan physically as well as mentally and spiritually. At seminars, he gives people the chance to lock him in any position, and he can get out of it and throw the person or people as he likes. I recommend finding an article on him for a reputable source, such as the Journal of Asian Martial Arts. Better yet, attend a seminar with him, and you will see why he is respected. He is a nice man who, according to one article, did not want to hurt the judo practitioner.How would one go about determining when and where his seminars are held?

Water Dragon

08-25-2004, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by SPJ
That got me thinking.

How to avoid the Judo throw?

Pull guard

wujidude

08-25-2004, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
How would one go about determining when and where his seminars are held?

www.chenxiaowang.com, on the "Workshops" page.

I talked with someone who was at the seminar where this happened, and his account pretty much accords with Doug's. There was another incident with an on-the-spot challenge from a Muay Thai boxer, and Chen put him down hard on the floor with a leg injury.

SPJ

08-25-2004, 09:48 PM

No need to verify stories.

Yang Lu Chan studied Lao Jia with Chen Chan Xin. He was undefeatable in Beijing at the time. Thus the nickname is Yang Wu Di.

Practice Tai Ji, you start with Lao Jia. It has the very basic steps and movements. It is easy. Because you are doing the large circles.

Guess what. Even that took me years to practice.

The circles become smaller to mid sizes in other forms.

The last stage is movement without movement. Circles with no circles. Breathing without breathing.

You are motionless. When the opponent touches your body parts or arms. They feel your circling Jin without seeing your arms moving. They got thrown several feet away.

Circles of no circles.

:D

Miles Teg

08-26-2004, 03:48 AM

Hey full credit to Chen stylists, Ive heard they are very skilled. Everyone is saying good things about them. I would give it a go if they had one where I live.
Im not questioning whether this teacher is capable of this or not.

Just the action that high level judo guy took sounds very very weird.

Miles Teg

08-26-2004, 03:48 AM

Miles Teg

08-26-2004, 03:55 AM

......unless he shagged his wife or something, in which case ...yeah, even Id probably rush someone from behind. Maybe even with a weopon.

Water Dragon

08-26-2004, 06:16 AM

Back in the day, every famous story of an internal guy involved him beating a Shuai Chiao man.

Now, the all involve the internal guy beating a Muay Thai Boxer, MMA guy, BJJer, or Judoka.

There's a reason these guys always show up in the stories.

bamboo_ leaf

08-26-2004, 10:01 AM

yep, you think that they would have learned by now ;)

Water Dragon

08-26-2004, 10:22 AM

lol

Doug

08-26-2004, 01:22 PM

Water Dragon

08-26-2004, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Doug
?

!

Miles Teg

08-26-2004, 04:51 PM

???

Felipe Bido

08-26-2004, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Back in the day, every famous story of an internal guy involved him beating a Shuai Chiao man.

Now, the all involve the internal guy beating a Muay Thai Boxer, MMA guy, BJJer, or Judoka.

There's a reason these guys always show up in the stories.

Is it like the stories that say "You didn't tell me you were using Xingyi!", like it happened to Zhang Xiangzhai (NOT Wang Xiangzhai) and Sun Lutang?...

What would be the modern equivalent?..."You didn't tell me you had a ****ing pocket knife!!!" or something like that?

:D

Water Dragon

08-26-2004, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
???

;

SPJ

08-26-2004, 09:20 PM

Let me break the silence.

Wrestling became a sport about 2000 years ago in China.

Shuai Jiao is both a sport and a combative method.

Judo is a sport version of throwing with rules. The way of the soft/gentleness. The do (Dao) of Ju (Ruo).

Tai Ji Quan evolved from long boxing. It is a combative method.

Even though people nowadays practice Tai Ji for health and meditation.

In essence, Tai Ji is still a fighting method. The ultimate (Ji) method of making people fall.

There are more ways to "throw" and to uproot then Judo or Shuai Jiao. Tai Ji is at whole different levels and more.

And Tai Ji may even break the opponent's arm or sway the opponent's arm like a heavy long spear.

Please do not compare apples with oranges.

I am a Judo fan for its principles and practices. And, most important of all, the spirits it represents.

I rooted for my mates in Judo games in college.

Peace.

:D

Miles Teg

08-26-2004, 11:37 PM

Yep I just started learning some Judo just because Im in a little Japanese town with nothing else to do, but I was surprised. There is a lot more to it than people think. THey are also quite relaxed.
One thing I found irritating in my first few lessons was how a judo guy would grab the colar of your uniform, holding it tight in a fist. While moving towards him the knuckles keep banging into the soft tissue below the colar bone.
Someone above mentioned that a Taichi person would use their whole body to injure the grabbers hand, but I dont see how without hurting yourself. Kind of like head butting someones knee to to damage it - you would hurt yourself first.

I cant really say how a judo guy would do against a Tai CHi guy. But I would say that if they both went to the ground I think the Judo person would win hands down. I found that in stand up grappling its hard for them to throw if you are being evassive. If you are also trying throw them its easy for them to throw you. But once you are both on the ground the judo person can roll you off or maintain control easily.

Doug

08-27-2004, 03:34 AM

Authentic Tai Chi trains for ground fighting. However, it is not uncommon to hear of people, past and present, who knew other arts as well to complement their Tai Chi. Tai Chi is a pretty comprehensive art if learned for combat. So often, thogh, the health aspect takes the fore. This is where Tai Chi is seen as an exercise for old people.

Doug M

One Finger Zen

08-27-2004, 06:15 AM

I'm learning Chen Style at present and have been for the past two years. I'm learning it as a martial art and also for the health benefits.

For some reason it kinda p*sses me off when people see it and stereotype it as something that just old people do for the tremendous health benefits (not a jab at you Doug, i was just saying) which is fine but they should also take into account that it was originally and still is at its roots, a martial art hence the name Grand Ultimate fist (names may vary :p )

Sorry, no disrespect intended to anyone, just had to get that off my chest.

On a lighter note, Chen is renowned for its incredible root and spiralling energy. No doubt in my mind that Chen Xiaowang wiped the floor with that guy :D . Master Wang Hai Jun is incredible too (hes a disciple of Chen Zheng Lei). Look out for him!!

Peace, OFZ

unkokusai

08-27-2004, 06:15 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Yep I just started learning some Judo just because Im in a little Japanese town with nothing else to do,

Nagoya is a "little Japanese town"?!

SPJ

08-27-2004, 06:50 AM

Hardly so.

I have relatives and in laws living there.

I like the dry fish, plum wine, rice wine, ---

Oh never say never, the mighty and hearty Miso soup.

MT; You pointed to the correct.

A sudden jerking movement or change of direction will injure the wrist of a grabbing hand. And you move or jerk with your whole body weight.

An approaching hand is aimed at a target area by moving steps close to you.

The secret is to move 1/2 of step back or to the side or lean back a bit. The grabbing hand is now out of reach. You then come back and hit the hand with your body parts. Again with the mighty force of a whole body jerking.

I use my whole body to hit your hand. I meet you at your targeted area by yielding first and coming back a sec. That is why it is a balance game for Tai Ji. The highest level, you do not see my body moves. I simply yield a microinch and ready to hit your hand when you reach the end of your Jin.

A bowl of Miso soup a day may lower your blood pressure.

A sip of Plum wine may lower your cholestrol.

:D

Miles Teg

08-27-2004, 08:52 AM

Well just out of Nagoya. I just say Nagoya because people know it.

Sure I can understand how it is possible to injure someones hand if you move into it before they get the grab on you.

Miles Teg

08-27-2004, 08:52 AM

Well just out of Nagoya. I just say Nagoya because people know it.

Sure I can understand how it is possible to injure someones hand if you move into it before they get the grab on you.

unkokusai

08-27-2004, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Well just out of Nagoya. I just say Nagoya because people know it.
.

What's the town's name?

Miles Teg

08-27-2004, 03:36 PM

Chita City. Its on the Chita *****ula south of Nagoya. Its only about 30 minutes away from Nagoya. Are you familar with Aichi Prefecture?

unkokusai

08-27-2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Chita City. Its on the Chita *****ula south of Nagoya. Its only about 30 minutes away from Nagoya. Are you familar with Aichi Prefecture?

I am. I lived in Toyohashi.

Doug

08-27-2004, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by One Finger Zen
For some reason it kinda p*sses me off when people see it and stereotype it as something that just old people do for the tremendous health benefits (not a jab at you Doug, i was just saying) which is fine but they should also take into account that it was originally and still is at its roots, a martial art hence the name Grand Ultimate fist (names may vary :p )

Gotcha.

For another school that teaches Tai Chi as a martial art, check out www.grtc.org .

Doug M

Knifefighter

08-27-2004, 06:18 PM

Doug-
I noticed you are in CA. Are there any schools that teach combat Tai Chi (including groundfighting) in CA?

Doug

08-27-2004, 06:37 PM

Sorry, I know of no school that specifically does this. There may be, but so much of the stuff out here deals with health. Some other guys out here (on this forum) are far better suited to answering this question than me.

Doug M

Miles Teg

08-27-2004, 07:56 PM

Toyohashi?? I think thats supposed to be the second biggest City in AIchi Prefecture. How long were you there for? What were you doing?
I was on the Jet Program, but I just switched jobs and now work in Nagoya, but still live in CHita City.

unkokusai

08-28-2004, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Toyohashi?? I think thats supposed to be the second biggest City in AIchi Prefecture. How long were you there for? What were you doing?

I don't think it's the 2nd biggest. It's a pretty small city actually. I was there for a year + working as a teacher.

Water Dragon

08-28-2004, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Doug-
I noticed you are in CA. Are there any schools that teach combat Tai Chi (including groundfighting) in CA?

You can try Tim Cartmell's Shen Wu program.

One Finger Zen

08-29-2004, 05:24 AM

nice website there doug, good to see the martial spirit of taijiquan being kept alive and kicking.

Peace, OFZ

SPJ

08-29-2004, 06:11 AM

Agreed.

:)

Doug

08-29-2004, 02:35 PM

Thanks. I recommend www.swordforum.com as well (the Chinese forum, I mean, but plenty of others are great too).

Scott Rodell wants to have a seminar out here some time. It has not materialized yet, but I hope he travels out here to California. One of the great things about his seminars is that he brings a collection of antique jian and dao for the participants to hold and get a feel for the real weapons. It is pretty unique to have a person who is not only skilled in Tai Chi but also quite knowledgable about the original weapons.

If you want to check out his non-profit organization, go to www.sevenstarstrading.com . The articles are the most beneficial, but he is really a nice person over the phone too--quite approachable.

Doug M

YongChun

09-21-2004, 04:49 PM

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=380

An Intrusion boosts the Tour
Two days later, to cap off the official welcoming, several hundred guests were invited to a banquet to honor the Chinese masters and their entourage. Among the guests were dignitaries from the country's sports organizations, local martial arts masters and aficionados. The dinner went smoothly with the usual long toasts. Just at the close of the dinner, three of the guests approached the elevated platform of the honored guests. They openly asked if what they saw about his martial skills on TV was true. They said that they were longtime judo practitioners and asked if they could test it. Chen Xiaowang, having eaten and drunk heartily, was not inclined to oblige but did not know how to decline. Invoking a well-lined belly as an excuse would be silly. A martial artist should be ever ready. So he beckoned them to come. Two of them proceeded forward and were allowed to do twisted chicken-wing locks on each of his arms behind his back. Without drama, Chen Xiaowang freed his arms. Dismayed and hardly content with this abrupt and anticlimactic end to their challenge, they nevertheless bowed to salute and thank the master. But as Chen Xiaowang turned to return to his table, the third judo person, who was standing by his side, suddenly grabbed Chen Xiaowang's right arm from behind, and tried to execute a judo throw on him. The dignitaries and guests were aghast with their jaws open. In unison they gestured, their eyes glued to the scene. The admonishment they exclaimed seemed stuck in their throats. In a flash, to the great relief of the organizers and guests, the attacker was seen flying and falling several feet away. The anxiety that had built up to a pitch in that brief moment gave way instantly to a thunderous applause of approval and appreciation to witness such a real-life martial feat.

Chen Xiaowang had responded with his natural reaction upon feeling a sharp force tugging to lift him. The sinking of his dantien energy and "kua" broke the attacker's lifting force and at the same time unsettled the attacker's center. Then he issued a fajin with the back of his shoulder, which struck the attacker close behind, sending him reeling to the floor. The adverse publicity would have doomed the tour had the local judo person succeeded in throwing the master. The organizers were thus doubly grateful to Chen Xiaowang for saving the tour and for generating even more media stories. The attacker, Mr. Lim (Lin Jinping in Pinyin), apologized for the unmannerly interruption, but was nevertheless thankful to have experienced the efficacy and power of taijiquan.

Doug

09-21-2004, 11:33 PM

Hey, great. This is the one from this magazine that I read. It has been published elsewhere as well.

Doug M

Miles Teg

09-22-2004, 02:38 AM

Still a bit weird though.
What language did they communicate in? Which country was this in? WHo were these guys? Their claims that they are long time judo players doesnt fill me with a sense of awe.

This encounter could well be a real event with some thugs showing up to cause trouble but world class Japanese Judo fighters going to another country to seek out a Tai CHi master, that Japanese people would have hardly heard of, and then challenging him after a meal........ I highly doubt it.

Youve got to understand something about the media here in Japan. Tai Chi is not very well known as an effective fighting art. When Japanese want to prove something, you better believe they make a media event out of it. Yoshida the gold medalist judo athlete and several other famous judoka joined the pride ring to prove their skills against Gracie Ju Jutsu and kick boxers and MMA fighters. Yoshida especially has done very well, so far only losing once so far I believe. Yes I have seen some T.V events were Japanese try to show up chinese martial arts in a rather cheap and unfair way. But it has been done on T.V for the Japanese public and with the full consent of the CMA practitioners. Not in another country where the outcome would never reach the Japanese public anyway.

Doug

09-22-2004, 08:23 AM

Miles,

You don't have to believe it, but it happened.

Doug M

Josh Vogel

09-22-2004, 08:04 PM

Hi,

Doug, I was interested in your comment about some Tai chi having methods of ground fighting. Did you mean like back to the floor kind of ground fighting or did you mean super low stances, controlling someone on the ground?

Either way, do you know any specifics as to the training methods used? Like push hands on the ground with lots of Chin na?

I've not heard of this before (which isn't saying much, since I'm far from seasoned in the martial arts) and was curious about it.

Thanks for your time,
Josh

Doug

09-23-2004, 01:19 AM

Hey Josh,

As I understand it, I refer to both methods of ground fighting/killing. As I have experienced it, you are right about low stances and applications at ground level; you can find that in other martial styles, such as Hung Gar and CHoy Li Fut as well. I believe ground fighting while actually on the ground would involve a lot of fajing. I am not an expert, and many other people here can provide better answers. But like many of the unusual weapons in Chen Village that no one hears about, I suspect that much in terms of what Chen Style Tai Chi can do is unknown to many martial artists who think of Tai Chi as an old ****'s art.

Doug M

Josh Vogel

09-23-2004, 04:49 AM

Hi,

Thanks for the Reply, Doug. I thought it might work along those lines (i.e low stance training, etc...). I've met some Chen guys who were pretty **** good and could beat the hell out of me, so I don't think that I would call it an old mans art...(or whatever they edited from your post)

Regards,
Josh

Doug

09-23-2004, 02:27 PM

I called it an old F-A-R-T's (F A R T's) art. I can't believe that was edited. Who is behind the censorship of this discussion board--some right-wing wacko? I can't believe it. How stupid. Oh, ecxuse me: how S-T-U-P-I-D/stewped/stupied/steupid. Censor that! I don't know when people will learn that there are no bad words but the ones repressive groups claim to be "bad." It has nothing to do with protecting young minds but controlling them. Arg.

Doug M!

Miles Teg

09-23-2004, 06:05 PM

Oh, I believed it happened with someone. But Id bet gold that they werent world class Judo athletes.

What would you say to me if I said my Judo teacher beat up a famous Tai Chi guy who rushed him at a seminar? Doesnt hold much weight does it?

The first question you would ask is WHO is this famous Tai Chi guy. To which I would I would say I dont know exactly but he is a world class Tai CHi teacher. To which you would instantly discard the story as having no value at all.

Doug

09-23-2004, 11:00 PM

Miles,

First, I would say not to assume how I would respond to such a question.

Next, I will say that people are people and anything can happen when people are involved: we are complex beings who, in the course of complicated, unspoken, chaotic thoughts,do things that are unexpected. Anything can happen to anyone, regardless of martial discipline.

Doug M

Miles Teg

09-24-2004, 12:56 AM

OK fair enough!

By the way if I had the choice I would study Chen Tai CHi over Judo. Its not like Im this big fan of Judo or anything.

blooming lotus

09-24-2004, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by Repulsive Monkey
I know of a high level Judo practitioner who switched to Cheng Man Ching style Taiji, and then went on to win a few golds at a high ranking competition. He said he gave up on his Judo and just used Taiji in his fights but made it look like Judo and he totally sailed all the way to gold positions in his category.

He said after all his years doing Judo he realised that Taiji washed the floor with his opponents.

what it boils down to ( and forgive me for not reading the 70+ posts to date) is that no art is complete. I've seen awesome judo folks playing, I wanna fight or study under and taiji dudes who I'm confident could the as* they needed to.

Remember , behind the art there is the practitoner and behind the practioner is a multitude of vartiants!!!!!!! How do you compare that???!!!

SevenStar

09-26-2004, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Pull guard

that may get you slammed... I know what you're getting at though.

SevenStar

09-26-2004, 10:06 AM

theoretically, things should be broken before the judo guy touches you, but in actuality, how likely is that to happen and how many are qualified enough to do so?

ShaolinTiger00

09-27-2004, 09:58 AM

If any of you are ever in the DC area, I BEG you to please come by and visit me. I would thouroughly enjoy and appreciate a demonstration in tai chi vs. judo.

please!

SPJ

09-27-2004, 10:22 AM

A few Qin Na techniques may desolve the Judo grab.

nairb

10-01-2004, 12:47 AM

These style vs style threads will be repeating the exact same arguments in the year 2999 as they were in 1999.

Even so, I'm suprised when people try to compare a martial Sport - Judo to what is supposedly a complete martial art like Tai Chi Chuan.

Shouldn't you be comparing the martial art that Kano used to derive Judo? Weren't there schools of the old Samurai combat JuiJitsu still being taught where Kano was a student and then developed Judo as a "safe" sport version for use in phys. ed.?

I'm sure there are historians here that know more than me about this, but I'm positive Judo was never meant to be a combat martial art. In fact the -do ending identifies it as less combat effective than the -jitsu ending.

Now can someone start a thread on Samurai combat JiuJitsu vs. Tai Chi Chuan? Or how about Ken-Jitsu vs. Chinese saber?

blooming lotus

10-01-2004, 03:22 AM

again I think we've hit a common note. Once you reach a certain level or attain an amount of your arts' skill, it comes down to the practioner. Judo has awesome grappling style, but I've seen impressive chen masters take down lightening fast , and then chin na / ninjutsu etc have throws and holds of their own....

cheers

Blooming lotus

nairb

10-01-2004, 11:17 AM

Another relevant point. The Attacker seems to have a Chinese name!?! Hmmm. Could he have been in Taiwan or Hong Kong or somewhere else not-Japan? Some of which are not exactly hotbeds of the Japanese Martial Arts perfection.

That might also explain conduct that would be unseemly for a Japanese Black Belt. I have the greatest respect for CXW and his style, but this the story does seem a little, ummm, suspect?

Originally posted by YongChun
http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=380

...The attacker, Mr. Lim (Lin Jinping in Pinyin), apologized for the unmannerly interruption, but was nevertheless thankful to have experienced the efficacy and power of taijiquan.

Doug

10-01-2004, 03:11 PM

Doesn't it seem, ummm, easy to attack his character?

So you honestly believe that a Japanese martial artist would not/could not/will not ever do something like that? Are you suggesting that Japanese martial artists are above the desire to see if someone is for real (their skills are real)?

It is funny that the only argument that is steady here is the one about whether the attacker was a Japanese judo practitoner. That alone should say something about the context and meaning of the argument. By that thinking, America's armed forces really are the only forces in the world who are concerned for peace, who genuinely seek out "terrorists" who spread "hateful ideology," and who have the right to do as they please without regard to the international community.

Doug M

Shooter

10-01-2004, 05:54 PM

If any of you are ever in the DC area, I BEG you to please come by and visit me. I would thouroughly enjoy and appreciate a demonstration in tai chi vs. judo

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21976&highlight=Judo

Miles Teg

10-01-2004, 08:34 PM

"So you honestly believe that a Japanese martial artist would not/could not/will not ever do something like that? Are you suggesting that Japanese martial artists are above the desire to see if someone is for real (their skills are real)?"

Yes, they do it all the time in Pride. Most of the time they do really well although sometimes a good striker who also has good grappling can win. They get fame, money and respect. The Japanese media loves fighter who defeats the foreign warriors. I still cant imagine going to a Taichi seminar in a Chinese speaking country to challenge someone though.

"It is funny that the only argument that is steady here is the one about whether the attacker was a Japanese judo practitoner. "

Agreed. But if I told you that a famous Taichi practitioner challenged a famous Judo guy and lost and then I told you that this well known Tai CHi guy was Japanese what would you think? I know race shouldnt be a factor, but be honest. What would your impression be.

nairb

10-01-2004, 10:37 PM

For all I know you guys may be good Martial Artists but didn't seem to do too well in reading class.

I quoted the original article thus:

"Originally posted by YongChun
http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezi...php?article=380

...The attacker, Mr. Lim (Lin Jinping in Pinyin), apologized for the unmannerly interruption, but was nevertheless thankful to have experienced the efficacy and power of taijiquan."

And noted that MR. LIM, the ATTACKER, seems to be a Chinese name. I have never heard of a Japanese person named Lin Jinping or Mr. Lim. Have you?

Sometimes it's a good idea to actually read the posts you're responding to.

Originally posted by Miles Teg
"So you honestly believe that a Japanese martial artist would not/could not/will not ever do something like that? Are you suggesting that Japanese martial artists are above the desire to see if someone is for real (their skills are real)?"

Yes, they do it all the time in Pride. Most of the time they do really well although sometimes a good striker who also has good grappling can win. They get fame, money and respect. The Japanese media loves fighter who defeats the foreign warriors. I still cant imagine going to a Taichi seminar in a Chinese speaking country to challenge someone though.

"It is funny that the only argument that is steady here is the one about whether the attacker was a Japanese judo practitoner. "

Agreed. But if I told you that a famous Taichi practitioner challenged a famous Judo guy and lost and then I told you that this well known Tai CHi guy was Japanese what would you think? I know race shouldnt be a factor, but be honest. What would your impression be.

nairb

10-01-2004, 10:43 PM

What about the argument that Judo was developed to be a PE class activity - the Japanese version of Dodgeball - while Tai Chi Chuan is supposed to be a complete Martial Art.

So this comparison is apples to oranges.

A better comparison would be the original combat version of Samurai Jiu Jitsu and Tai Chi Chuan or Chinese saber and Ken Jitsu. (see my earlier post)

Ok. I'm finished with this silly thread. Enjoy.

Originally posted by Doug

It is funny that the only argument that is steady here is the one about whether the attacker was a Japanese judo practitoner.

Doug M

Doug

10-02-2004, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
"So you honestly believe that a Japanese martial artist would not/could not/will not ever do something like that? Are you suggesting that Japanese martial artists are above the desire to see if someone is for real (their skills are real)?"

Yes, they do it all the time in Pride. Most of the time they do really well although sometimes a good striker who also has good grappling can win. They get fame, money and respect. The Japanese media loves fighter who defeats the foreign warriors. I still cant imagine going to a Taichi seminar in a Chinese speaking country to challenge someone though.
Miles, I want to be sure I understand you: you believe Japanese martial artists are above human weakness?

"It is funny that the only argument that is steady here is the one about whether the attacker was a Japanese judo practitoner. "

Agreed. But if I told you that a famous Taichi practitioner challenged a famous Judo guy and lost and then I told you that this well known Tai CHi guy was Japanese what would you think? I know race shouldnt be a factor, but be honest. What would your impression be.
I do not mean to be rude, but I already answered this above when you asked me last time.

Doug M

Doug

10-02-2004, 01:51 AM

Originally posted by nairb
For all I know you guys may be good Martial Artists but didn't seem to do too well in reading class.
You should not talk since you missed the point of the argument above.

And noted that MR. LIM, the ATTACKER, seems to be a Chinese name. I have never heard of a Japanese person named Lin Jinping or Mr. Lim. Have you?
Have you ever heard of you missing the point of the above argument?

Sometimes it's a good idea to actually read the posts you're responding to.
Sometimes, it is good to make logical arguments, not assumptions. Therefore, you are the primary audience for your own claim here. Look at your initial claim, and think about it. Then, try not to make assumptions.

Doug M

Miles Teg

10-03-2004, 08:31 PM

"Miles, I want to be sure I understand you: you believe Japanese martial artists are above human weakness?"

Of course not. Its just that Judo is put out more in the public eye(media) compared to Taichi. E.G the octogon, pride etc. Taichi has yet to prove itself in such events. If there is any martial art that has seomthing to prove its TaiChi - not Judo. Hey, I do wing chun and that is the same as Tai CHi in that it is very effective but hasnt proved itself against other martial arts in media events yet.
The best example of a style that has achieved this is BJJ people. They will go up against anyone if it is to be televised. Wing Chun or Tai Chi people havent made a name for themselves in this way yet.

Look, the point of the story coming on this this thread was to show that Tai Chi is superior to Judo. I am not saying that it isnt just that this thing that took place shouldnt be looked upon as some historical event that proves the case. People shouldnt base the effectiveness of Judo verses Taichi on the relaying of this event. We dont know who this world class Judo guy was. Now through someones observation we know that this person is not Japanese which throws light on the questions I had before about language barriers, happening to be in the same country, and why a world class Japanese judo guy would bother when there are so many better ways that they can and do prove themselves.

Base your opinion on what is a better style on your own experience not this story.

By the way, Judo was not designed to be a PE activity for Japanese high schools as someone above pointed out.

Doug

10-04-2004, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Of course not. Its just that Judo is put out more in the public eye(media) compared to Taichi. E.G the octogon, pride etc. Taichi has yet to prove itself in such events. If there is any martial art that has seomthing to prove its TaiChi - not Judo.
I understand you. Tai Chi's multi-faceted approach to combat, health, and spirituality does have a way to make it seem lees of a combat art. After all, it's what old peole do, right? At least, tht is the perception. There are people who practice it as a combat art, but they are far fewer in numbers than other arts out there. It would be just like Judo players proposing that their art is as much of a promoter of health and spirituality as Tai Chi is.

Hey, I do wing chun and that is the same as Tai CHi in that it is very effective but hasnt proved itself against other martial arts in media events yet.
Well, yeah, but they are very different arts.

The best example of a style that has achieved this is BJJ people. They will go up against anyone if it is to be televised.
Everyone? All the time? Is that a given?

Wing Chun or Tai Chi people havent made a name for themselves in this way yet.
Well, that may also be due to the nature of the art. I know plenty of tai Chi artists who will take a challenge but will not make it public because the act of combat, restricted or not, is not a public matter. Perhaps a hot-headed Tai Chi person will stand in the spotlight and change that perception.

Look, the point of the story coming on this this thread was to show that Tai Chi is superior to Judo. I am not saying that it isnt just that this thing that took place shouldnt be looked upon as some historical event that proves the case. People shouldnt base the effectiveness of Judo verses Taichi on the relaying of this event.
I thought this was a given in this thread. Perhaps that was not clear.

Base your opinion on what is a better style on your own experience not this story.
I refer back to my explanation above about people being complicated, chaotic beings.

By the way, Judo was not designed to be a PE activity for Japanese high schools as someone above pointed out.
Well, it certainly was not meant for combat. I assume you are familiar with Jujitsu and know how different it is from Judo. The same goes with Aikijutsu, Aikido, and "softer" styles therein. While it was meant for preserving the culture (among other non-combative things), Judo is not taught with killing people on a battlefield in mind. Give a tough Jujitsu man a tanto or a wakazashi, and you will see one bad dude emerge.

Doug M

Miles Teg

10-04-2004, 01:53 AM

Well, I dont see why it cant be considered a combat art. If its not a combat art then neither is BJJ. BJJ has its roots from the guy who created Judo. If Judo or BJJ are not combat arts then what does that say about the many martial arts that have lost to BJJ and Judo guys in the Octogon?

As for the BJJ question. Well as far as I know there is a certain take on all challenders philosophy that they foster. Apparently you can walk into a Gracie dojo and throw out a challenge and they often accept.

Doug

10-04-2004, 09:14 AM

Well, what are you emphasizing in the -do art? By definition, Judo is all about finding one's way or path. It is not about killing other men. You know that the theory or philosophy behind a given art makes a big difference. This is such a case.

I'll go back to Aikido for a moment. Its roots are in a much harsher, combat-style system of killing. There is no philosophy as in the Aiki sense; you control the opponent(s) and kill. If you ever talk about the differences between a -jutsu or a -do system with a practitioner who practices either system opposite yours (Aikido or Aikijitsu), you will not only hear how different the system is but feel it too: someone who trains to kill has a far different "energy" than someone who is trained to better one's self.

You mention that someone can walk into a Gracie Jujutsu school, make a challenge, and actually confront someone from that school. How many people die from these encounters? How willing are the Gracie people to kill the challenger? Unless I am wrong, death is not something that happens in these encounters. Could they? Sure, the potential to kill is high and fairly easy to resort to if need be. But the decision not to kill someone marks the difference I speak of: rather than responding with death, another option exists--life. Comparing "ultimate fighting" with real combat is a mistake. The fact that people walk away from these things with "changed" perspectives is quite different than not walking away at all.

So, yes, you can turn a -do art into a more combat-oriented one, but at least two consequences. The change will contradict the -do art and cease being what it was originally intended for. One of the treasures of Tai Chi is that it is supposed to be something like a -do and -jutsu system (and more). The same cannot be said of a lot of martial systems. Trying to make Judo into a -jutsu art is the same as making Aikido into a -jutsu system as well; it radically changes the art into a system.

The other result is that the -do artist will be conflicted if training this way. If primarily trained under a -do art, a practitioner will find that training to kill--literally--is at odds with his former self, who was usually training to gain some type of insight into himself and the world around him. What will often happen is that he will reject the -do art or the -jutsu system in order to fully incorporate his current practices. He may also try to merge the two into one concept in his mind, which physically appears to work; however, the conflict will remian in his mind and affect how he interacts with himself and others in the chosen -do or -jutsu form. Thus, truthfully remaining faithful to both systems at the same time will tax his study and his mind.

Much depends on a practitioner's disposition and what he takes with him to a given -do or -jutsu form. People, complicated and chaotic, are more inclined toward life (-do) or death (-jutsu). Tai Chi was designed to develop both of these without the practitioner having to choose either one.

Doug M

ShaolinTiger00

10-04-2004, 09:23 AM

Originally posted by Shooter
http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21976&highlight=Judo

I wouldn't say I only used Tai Chi in the matches. I would say that I do Tai Chi, Judo, and MMA

:rolleyes:

Knifefighter

10-04-2004, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Doug
By definition, Judo is all about finding one's way or path. It is not about killing other men. Judo has its roots in "battlefield" fighting. One of the original purposes of judo was to make it more effective than the "battlefield" arts of the day.

Judo has a wide variety of chokes. All one has to do is not let go of the choke once the opponent losses consciousness and death will occur. If this is not about killing, I'm not sure what is.

Originally posted by Doug
You mention that someone can walk into a Gracie Jujutsu school, make a challenge, and actually confront someone from that school. How many people die from these encounters? How willing are the Gracie people to kill the challenger? Unless I am wrong, death is not something that happens in these encounters. Could they? Sure, the potential to kill is high and fairly easy to resort to if need be. But the decision not to kill someone marks the difference I speak of: rather than responding with death, another option exists--life. And how many people die in tai chi practice, challenges, or tournaments? How many people even get hurt, or choked out? I would imagine that it is far less than that which regularly occurs in BJJ and judo.

BJJ has an ever increasing repetoire of force available to the practioners beginning with non-violent control techniques, moving into incapacitating limb breaks, and going all the way into lethal force techniques.

Doug

10-04-2004, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Judo has its roots in "battlefield" fighting. One of the original purposes of judo was to make it more effective than the "battlefield" arts of the day.
The same is true for Aikido and its parent arts. But having its roots in a battlefield system does not instantly make it the battlefield system. That is why it is a -do art.

Judo has a wide variety of chokes. All one has to do is not let go of the choke once the opponent losses consciousness and death will occur. If this is not about killing, I'm not sure what is.
I stated this in my last message. Killing is the easy thing to do; giving someone another chance is not unless it is systematized into a form. Because another option exists--killing is not the only option--there is a difference between the two. The potential to kill does not equal a battlefield system. If you are trained in a -jutsu system and a -do system, you will know the difference immediately.

And how many people die in tai chi practice, challenges, or tournaments? How many people even get hurt, or choked out? I would imagine that it is far less than that which regularly occurs in BJJ and judo.
I do not know. You probably would not hear about them when they happen. Then again, Tai Chi does emphasize the -do and -jutsu aspects, and it is entirely possible that restraint is of higher consideration to internal martial artists than systems focused on one aspect: killing the opponent(s). Whatever point you are trying to make is unclear. Why not re-state your concerns in another way so that I can better gauge your question?

BJJ has an ever increasing repetoire of force available to the practioners beginning with non-violent control techniques, moving into incapacitating limb breaks, and going all the way into lethal force techniques.
Well, duh. How is this in conflict with what I already said?

Doug M

Knifefighter

10-04-2004, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by Doug
Why not re-state your concerns in another way so that I can better gauge your question? [/B]My point is that, if anything, Judo and BJJ are more likely to be killing systems, since they regularly practice their killing techniques at full force against resisting opponents who are also doing the same.

BJJ practioners and Judoka know exactly what it takes to kill someone, as most have effectively done so by choking opponents into unconsciousness more than a few times. I'd be willing to bet that there are almost no tai chi practitioners who have come that close to killing someone, so, basically, they are only theorizing that their "killing" techniques are able to be used in a real situation.

SPJ

10-04-2004, 09:23 PM

Agreed that most people practice Tai Ji for health and fitness.

Most Judo practices are sports versions.

So it is up to the students or practitioners.

If you learn how to fall safely, a throw may not be able to hurt you.

So always know how to protect your self.

There are more protecting strategy in Tai Ji.

What is the protecting strategy in Judo?

There is both defense (Yin) and offense (Yang) in a Tai Ji move.

Thus the name is Tai Ji.

Peace.

:)

Miles Teg

10-04-2004, 10:02 PM

Just a guess here as Im a beginner but ........

That would be positioning yourself in a way that makes it difficult for the opponent to use his/her weapons effectively.

Miles Teg

10-04-2004, 10:42 PM

Whats the protection strategy for Tai CHi?

Doug

10-04-2004, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
My point is that, if anything, Judo and BJJ are more likely to be killing systems, since they regularly practice their killing techniques at full force against resisting opponents who are also doing the same.
Then you are in conflict with the -do art.

BJJ practioners and Judoka know exactly what it takes to kill someone, as most have effectively done so by choking opponents into unconsciousness more than a few times.
Why is this being repeated? Is there someone here saying that a -do art practitioner is unable to kill? Is that even the argument? Hey, children know what it takes to kill someone. Have you ever seen them play with other children or talk--playfully--about what to do to other people, say, in their sleep? For the last time, killing is not the difficult part.

I'd be willing to bet that there are almost no tai chi practitioners who have come that close to killing someone, so, basically, they are only theorizing that their "killing" techniques are able to be used in a real situation.
Your claim is an assumption and belongs somewhere else. Only a study of every practitioner of Tai Chi and Judo will give an idea as to what you are claiming, and that will not even be accurate. But your argument also works against you because anyone can accurately claim that most people who study Judo or Jujutsu have also not come close to killing someone. What is your point, aside from seeming to hold a grudge against Tai Chi?

Doug M

Miles Teg

10-05-2004, 12:19 AM

Doug
I believe it was you who started with the whole killing idea. I wasnt sure where you were going with it and Im not sure where you're going with the whole Do verses jutsu thing. What difference does it make what you call it?

If you look at your post it basically says that Judo/BJJ is not a killing art. This opens the implication that Taichi IS a killing art although not clearly stated. Thus Knifefighter's justified comparison between Taichi and BJJ/Judo as killing arts.

POSTED BY DOUG:
"Well, what are you emphasizing in the -do art? By definition, Judo is all about finding one's way or path. It is not about killing other men. You know that the theory or philosophy behind a given art makes a big difference. This is such a case.

You mention that someone can walk into a Gracie Jujutsu school, make a challenge, and actually confront someone from that school. How many people die from these encounters? How willing are the Gracie people to kill the challenger? Unless I am wrong, death is not something that happens in these encounters. Could they? Sure, the potential to kill is high and fairly easy to resort to if need be. But the decision not to kill someone marks the difference I speak of: rather than responding with death, another option exists--life. Comparing "ultimate fighting" with real combat is a mistake. The fact that people walk away from these things with "changed" perspectives is quite different than not walking away at all."

blooming lotus

10-05-2004, 01:46 AM

Buddy

10-05-2004, 04:28 AM

"THat's not true Knifefighter. Chen taiji and the notrious wu sustems were both ( wu a deritive of chen) created specifically for combat and were absolutely a first port of martial defence call back in the fuedalisms. Baring taiji sword in mind,"

While I disagree with knifefighter about Judo and BJJ (they are sports, add a knife or multiple opponent and they fail) you know nothing about Taiji. Which 'notrious" Wu are you referring to? Hao? Name someone from this system known for fighting? Wu Jianquan? an offshoot of Yang. Fuedalisms? WTF does that mean? These styles came into the public eye within the last hundred years. And just how long did you study Taji sword? Your opinions mean nothing. Get a job and raise your child like a good little girl.

Miles Teg

10-05-2004, 06:04 AM

Sports? What makes it a sport any more than Judo is a community center past time for the retired.

.....and god am I sick of the multiple attacker/knife arguement!

Buddy

10-05-2004, 06:58 AM

Rules.

SPJ

10-05-2004, 08:05 AM

The basic defense ideas of Tai Ji:

1) to yield, redirect, extend or empty out the opponent's Jin.

2) to neutralize the opponent's Jin. (Hwa Jin)

How?

By positioning, and Chan Si (silk reeling).

3) Qin Na and anti Qin Na.

What is protection strategy of Judo against a punch, a kick, a leg sweep, a throw, a tripping, Qin Na, elbow, knee strike, head banging on the nose, ----?

:confused:

Doug

10-05-2004, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Doug
I believe it was you who started with the whole killing idea. I wasnt sure where you were going with it and Im not sure where you're going with the whole Do verses jutsu thing. What difference does it make what you call it?

If you look at your post it basically says that Judo/BJJ is not a killing art. This opens the implication that Taichi IS a killing art although not clearly stated. Thus Knifefighter's justified comparison between Taichi and BJJ/Judo as killing arts.
I cannot believe how you guys who practice a -do or -jutsu do not understand the comparison. Obviously, the level of exposure to the difference between the two has not been very high.

"What difference does it make what you call it"?! It makes every difference. The two are night and day. There are similarities between a -do and a -jutsu, but they are not the same. A true -jutsu has one response to a threat: death. That is the fundamental understanding of such a system. Does that mean partners in class are killed? No. Does that mean every instance that a -jutsu person uses his craft will result in death? Of course not. But the goal is death, which was a necessary component of a battelfield. A -do can kill as a last resort. Does a -do use every other restraint to avoid killing someone else? Yes. This is not difficult to understand, so why are some of you taking offense? Who is contesting that a Judo practitioner can kill someone else? Yet who is saying that Judo is a "death art" rather than a sport? I have heard plenty of times that Aikido is a "death art," but that is nonsense as well. At the basic level of intention, the foundations of -do and -jutsu are different.

No, Knifefighter is not justified in making his comparison because 1) he misunderstood the point I made and 2) he makes an assumption about Tai Chi not being in the same league as Judo (which is a hilarious generalization). If someone wants to answer this question, find a Tai Chi fighter and challenge him or her. That is the only way to get beyond any blanket generalizations. But "willing to bet" is just another way of saying that one does not know for sure.

Yes, Tai Chi is a killing art for the person who trains with that in mind. Yes, it can be a healing art and a spiritual art as well. There is no need to "open the implication" because this is a fact. If you are thinking that I am saying a Judo practitioner is unable to kill someone else, get that out of your head.

You posted this:

POSTED BY DOUG:
"Well, what are you emphasizing in the -do art? By definition, Judo is all about finding one's way or path. It is not about killing other men. You know that the theory or philosophy behind a given art makes a big difference. This is such a case.

You mention that someone can walk into a Gracie Jujutsu school, make a challenge, and actually confront someone from that school. How many people die from these encounters? How willing are the Gracie people to kill the challenger? Unless I am wrong, death is not something that happens in these encounters. Could they? Sure, the potential to kill is high and fairly easy to resort to if need be. But the decision not to kill someone marks the difference I speak of: rather than responding with death, another option exists--life. Comparing "ultimate fighting" with real combat is a mistake. The fact that people walk away from these things with "changed" perspectives is quite different than not walking away at all."

What is confusing about this message? Can you pick out select parts and further specify what ails you? By doing so, I can clarify what I mean for that specific portion. Otherwise, I will be typing for a long time.

Doug M

ShaolinTiger00

10-05-2004, 03:01 PM

find a Tai Chi fighter and challenge him or her

No such thing. The closest thing you'll find is tai chi guy with a wrestling background who now studies kickboxing and sub grappling (mma) that says "it's all tai chi man..." *waves hands*

he makes an assumption about Tai Chi not being in the same league as Judo (which is a hilarious generalization).

right.. because we all know dozens of world class tai chi athletes

:rolleyes:

Doug

10-05-2004, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
No such thing. The closest thing you'll find is tai chi guy with a wrestling background who now studies kickboxing and sub grappling (mma) that says "it's all tai chi man..." *waves hands*
That is untrue.

right.. because we all know dozens of world class tai chi athletes

:rolleyes:
This supports my point even further. Thank you.

Doug M

Shooter

10-05-2004, 06:06 PM

I've never studied kickboxing or 'sub grappling' or 'mma'. No Judo, BJJ, or instructional videos either.

*cloud-hands*

:rolleyes:

Miles Teg

10-05-2004, 07:49 PM

No Doug, I must be missing the point entirely. I don't understand. And no I haven't had much exposure to Judo or jutsu arts so perhaps the difference is indeed unclear to me.

You train at a style. You learn a system to defeat an opponent. What more is there than that? I have been training Judo (a gdoh Art) and wing chun. Personally I donft see the difference you refer to. Neither are a religion. Whether its wing chun or Judo, I go class to learn hwo to take someone out. Whether, Im punching, kicking, choking, or arm barring its all for the same purpose.

When I think killing arts, the only arts that really pop into my mind are ninjutsu or arts that involve using weapons like knives, swords, shuriken, etc. I believe these arts are of little value to civilians like me.

Then you have good old empty hand martial arts where you learn to somehow defeat an opponent. In all these martial arts you have the ability to kill someone, or if you have a high level of skill, be able to either subdue or repel them to the extent where they cannot fight back.

Among these martial arts there are certain martial arts that are adaptable to different fighting environments (e.g. Judo & BJJ) and then there are those that say their techniques are too deadly for restrictive fighting environments where the deadly eye poke etc. is not allowed. These martial are sad because not only do they never really get to try their deadly techniques out in the first place, they also have such a poor foundation that the mechanics of the system are is like a paper castle that falls apart with out them(the deadly techniques). Although Taichi doesnft seem to be nearly as adaptable as Judo or BJJ as we havenft seen many step out into competitive fighting arenas (although I gather that a few on this forum do), I have never thought of Taichi as being such crap that it only relies on deadly techniques. I have always thought of taichifs biggest asset as having a sound foundation in body mechanics resulting in having the ability to both be able to absorb tremendous force and also put it out. I have always thought that there is no reason why such awesome mecahnics couldnft be adapted to different fighting environments. These mechanics would certainly work.

SPJ

10-05-2004, 08:36 PM

Excellent points.

Cheers.

:)

Doug

10-06-2004, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
No Doug, I must be missing the point entirely. I don't understand. And no I haven't had much exposure to Judo or jutsu arts so perhaps the difference is indeed unclear to me.
Hmm. I have been under the impression that you train in Judo.

You train at a style. You learn a system to defeat an opponent. What more is there than that?
Well, this grossly overgeneralized interpretation misses the difference. A -do art is never about "defeating" someone. It is about "defeating" yourself, constantly bettering your mind and spiritual self through technique and, in a more true sense, meditation, which takes on different forms. A -jutsu system does not have to even consider "conquering self" because the goal is to kill the other guy on a battlefield. You are confusing the two, which is leading you to believe that they are one in the same.

I have been training Judo (a gdoh Art) and wing chun. Personally I donft see the difference you refer to. Neither are a religion. Whether its wing chun or Judo, I go class to learn hwo to take someone out. Whether, Im punching, kicking, choking, or arm barring its all for the same purpose.
Now, I am confused. You have little exposure to Judo, yet you train in Judo...hmmm.

Are you really going to class to "learn how to take someone out"? You can do that by other means that have nothing to do with martial arts. No, there is more going on inside you than you realize. If you are practicing Judo to learn how to kill someone, then you are going about "the methods of killing" in an entirely roundabout way. Just because the techniques are there does not mean you are "killing" with them.

When I think killing arts, the only arts that really pop into my mind are ninjutsu or arts that involve using weapons like knives, swords, shuriken, etc. I believe these arts are of little value to civilians like me.
And Jujitsu certainly would involve weapons on a battlefield. However, the intention behind the system is to kill the other person, not "defeat the self." So you are really answering your own questions here when you say "these arts are of little value to civilians like me." Therefore, you are practicing the arts that are not "focused on death" but are all about personal struggles and learning.

Then you have good old empty hand martial arts where you learn to somehow defeat an opponent. In all these martial arts you have the ability to kill someone, or if you have a high level of skill, be able to either subdue or repel them to the extent where they cannot fight back.
Yes, like I said again and again and again.

Among these martial arts there are certain martial arts that are adaptable to different fighting environments (e.g. Judo & BJJ) and then there are those that say their techniques are too deadly for restrictive fighting environments where the deadly eye poke etc. is not allowed. These martial are sad because not only do they never really get to try their deadly techniques out in the first place, they also have such a poor foundation that the mechanics of the system are is like a paper castle that falls apart with out them(the deadly techniques).
First, you cannot talk about other martial systems unless you have practiced or do practice them. All is assumption if you talk without knowing. If you were to take your judgements to be true, you would be the grad F-ing master of the martial universe. Since you do not even understand the difference between a -do and a -jutsu, you should not be so rash as to make blanket statements like that.

Second, you should make a distinction between being able to use a technique and not having to use a technique. These "deadly techniques" as you call them are readily available to these "restrictive martial systems" and can be used at any time. However, there are consequences to using them that may not be desirable at a given time. Someone may know how to execute a "deadly technique" without ever having to use it. That is a major difference. Just because one knows how to perform a specific technique does not mean one must use it. Thinking that one cannot find value in a technique that never is used, in a tournament or not, is actually a clear indication of surface-level understanding of martial arts.

Although Taichi doesnft seem to be nearly as adaptable as Judo or BJJ as we havenft seen many step out into competitive fighting arenas (although I gather that a few on this forum do),
Uh, which system is used by more epople around the world for health and meditative purposes?

Have you ever practiced Tai Chi? How can you make such a silly assessment if you have no basic understanding of Tai Chi beyond a magazine or book description? Again, assumptions, the mother of all F-ups, and all that.

I have never thought of Taichi as being such crap that it only relies on deadly techniques. I have always thought of taichifs biggest asset as having a sound foundation in body mechanics resulting in having the ability to both be able to absorb tremendous force and also put it out. I have always thought that there is no reason why such awesome mecahnics couldnft be adapted to different fighting environments. These mechanics would certainly work.
How would you know this if, again, you have not practiced the art?

Even if you really do know about Tai Chi--have practiced it and personally experienced the things you speak of--how would it not be considered "adaptable"?

Tai Chi's major emphasis in the West is as a healing art, not a fighting art. There are schools in the United States that practice Tai Chi as a combat system, but so many more teach its health aspects. "Groundfighting" is all about the fighting aspect, which limits its application. If one take the intention of "fight, fight, fight" to the -do art, then one is not practicng the -do aspect and is missing out on the very beneficial parts of the -do art. To say that Tai Chi is not as adaptable as these otehr systems is simply a misinterpretation of the facts that are right in front of us. Given time, Tai Chi's fighting aspects can become a major emphasis in more schools.

Anyway, I am not going to talk about -do or -jutsu (I should have been typing "jitsu" all along--sorry) anymore. I have explained it well enough, and those who know the difference can say more if they want to.

Doug M

Knifefighter

10-06-2004, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Doug
Second, you should make a distinction between being able to use a technique and not having to use a technique. These "deadly techniques" as you call them are readily available to these "restrictive martial systems" and can be used at any time. The practitioners of these "deadly" arts believe that their "deadly' techniques are readily available. However, the truth is, since they have never actually used them, the "lethal" techniquues are rarely as available as those practitioners think they are.

Doug

10-06-2004, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
The practitioners of these "deadly" arts believe that their "deadly' techniques are readily available. However, the truth is, since they have never actually used them, the "lethal" techniquues are rarely as available as those practitioners think they are.
This is only true if these techniques are not practiced on objects, stationary or moving, and in sparring. True, one cannot spar with these "deadly" techniques because "the opposite" would die. Yet training to use them and being ready to use them constitute their readiness.

And I do not believe every practitioner of every "deadly technique" will be able to perform it well or competently. The same goes for all things.

This reminds me of a non-Tai Chi incident. I was regularly hand training with a fifty-pound sandbag and a metal bar a few years ago. One technique I was training was a backfist. To test it, I decided to hang a background onto a wall with my backfist to help someone with a photo shoot. It worked.

So, yes, one needs to train and use the technique (by "use," I mean apply it to some medium) for it to work. But one does not have to actually kill someone with it. Of course, one could take the route of Mas Oyama and kill bulls.

Doug M

Miles Teg

10-06-2004, 08:17 PM

(Hmm. I have been under the impression that you train in Judo.)

Thus use of the term "not much". As I said before, I just started.

(Well, this grossly overgeneralized interpretation misses the difference. )
I dont want to see the difference, I want to see similarities and useful applications.

(A -do art is never about "defeating" someone.
It is about "defeating" yourself, constantly bettering your mind and spiritual self through technique and, in a more true sense, meditation, which takes on different forms. A -jutsu system does not have to even consider "conquering self" because the goal is to kill the other guy on a battlefield. You are confusing the two, which is leading you to believe that they are one in the same.)

Correct me if Im wrong, but don't life and death battlefield encounters require a greater focus on "the way" meditation and so forth. Bettering yourself mentally and physically in preparation for the few seconds of fighting eventuate in killing or being killed. Was it not the samurai that would meditate for hours a day sometimes right before a challenge. Wasnt their whole philosophy the most dangerous warrior is one that doesnt fear death.
I think you're making this more complicated than it needs to be and I dont think the creators of these arts had these differences in mind when they made them. Iaido for example is the art of drawing a sword and that is a "Do". BJJ evolved from a student of the guy that created Judo. This student stayed with the name Jutsu (this may be due to the person leaving his teacher (kano) before the name Judo started being employed - but it still illustrates that there is little difference in the naming)

(Now, I am confused. You have little exposure to Judo, yet you train in Judo...hmmm.)

See above.

(Are you really going to class to "learn how to take someone out"? You can do that by other means that have nothing to do with martial arts. No, there is more going on inside you than you realize. If you are practicing Judo to learn how to kill someone, then you are going about "the methods of killing" in an entirely roundabout way. Just because the techniques are there does not mean you are "killing" with them.)

I didnt think taking someone outEnecessarily equated to killing someone. Killing people with martial arts hasnt crossed my mind.
quote:

(And Jujitsu certainly would involve weapons on a battlefield. However, the intention behind the system is to kill the other person, not "defeat the self." So you are really answering your own questions here when you say "these arts are of little value to civilians like me." Therefore, you are practicing the arts that are not "focused on death" but are all about personal struggles and learning.)

For me its about fighting skills, body mechanics etc. Learning Eyes. Personal struggle Ewell Ethat covers all areas of life.

(First, you cannot talk about other martial systems unless you have practiced or do practice them. All is assumption if you talk without knowing. If you were to take your judgements to be true, you would be the grad F-ing master of the martial universe.)

Come again sunshine? What judgments?

(Since you do not even understand the difference between a -do and a -jutsu, you should not be so rash as to make blanket statements like that.)

What blaket statements? That taichi has good body mechanics?

(Second, you should make a distinction between being able to use a technique and not having to use a technique. These "deadly techniques" as you call them are readily available to these "restrictive martial systems" and can be used at any time. However, there are consequences to using them that may not be desirable at a given time. Someone may know how to execute a "deadly technique" without ever having to use it. That is a major difference. Just because one knows how to perform a specific technique does not mean one must use it. Thinking that one cannot find value in a technique that never is used, in a tournament or not, is actually a clear indication of surface-level understanding of martial arts.)

Well we are kind of dancing around the generalized term deadly techniquesE Are you referring to pressure points/dim mak etc or very powerful body mechanics that effectually make the technique deadly? If you refer to body mechanics they should be adaptable to various fighting arenas.
quote:

Posted by me:
Although Taichi doesnt seem to be nearly as adaptable as Judo or BJJ as we havent seen many step out into competitive fighting arenas (although I gather that a few on this forum do),

(Uh, which system is used by more epople around the world for health and meditative purposes?)

I dont see how health and meditative purposes fits in with my comment on adaptability to fighting arenas.

(Have you ever practiced Tai Chi? How can you make such a silly assessment if you have no basic understanding of Tai Chi beyond a magazine or book description? Again, assumptions, the mother of all F-ups, and all that.)

No I havent. But what assumption? That Taichi has awesome body mechanics?
I just have an interest and have had a few demos from/through friends. There are a few overlapping principles in W.C and Taichi. Namely whole body unity, sensitivity, wecome-stick-follow, uprooting rooting etc. However, before you get going on your separation fetish Eyes, as you unnecessarily said before they are different arts.

(Even if you really do know about Tai Chi--have practiced it and personally experienced the things you speak of--how would it not be considered "adaptable"?)

I dont think its not adaptable. I believe the foundations are such that they need not rely on deadly techniques and would thus be adaptable to fighting arenas.

(Anyway, I am not going to talk about -do or -jutsu (I should have been typing "jitsu" all along--sorry) anymore. I have explained it well enough, and those who know the difference can say more if they want to.)

I thought jutsu was correct.

SPJ

10-06-2004, 11:03 PM

Sorry to interrupt.

What is a Judo throw?

What is an Aikido throw?

What is a Tai Ji throw?

What is a Ba Gua throw?

What is a Shuai Jiao throw?

What is a Mantis throw?

What is a Ba Ji throw?

There are a lot of generic throws?

Please name a unique one in each school and how it differs?

Oops. Judo throws are generic throws.

Other schools have them and plus more.

:confused:

Miles Teg

10-07-2004, 01:22 AM

Please expand.

Knifefighter

10-07-2004, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by Doug
These "deadly techniques" as you call them are readily available to these "restrictive martial systems" and can be used at any time. Have you ever actually ever seen anyone use any of these "deadly" techniques? If so, what happened to the person on whom they were used?

SPJ

10-07-2004, 05:47 PM

Hi, MT;

To throw is not the monoply by Judo.

40 to 60% of 7 stars Mantis moves end with a throw.

There are a lot of throws in Ba Gua, Tai Ji, Ba Ji and others.

Shuai Jiao or wrestling to throw was popular in China over 2200 years.

Recently, the Mogolian and Moslem Shuai Jiao are popular for last 600 years.

Shuai Jiao was incorporated into a lot of Wushu.

Shaolin and Wu Dang also have throws in their systems.

And none of them ever learned Judo.

My point is that if you may fit your WC and Judo together for your purpose. That would be nice.

By the way, MT+BJJ=MMA is popular over a decade.

You may incorporate Judo into your WC or vice versa.

That would be awesome, too.

:)

Miles Teg

10-07-2004, 07:58 PM

I see your point. I personally dont put much value on the judo throws I have so far learnt (although they are not completely useless).

Now, the Newaza (ground)techniques are fun, useful and applicable - once your on the ground of course!

Doug

10-08-2004, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Have you ever actually ever seen anyone use any of these "deadly" techniques? If so, what happened to the person on whom they were used?
There are two faults with your question. First, I say I have seen them and describe them, and you still do not believe me because you have not seen them. Second, I say I have not seen them, and you believe your claim has been justified. Neither answer is suitable for an online discussion forum because nothing is actually proven. Therefore, on what I have seen and know I will not talk about because it will not help you any. So do not bother asking this question.

As I have said before, if you want to see these techniques, try to kill a Tai Chi master. But even that will not guarantee seeing them. It will, though, prove a host of other things that are not necessary at all.

Doug M

Ray Pina

10-08-2004, 08:57 AM

Wow don't know I how I missed this one. I didn't read it all, just the last three pages but there were a lot of quotes being used from earlier pages so I think I get the gist.

My two cents:

What I don't like about Judo is that a lot of the randori begins with the gtabbing of the gi already. Is it that easy to get that position against a skilled fighter? And if so, why aren't you just beating him? If you can grab the coller, why not strike the throat already? If you can head lock, why not forearm bash the guy AND then head lock as a finish.

Taichi? Find a tai chi fighter and challenge them? Not that easy! It's hard enough to find Wing Chun guys to really throw down with ... full striking, full kicking, taking downs, etc.

Not that it's not out there. My teacher says all his defense against leg shoots comes from cloud hands and I can see it but he has a pretty fierce aproach to fighting in general and has been exposed to much, including black belt rankings in Judo. But for the most part, those guys in the park look timid.

With that said, I see value in both arts. But I also see the restrictions.

Doug

10-08-2004, 09:14 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
(Hmm. I have been under the impression that you train in Judo.)

Thus use of the term "not much". As I said before, I just started.
Then how can you claim to know so much about any -do or -jutsu if you are just a beginner? Geez, kid, you surely think highly of yourself if you are ready to make such claims right away.

I dont want to see the difference, I want to see similarities and useful applications.
And this is your problem. You do not want to see the differences. You want to group it all together. Well, you may see the differences in time. Right now, though, that probably is not your highest concern. Still, if you take a "killer" mentality into a -do art, you are not really practicing the -do art and are missing out on the important aspects that it has to offer.

Correct me if Im wrong, but don't life and death battlefield encounters require a greater focus on "the way" meditation and so forth. Bettering yourself mentally and physically in preparation for the few seconds of fighting eventuate in killing or being killed. Was it not the samurai that would meditate for hours a day sometimes right before a challenge. Wasnt their whole philosophy the most dangerous warrior is one that doesnt fear death.
Are you doing this when you go to your classes, or are you doing something like it? See, there is a difference. Unless you are doing these things that you describe above, you are dealing in -do, not -jutsu.

I think you're making this more complicated than it needs to be and I dont think the creators of these arts had these differences in mind when they made them. Iaido for example is the art of drawing a sword and that is a "Do".
Yes, they did. You are a funny beginner, jumping to conclusions about martial arts in ways you do not fully understand. You will in time, but you should not jump around like this. Iaido is the art of drawing the sword, yes, not the system or technique of cutting a man in two. Different intentions are for different methods. When Morihei Ueshiba created Aikido, he had a specific idea that was separate from Aikijutsu or Daitoryu. You do not practice either of the latter methods (including the ideology and actions that support that ideology) when practicing Aikido. The same is true for the other Japanese arts mentioned.

I didnt think taking someone outEnecessarily equated to killing someone. Killing people with martial arts hasnt crossed my mind.
And that is the difference. It is pretty simple.

(First, you cannot talk about other martial systems unless you have practiced or do practice them. All is assumption if you talk without knowing. If you were to take your judgements to be true, you would be the grad F-ing master of the martial universe.)

Come again sunshine? What judgments?
Look back at your comments. Think about them. Then, re-read my comment, moonlight.

(Since you do not even understand the difference between a -do and a -jutsu, you should not be so rash as to make blanket statements like that.)

What blaket statements? That taichi has good body mechanics?
Again, re-read your comments and think about them.

Well we are kind of dancing around the generalized term deadly techniquesE Are you referring to pressure points/dim mak etc or very powerful body mechanics that effectually make the technique deadly? If you refer to body mechanics they should be adaptable to various fighting arenas.
The generalization arrived with you, so you clarify what you meant and mean. Then, we can go from there.

I dont see how health and meditative purposes fits in with my comment on adaptability to fighting arenas.
Well, you are a beginner.

(Have you ever practiced Tai Chi? How can you make such a silly assessment if you have no basic understanding of Tai Chi beyond a magazine or book description? Again, assumptions, the mother of all F-ups, and all that.)

No I havent. But what assumption? That Taichi has awesome body mechanics?
How would you know since you have never practiced it?

I just have an interest and have had a few demos from/through friends. There are a few overlapping principles in W.C and Taichi. Namely whole body unity, sensitivity, wecome-stick-follow, uprooting rooting etc. However, before you get going on your separation fetish Eyes, as you unnecessarily said before they are different arts.
They are not my differences, squirt. Do you really feel so arrogant that you feel you can re-define -do and -jutsu?

I dont think its not adaptable. I believe the foundations are such that they need not rely on deadly techniques and would thus be adaptable to fighting arenas.
You are contradicting yourself.

And this has been way off the topic of this thread. There are far more things to argue about than the obvious differences between -do and -jutsu.

Doug M

Knifefighter

10-08-2004, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Doug
There are two faults with your question. First, I say I have seen them and describe them, and you still do not believe me because you have not seen them. Second, I say I have not seen them, and you believe your claim has been justified. If you have seen or done them, then you are speaking from experience, as well as theory. If you have not seen or done them, then you are speaking from theory only, squirt.

Doug

10-08-2004, 08:49 PM

Originally posted by Knifefighter
If you have seen or done them, then you are speaking from experience, as well as theory. If you have not seen or done them, then you are speaking from theory only, squirt.
You are a funny guy or gal. You now seem to take up the position and/or defense of another argument. This is because you have no more argument of your own and need to take up someone else's defense. Nice try--no, wait, it is clearly without merit.

As a generalization, you have stated the obvious as quoted above in terms of seeing and not seeing. Well, duh for you.

As a more specific point, you prove my point about knowing or not knowing. You do not know or, if you do, certainly do not lead toward that direction. Therefore, your attempt to make me look worse falls way short of its attempt. You are the one who appears small here, friend. So "squirt" really applies to you.

If you know everything, start proclaiming; if you do not, stop making assumptions.

Anything else?

Doug M

Miles Teg

10-09-2004, 01:29 AM

Is there any point to this? You are saying Judo is not a killing art but is capable of killing.

So Taichi is a killing art and is not capable of doing anything less?
Jutsu arts are killing arts and are not capable of doing anything less?

I take it the answer to both questions is "of course they are both capable of throwing, dislocating, rendering someone unconscious, subduing, joint manipulation, and causing injury resulting in an oponent being unable to continue fighting all with out needing to KILL".

So you have Judo & BJJ that can do the above and kill. Then you have Taichi and Jutsu arts that can kill and do the above.

Im I missing something here? In light of the above contradiction (actually non contradiciton) and by your own definition what is the difference? Besides arts that primarily focus on weopon use, how does this "Killing art"/"non killing art" arguement make a lick of difference to anything?

Of course there are huge differences in these martial arts, but they won't be found in this killing art distinction you have made.

Christopher M

10-10-2004, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Doug
There are two faults with your question... Neither answer is suitable for an online discussion forum because nothing is actually proven.

I don't think his main point was to question any individual's personal experience, but rather to note that training a technique is central to having realistic confidence in its execution, and there are some difficulties in training lethal techniques.

Doug

10-10-2004, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Of course there are huge differences in these martial arts, but they won't be found in this killing art distinction you have made.
I ahve not these distinctions. They exist, period. They are as natural to the respective systems as H2 is to O. You may not see it right now, but that is not my doing.

Doug M

Doug

10-10-2004, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by Christopher M
I don't think his main point was to question any individual's personal experience, but rather to note that training a technique is central to having realistic confidence in its execution, and there are some difficulties in training lethal techniques.
I do not contest that point at all. I think that is a given. If that is what he meant, my apologies to you, him, and anyone else.

Doug M

SPJ

10-10-2004, 02:38 PM

Excellent Do vs Jitsu discussions.

Not a Japanese expert.

-Do in Chinese is Dao or the way or the path. It means the principles underlying what ever you are doing.

Such as Ju do, karate do, Bu do, Bushi do.

Do is the higher principles of the arts or the practices. As Doug pointed out.

-Jitsu in Chinese is Shu or the skills, and the techniques.

Such as Wu Shu, Yi Shu, etc

Jitsu is the technique, the excecution or performance of the Do.

In short, Do is the principles behind the Jitsu. And Jitsu is the expression of the Do.

:cool:

SPJ

10-10-2004, 02:48 PM

Since the martial way, or martial arts are about fighting.

As Miles pointed out, there are throws up to a lethal attack.

The focus of Do is more oriented toward why and how we fight.

Judo focuses on using throws to end a fight. Actually, you may start with something else, some other tactic so that you may throw.

Such as a fake fist to the the face, then kneel down immediately and grab thighs and throw.

That is why I post many to allude to MT that you may couple Judo with something else.

Yes, it is about fighting to win. You may end the fight to the ultimate end.

On the other side of the equation is that we focus on defending ourself against that terminal end happens to us.

The purpose of MA is to defend ourself so that we survive without being kylled.

So the question is more about how not to be kylled than if to kyll or not to kyll the opponent?

If you are in the forces, yes, you are to terminate the enemy as MT pointed out.

If you are a civilian, then you are to protect yourself first. either call 911 or whatever to save thyself first.

Peace.

:D

SPJ

10-10-2004, 03:42 PM

Here is a link.

How Tai Ji Qi Shi is to take down a Judoka (fake fist to the face and grab thighs to throw).

http://www.essenceofevolution.com/taiji/dajiashi.htm

SPJ

10-10-2004, 05:48 PM

Here is a link.

A throw in Ba Gua.

http://www.essenceofevolution.com/video/essenceofthrowing3e.htm

SPJ

10-12-2004, 07:30 PM

Here is a link.

It is the fighting theory of Tai Ji Quan by Master Su in the July isssue of "Budo and Bujutsu the hidden" mag.

http://www.essenceofevolution.com/history/hiden17/hiden17.htm

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 01:03 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
I see your point. I personally dont put much value on the judo throws I have so far learnt (although they are not completely useless).

why not?

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 01:15 AM

Originally posted by EvolutionFist

My two cents:

What I don't like about Judo is that a lot of the randori begins with the gtabbing of the gi already. Is it that easy to get that position against a skilled fighter? And if so, why aren't you just beating him? If you can grab the coller, why not strike the throat already? If you can head lock, why not forearm bash the guy AND then head lock as a finish.

you haven't seen good judo. you begin separated. most good judoka are skilled grip fighters - you're not gonna just grab them. it's common for lower caliber guys to just walk up and grab eachother.

as for striking, sure the option is there, but you can't strike in judo. enter an mma or san shou event for that. Also, along your line of thinking, if you can grab his collar, why not throw him on his head?

shoot defense from cloud hands? how far away is the shooter? describe some of them.

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by SPJ

To throw is not the monoply by Judo.

No, it's not, but who's gonna be better at them - a judo or shuai chiao guy who spends most of their time throwing, or a mantis, shotokan, longfist, bagua, etc. stylist who throws considerably less?

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by SPJ
The basic defense ideas of Tai Ji:

1) to yield, redirect, extend or empty out the opponent's Jin.

2) to neutralize the opponent's Jin. (Hwa Jin)

How?

By positioning, and Chan Si (silk reeling).

3) Qin Na and anti Qin Na.

judo does all of these. But, as with other sport arts, these principles have no name. They are merely taught.

What is protection strategy of Judo against a punch, a kick, a leg sweep, a throw, a tripping, Qin Na, elbow, knee strike, head banging on the nose, ----?

:confused:

judo actually has kata (forms) for defenses against strikes, as well as it has strikes of it's own (atemi waza). However, in general, the way many wuold deal with protecting against strikes is to close distance. If I am in close, your punch and kick power is limited. you have knees and elbows, but I'm in my realm now - I can throw, sweep, elbow, knee, head butt, use my shoulder etc.

to protect against a sweep or throw, you need a good base and good footwork. also, a knowledge of counters is invaluable. for example, if someone steps in to throw me with harai goshi, ippon seionage or any throw that requires turning their back to me, I will either do a sacrifice throw called tani otoshi, or I will try ura nage - a suplex. you may resist a throw, go in the direction he's taking you and counter, etc. the options are endless.

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Doug

"What difference does it make what you call it"?! It makes every difference. The two are night and day. There are similarities between a -do and a -jutsu, but they are not the same. A true -jutsu has one response to a threat: death. That is the fundamental understanding of such a system.

A jutsu was a koryu - a classical japanese system. They are the arts that were trained pre meiji era, before the disbanding of the samurai. During the meiji, there was no need for samurai, killing arts, etc. and the do styles were born. But....

Does that mean partners in class are killed? No. Does that mean every instance that a -jutsu person uses his craft will result in death? Of course not.

because they didn't spar. their techniques were too deadly. Then, when they had to fight against kano's judo guys, they got slaughtered. A few of the matches did end in death. Kano's introduciton of randori made all the difference. So, back to his question, "what difference does it make?" theoretically, it makes alot of difference. Practically, it does not. judo throws can kill. Judoka learn locks and eventually strikes. plus, they can practice at full speed. Who has the advantage here?

But the goal is death, which was a necessary component of a battelfield. A -do can kill as a last resort. Does a -do use every other restraint to avoid killing someone else? Yes.

not necessarily. At least not in the case of judo. What determines that is how hard I throw you and what you land on. A simple shoulder throw can kill you if you are thrown hard enough onto concrete and your head smals into the ground. same with ura nage. what happens if I do tai otoshi too high on your leg? your knee gets popped.

]

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 01:49 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg

(Anyway, I am not going to talk about -do or -jutsu (I should have been typing "jitsu" all along--sorry) anymore. I have explained it well enough, and those who know the difference can say more if they want to.)

I thought jutsu was correct.

jitsu and jutsu are the same thing, but in terms of correctness of the romanization, jitsu is wrong. jitsu was adopted by the brazilians, however, some time during bjj's inception.

Buddy

10-13-2004, 04:02 AM

"or a mantis, shotokan, longfist, bagua, etc. stylist who throws considerably less?"
Cheng Tinghua, whom most of the Bagua you might see (not Yin Fu stylists) was a Shuai Jiao guy. All of the systems that come from him use throws extensively. See SPJ's example of Su Dongchen, a former bodyguard for the Yakuza.

Kaitain(UK)

10-13-2004, 04:48 AM

Seven - you're making a huge assumption here that what you understand by yield, redirect, empty etc are the same as what someone who studies taiji understands them to be. Even within taiji there are so many differences in understanding and execution it makes it impossible to say what it really means - just how it appears and manifests itself for you.

I've trained BJJ and Judo and for me it isn't the same as taiji - you can say that both are sensitive to the opponent but that's about as far as the similarity to taiji goes. I don't think taiji is better, it's just different. Within the fighting method (as I understand it) I would say that a key difference is a taiji student wouldn't learn just to throw - it would be something that came out of striking and is just 'there'. Therefore a lot of throws are not relevant when dropping someone is the main priority.

This is not to say that Judo is useless for fighting, I appreciate that the throws can be devestating, but they are also trained for sport. Any art that has sport competition is bound to generate techniques that are only useful for that competition. I would guess that when training judo into a fighting method for yourself, you strip out a fair amount of technique once striking enter the equation? If you train an art solely for fighting then its techniques are going to be different to one that trains primarily for sport but has application for self-defence.

With regards to having the same skills in Judo as in Taiji - the deliberate cultivation of a skill is going to yield better results than just waiting for it to manifest. I've trained with Wado BB's that still moved like robots and had no sensitivity. I've trained with Wado BB's that moved and felt like they'd been studying taiji. Ditto BJJ guys, Escrima guys, MT guys. Some people are naturally gifted and develop the attributes that internal arts deliberately cultivate. A lot don't - I think you get a higer success rate if you are constantly telling your students what it is they are feeling when you train with them. Caveat to that is I've trained with taiji students who said they have those skills, but upon examination it was evident they had none. I, being one of the 5% of students who get the real deal (along with everyone else here), have them in spades :P.

SPJ

10-13-2004, 07:12 AM

Seven;

I am a Judo fan, too.

Here is a link for Judo forum.

http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?forumid=11

Good discussions.

Shuai Jiao was incorporated into a lot of Wushu. As a matter of fact, all my teachers, relatives and moi all like Shuai Jiao. This made us like Judo, too.

As you pointed out correctly, Judo is a sport version. On the other hand, combative Shuai Jiao is very effective, too.

My point is that throwing techniques are seamlessly part of fighting techniques coupled with many other strikes, set up before, after or inbetween. How Shuai fusion with many styles of TCMA is the art, the questions and lessons in their schools.

Shuai Fa (throwing methods) are in Tong Bei, Mantis, Ba Gua etc. They are effective, too. and not less. They are coupled with other striking techniques and that made them more "potent".

You are correct that if you do not practice the throw often, the effectiveness is less.

Tai Ji has many other ways to make the opponent fall without actually " throwing". As Kaitain pointed out.

Doug

10-13-2004, 09:55 AM

Does that mean partners in class are killed? No. Does that mean every instance that a -jutsu person uses his craft will result in death? Of course not.

because they didn't spar. their techniques were too deadly. Then, when they had to fight against kano's judo guys, they got slaughtered. A few of the matches did end in death. Kano's introduciton of randori made all the difference. So, back to his question, "what difference does it make?" theoretically, it makes alot of difference. Practically, it does not. judo throws can kill. Judoka learn locks and eventually strikes. plus, they can practice at full speed. Who has the advantage here?
They did not spar? The whole of samurai who used jujutsu did not spar? Then how do you suppose they learned their techniques? Did someone show his men how to do the techniques once and leave it at that? Are you claiming that practice in classical techniques did not involve actually practicing them?

Theory and application mean the same thing here because both share a direct relation, so it does make a difference. Stating that Judo throws can kill is not new: I made that claim as well, and it is no surprise. My point, which is obvious to those who can at least read a book, is that the end for a Judo practitioner is not to kill.

And who is "they" in "when they had to fight"? A particular school? The whole of the representatives of Jujutsu men? The undead from centuries past?

Does a -do use every other restraint to avoid killing someone else? Yes.

not necessarily. At least not in the case of judo. What determines that is how hard I throw you and what you land on. A simple shoulder throw can kill you if you are thrown hard enough onto concrete and your head smals into the ground. same with ura nage. what happens if I do tai otoshi too high on your leg? your knee gets popped.
Uh, yes, the practitioner, if he is being faithful to the -do, is going to avoid death at all costs. Your examples support my point that a -do has these possibilities in it, but they are not automatic or are not the ends that are desired. They may be mistakes that are made on other practitioners in class, for example, but they are not purposely done to other practitioners. If they are purposely done, then the practitioner is no longer practicing a -do.

When Aikido's founder publicly presented his system for the first time, he made it quite clear to the royalty before him that he could not actually complete the techniques--could not really show them--because he would kill all his uke after two techniques. That is the difference: a Judo practitioner is not trying to kill: something more is at work.

And by "you," you mean "someone," correct?

Doug M

SevenStar

10-13-2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by Doug
They did not spar? The whole of samurai who used jujutsu did not spar? Then how do you suppose they learned their techniques? Did someone show his men how to do the techniques once and leave it at that? Are you claiming that practice in classical techniques did not involve actually practicing them?

they did not spar. They drilled. Kano is credited with introducing sparring into the MA. As you stated, they were training to kill. As far as they were concerned, they couldn't practice hard without killing or maiming. Plus, that may change their intent. sparring was not done.

Theory and application mean the same thing here because both share a direct relation, so it does make a difference. Stating that Judo throws can kill is not new: I made that claim as well, and it is no surprise. My point, which is obvious to those who can at least read a book, is that the end for a Judo practitioner is not to kill.

the end for a jujutsu guy is not to kill either - at least not in this day and age. The intent of the practitioner is dependent more upon the condition he's living in, not what he's training. Had judo been around pre tokugawa shogunate, you would've heard about them killing as well.

And who is "they" in "when they had to fight"? A particular school? The whole of the representatives of Jujutsu men? The undead from centuries past?

It was a tourney, kano's men vs. several jujutsu guys, as the jujutsu guys thought their deadly art was superior to judo. I will see if I can dig up which schools were involved.

[/b]Uh, yes, the practitioner, if he is being faithful to the -do, is going to avoid death at all costs. Your examples support my point that a -do has these possibilities in it, but they are not automatic or are not the ends that are desired. They may be mistakes that are made on other practitioners in class, for example, but they are not purposely done to other practitioners. If they are purposely done, then the practitioner is no longer practicing a -do.[/b]

I have been headbutted and elbowed purposely in a tourney. That's not death, but is against the "do". Judo is said to be a gentle art, but is not gentle at all. However, you're right about my examples - they are modifications and not things done on purpose in training. I'll give you that one.

And by "you," you mean "someone," correct?

could be you or anyone. doesn't matter. It's an illustration of my point.

Doug

10-15-2004, 09:35 AM

they did not spar. They drilled. Kano is credited with introducing sparring into the MA. As you stated, they were training to kill. As far as they were concerned, they couldn't practice hard without killing or maiming. Plus, that may change their intent. sparring was not done.
So certain are you that warriors from hundreds or thousands of years ago did not spar? Think about it: where is the logic in your claim? You do not think that these men would not have thought to test their skills against one another?

the end for a jujutsu guy is not to kill either - at least not in this day and age. The intent of the practitioner is dependent more upon the condition he's living in, not what he's training. Had judo been around pre tokugawa shogunate, you would've heard about them killing as well.
I have always been referring to the original ideology of Jujutsu, not a contemporary one. Perhaps I should have made that clearer, but I took for granted that this was understood. Maybe that clears things up.

It was a tourney, kano's men vs. several jujutsu guys, as the jujutsu guys thought their deadly art was superior to judo. I will see if I can dig up which schools were involved.
I do not dispute the event but the fact that one era's "representative" does not speak for the entire system.

However, you're right about my examples - they are modifications and not things done on purpose in training. I'll give you that one.
Well, it really does not matter if you "give me that one" or not because all I am stating is what is basic and fundamental to the underlying differences. Thanks, but these differences exist prior to either one of us.

could be you or anyone. doesn't matter. It's an illustration of my point.
It does matter if I do not know what you mean. When you you "you," the meaning implicates an unknown subject, which can easily be misunderstood as me. So thanks for the clarification.

Doug M

SevenStar

10-15-2004, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by Doug

So certain are you that warriors from hundreds or thousands of years ago did not spar? Think about it: where is the logic in your claim? You do not think that these men would not have thought to test their skills against one another?

No, you think about this one... these guys are supposed to be prepared to fight at the drop of a dime, no? If they get inured through full contact and got invaded the next day, they can't fight. Modern day thailand is the same in respects to sparring - they fight on a weekly to bi-weekly basis, some more frequent than that. Consequently, they don't spar. Why? because if they get hurt, they can't fight. I will post several articles and such though to prvide some sort of proof to what I am saying.

I do not dispute the event but the fact that one era's "representative" does not speak for the entire system.

I think it spoke for the training methodology more than anything. Kano showed that sparring helped increase the effectiveness of his students.

Doug

10-15-2004, 12:59 PM

No, you think about this one...
N-with-a-capital-O, re-think your position.

these guys are supposed to be prepared to fight at the drop of a dime, no? If they get inured through full contact and got invaded the next day, they can't fight.
Define what you mean by "sparring". The difference here may be that you are thinking of something quite different.

However, the idea that "playing" (as is popularly used in kung fu circles) is a modern conception is silly.

Yes, please post the articles in question.

Doug M

SevenStar

10-15-2004, 01:35 PM

I've got no clue as to when it was introduced to CMA. he's credited in introducing it to JMA. Not hard to believe, howver, as there are OMA, JMA and CMA schools today which do not spar.

SevenStar

10-15-2004, 01:59 PM

here's something on the tournament I was talking about. It points out a specifc school however, there were several such tournaments involving several schools - this one, however seems to be the most popular.

"We also have accounts of Kano in action. It is widely known that the Kodokan defeated Jujutsu in a famous tournament in 1886. The part of this story that is not so widely known is what happened in 1880. In 1880, Kano was a student at the university. The Totsuka-ha Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu school came to the campus to give an exhibition. Note that blood oaths by all students of the ryu prohibit unlicensed students from giving public exhibitions. So this was not a handful of beginners. After the exhibition, they invited anyone from the audience to come up and fight. Kano—young, enthusiastic, and clueless to the protocols—jumped up and took them up on the offer. Kano did not realize that the offer of accepting challenges was largely a formality. Kano went on to defeat everyone there. He was 20. This loss of face festered among the Yoshin Ryu people and culminated in the tournament of 1886, when Totsuka-ha was completely and utterly defeated by the Kodokan."

SevenStar

10-15-2004, 02:46 PM

I just grabbed this. I'm still looking for more.

" At the time, the technical contents of the jujutsu disciplines were basically taught and passed on by "Kata" (form). "Kata" was based on actual fighting techniques and were patterned and served well in the teachings between master and disciple. "Kata" utilized were dependent on the level of the disciple and for the advanced a high level "kata" could be taught and the master could know how far the disciple has progressed with this patterned "kata" method. In addition, this method was suited to leave such information to later generations in its original form. However, at times where "beauty" was pursued it became more artificial and this was considered dangerous as it would distance itself from the basic requirement of bujutsu which is actual fighting capability. As such. there were no alternative methods to determine which disciplines were superior other than the inter-discipline matches."

Doug

10-17-2004, 05:10 PM

Could you please cite these sources?

Thanks,

Doug M

Finny

10-17-2004, 09:35 PM

A few misconceptions being bandied about here...

Kano did NOT introduce sparring to JMA. Koryu Jujutsu schools DID engage in randori or free-sparring. However, the majority of training was devoted to Kata practise. And from what I recall, there weren't any instances of death resulting from the Fusen Ryu, Yoshin Ryu vs. Kodokan challenge matches.

And on the whole -do vs. -jutsu thing, Doug, it'd be better not to profess such a black and white view of the nomenclature.

Draeger was the first to promote the whole -do vs. -jutsu thing, and FWIW, he regarded Edo period (Tokugawa era) koryu as "classical BUDO" (the Yoshin Ryu that Seven was talking about would therefore be a Budo). To him, the only true -jutsu were the sengoku jidai era arts such as Maniwa Nen-Ryu, Takenouchi Ryu, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu and a few others.

But regardless, Draeger's ideas have been widely discussed and dissagreed with by many native Japanese and non-Japanese MA practitioners over the years.

To quote from an article by Ellis Amdur, one of Draeger's associates, and a holder of Inkajo in Araki Ryu and a shihan license in Toda-Ha Buko Ryu:

"I might mention that Donn Draegers' formulation of bujutsu (martial arts/techniques) and Budo (martial ways) was regarded by my instructor , and in fact, by most Japanese, with bemusement when it was presented and amusement when it was explained.

Araki Ryu, for example, which is surely one of the crudest and roughest of koryu, with a savage attitude towards combat, ALWAYS REFERED TO ITSELF AS A BUDO. For most Japanese involved in such practises, there was not a clear distinction between self-perfection and self-protection. One could become "enlightened" with blood on one's hands."

I particularly love that last line. Anyways, it's definately NOT such a black and white issue as "-jutsu are for killing, -do are for self-perfection". There are numerous -jutsu arts whose sole objective is NOT to kill, torite and the like, jujutsu-like arts taught to feudal samurai police types, were designed to bring in 'perps' alive. Some -do arts, like Kendo, were specifically designed to increase the ability of swordsmen to kill, despite the sport it has evolved into.

Just a FYI.

SevenStar

10-17-2004, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by Doug
Could you please cite these sources?

Thanks,

Doug M

yeah, they're on judoinfo. I'll go find them.

Doug

10-17-2004, 11:04 PM

Finny,

I think you are right on about quite a few things. I will not comment on Draeger because that is the business of another thread.

There are primary distinctions between -do and -jutsu that are not out of this world: they are part of their respective systems. There are "harder" -do styles, but the primary intention is still the same. My views are not so "black and white" as they may seem.

Doug M

Finny

10-17-2004, 11:21 PM

Well said, I understand

SevenStar

10-17-2004, 11:22 PM

"In fact, in the multi-discipline jujutsu matches where the Kodokan was competing, the randori really revealed its strength. For example, at the bujutsu competition held at the police headquarters in 1885, it is said that the Kodokan dominated the Tozuka-group Yoshin-ryu who were the main powerhouse at the time."

http://www.judoinfo.com/randori1.htm

looking at the article again, it does state that there were other schools that did randori, however, according to http://www.bstkd.com/Bulletin3.htm, it wasn't practiced by many schools and was primitive compared to kano's randori.

also, pretty much any article you read about the tourney in 1866 or any of the others states that the advantage that kano's guys had was the fact that they did randori. If so many other schools utilised this method, why were they losing? kano's guys were challenged quite frequently.

Finny

10-18-2004, 01:28 AM

That's just the thing - they kinda reversed the emphasis.

Just about every jujutsu group would've practised some form of free-sparrinng, but you're right, it would've been quite crude and basic compared to the randori of Judo.

The thing is, the koryu jujutsu schools would've trained MOSTLY in kata - then some of the advanced students would've engaged in SOME free sparring, and more importantly/commonly, in challenges against other schools.

So where the koryu schools trained mainly in kata, with a sprinkling of randori, Kano began to emphasise randori as much as kata practise.

Vajramusti

10-18-2004, 09:57 AM

Rather than commenting on every post on this Jodo-taichi thread..
Lots of apples and oranges comparisons IMO.

The ymca, club and park pracitioners of taiji/taiji are numerous
and practically world wide. What they do has little to do with taiji as a martial art. While the original Yang was a superb fighter- later Yang stylists for the most part drained the martial elements out of their taichi.Chen taiji thrived in Chen village -however some Chen masters were mistreated in the Cultural revolution. But top f;ight Chen survived- Feng Zhi Quan and the four tigers including Chen Xiao Wang are the real McCoys. CXW's younger brother is superb and has a school in Chen village. Two of CXW's sons are pretty good- the youngest is just a teenager.
The west has known about judo for some time- but the exposure to Chen was after the cultural revolution was over.. so it is relatively recent.

Whatever Judo was in Kano's time- these days it is primarilya throwing sport. An Olympic judo silver medalist who entered the UFC did fine at first with his throws- but on the ground he didnt know what to with fairly crude punches raining down upon him.

Top level Chen taiji is a complete art- throw, breaks, strikes, chinna-it is all there. CXW can seamlessly move from one function to another withe the ability to fajing with any part of the body practically any time. Fajing is talked abouta lot but without appropriate teaching and learning- people generally muscle it.

I primarily do wing chun but I respect top quality chen and judo as well and have met and "sensed" top quality folks in all 3 activities. Good chen has an edge over good judo. But finding a top level chen teacher is not easy. Judo teachers and bad wing chun teachers abound.
CXW occasionally tours Japan as well and some top flight japanese masters (Kanazawa in Karate) have been learning taichi.

Forget (IMHO) about common taichi and comparing speculatively lowest common denominators of different arts.