A problem exclusive to Yang style? Is theory just BS?

[Kaitain(UK)]

Hi all - I haven't posted for a while as I've been a touch disillusioned with the internal community recently. Let me explain:

I used to think that anyone who knew the 'science' of Taiji would be the bomb in practical terms. However, having watched a few videos of some 'Sifu's' recently my opinion is beginning to change.

Memorising the classics does not a master make. Understanding that the body needs to move a certain way does not mean you can do it. Realising that power comes from the ground and not the person does not mean you can do it. And so on and so forth.

Frankly I've been disgusted and distressed by the amount of fraudulent Taiji instructors I've seen recently - some of these guys are still falling onto their leg at every step. Yet they can tell you with a straight face that you must sink into every step and move like a cat.

What this amounts to is very little faith in the spoken or written word of people - I know what I can do and what I want to be able to do. I can explain what I want to do very well - but at least I reecognise that I can't actually do it yet. How many people here (or any other forum) are actually incapable of practically expressing the theories and principles they espouse?

It's bad enough that 90% of Taiji schools are 'beach' Taiji and do not know about, let alone train, martial application. But now I'm beginning to believe that most of the remaining 10% probably don't have a clue either.

If an instructor on a video cannot even demonstrate the ten essential points of Taiji then we are in a bad situation.

Am I being too harsh? Is this some revelation most people go through?

On the basis of this - is there any point in having discussions on techniques and the like if the people discussing said techniques cannot execute any of the fine theory they regale us with?

Ultimately I have to ask - is theory remotely relevant? I know what certain aspects of my training feel like - I can tell someone what they should be feeling because I just describe it as I remember it.

Is theory just the recourse of the those who cannot do it?

My best example is Dr Yang - his Taiji theory sounds fantastic, until you see him on video at which point it loses a lot of credence. How can you teach someone a system that you cannot perform yourself with anything like the proficiency you portray? (btw I don't question his skill at Chin Na (or other styles/skills) as I know nothing about it - but I know what Yang style TJQ looks like when performed properly)

Cheers

A disillusioned Kaitain

"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"

[honorisc]

The theories that they can't do have been done. This is what gives any discussion credulence. That these things have been gone over by people who do them or have done them. By those who know. They were telling or overheard by, want to bes. At least some of these want to bes did not work enough to become. But they have the words or theories right. Discuss the theories before you can so that when you can you'll have some thing to do. Since application begins with thinking to apply it you have started doing and will better be able to when you can.

~I could see how you might loose heart. Taijiquan is theory and principles that work. It's a chessgame where you do that? Well then I automatically do this and I can win. Taijiquan is a thing of you have to experience it to be able to really do it. While otherwise reputable people might not can do (lack of experience/understanding/learned wrong/was unsure and not recalling propperly), they will usually Say the right theories. "Relax, sink into the step..."Even though they might not understand the mechanics. The how reveals its self if you merely go over the princple and try to do that~.

For some people Taiji might be money~. For some it might be, that they would like to help, but don't understand enough to do it themselves. The student tends to excell the teacher in what is taught.~ Get what you can from it. Or don't bother with it at all.

Very some such, perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.

[This message was edited by No_Know on 08-04-01 at 04:10 AM.]

[Ky-Fi]

Kaitan,
I'm a student of Dr Yang's. I don't want to get overly defensive, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would bring up a couple points from my experience. I'm currently taking a class on Taiji chin na. The thing I like about chin na is that you can easily guage the skill of the person opposite you. We're learning the applications out of push hands, and when your partner is a new student, and is just learning the technique, some things are obvious. He doesn't yield well, he's not rooted, he has to muscle his way through the techniques, he doesn't have good body position for the application, and he has to struggle to get the angle right for the lock. When the assistant instructor (10 year student) shows you the application, it's different. His yielding and body mechanics are smooth, and he can get the angle of the lock without much trouble, and he finishes up with good body position. However, when you push with Master Yang, it's different altogether. You push, he's so soft you can barely feel him touching you, and you're instantly locked up, off balance and in an unbelievable amount of pain. Then, (to the amusement of your classmates :)) he demonstrates the additional options he has once he has the initial lock. With the tiniest pressure on your head, forearm, pinky, etc., he increases the tension and the angle and ratchets up the pain another notch until you tap. You said you don't question his skill in chin na, but in Taiji. Well, especially from Taiji push hands, if you can't yield, follow and stick, and if you're not rooted and relaxed, you're not going to be able to apply the techniques well. To be able to do chin na correctly and well, as in any other aspect of CMA, it has to be fully integrated with the other basic skills of the style.
Maybe from a video you feel his form isn't very pretty, or doesn't look like Yang Taiji---that's fine if that's your opinion. But as far as applying the principles----that is, being soft, rooted, and yielding, sticking and following as a foundation to inflict a great deal of pain on your opponent, from my first-hand experience Dr. Yang is quite skillful---and I think my opinion is pretty common with people who have trained with him.

[Kaitain(UK)]

but from his knowledge of theory I expected someone with a form (which is the text book after all) on a par with Ip Tai Tak or John Ding or any of the high-ups in the Yang family.

However, it's destructive to name names - it is after all merely my opinion which has been formed on the basis of books and video. No real life so no real experience I suppose.

He was one amongst many that surprised me - his idea of Taiji is blended with all the other areas he has trained in so maybe that is the discrepancy. On tape he didn't move the way I expected someone with his knowledge and stature to move.

"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"

[Ky-Fi]

Kaitan,
No, your post wasn't offensive. There's a difference between maliciously slamming someone, as opposed to sincere criticism--I think your post was the latter. One thing Dr. Yang has said in regards to masters is "Nobody knows it all, and nobody's right about everything, including me."

I think Dr. Yang would argue strenuously that his Taiji adheres soundly to the general principles of Taiji. But as far as your observation that other styles that's he's studied have influenced his understanding of Taiji--I think he would be the first to admit that---in fact, that's central to his concept of the nature of learning CMAs, as I understand.

A disclaimer here----I'm not a long-time student, so don't take my posts as someone who's speaking for YMAA or Dr. Yang.

[Daniel Madar]

There are actually plenty of people who suck out there, many of people who are considered good. I've only seen one "good" teacher that I thought had anything.

Fact of the matter is, to be considered good, all you have to do is talk alot, quote the classics and build a loyal following of near cultists, who after several years are afraid to admit to themselves that they paid you several thousand dollars and did not learn crap. After that your fame is secured, and you will be invited to demonstrate at all the major tournaments because the promoters don't care about your skill. They just want your students to show up and pay. So now you are famous and good.

Meanwhile, the little old guy who sits next to you on the bus may be an incredibly skilled practitioner, but no one will ever know. Why not? He's from China. He does not know how to promote himself. Maybe he does not want to promote himself. Can he write a book? No, he can't even speak english. Maybe when he first came to the country, he was invited to a tournament, where he kicked the crap out of a well known "master" and embarrassed him. After people saw the "good" teacher get manhandled, the promoters did not invite him back. After all, he was revealing the lie and endangering their cash.

Sound impossible? Sure it is.

All I can say is that some of the best teachers are not the ones who write books. They are the ones who practice and teach.

Here's an example:

The Lily Lau tournament is this weekend in the bay area. Jimmy Wong is going to be demonstrating the Wu Style, flying in all the way from texas. ((I pick Jimmy Wong, because I've never seen him. Maybe he is good. I'll tell you tomorrow, if I waste the money.)) Now, in the bay area, I know of two *extremely* skilled Wu stylists. Why aren't they invited?

Feng Zhiqiang's disciple Zhang is teaching in Golden Gate park. Is he at the tournament? No.

And for that matter thanks to whoever tipped me off that he is teaching there, because he does not know how/does not advertise.

Does that make these teachers bad? No.

Does this make Jimmy wong good? No.

To be honest, I think finding a good internal teacher is a matter of luck.

Merciless is Mercy.

[Mark M]

Well said!! My teacher told me that if I wanted to enter tournaments, do it for fun and don't expect to win. The schools that sponsor the tournaments and their close affiliates and "friends" will always win. I know a guy who has been teaching for quite a while now that sucked up to the judges and after 2 or 3 tourneys is now winning trophys and is now himself a judge. He never completed training with anyone and does not even know a long form, just short competition routines. So much for the "inner circle", there are many more just like him. People like this are the reason that many qualified teachers don't want to become a part of any organizations that sponsor events, and just want to be left to themselves.

[Victor]

Kaitain,

I don't accept your assessment that Dr. Yang's Yang Tai Chi isn't good Tai Chi. I believe honestly it is one of many differing variations on the theme, with its own dynamics.

I'm not a student of his, but have experienced his Chin Na, Push Hands and Tai Chi. His skill is readily apparent when you have occasion to work with him, and I've seen the transference into his students.

I study Yang TCC with Ernest Rothrock, as well as working on the Wu Teaching Form. His instructor is Leung Sheum from NYC. Yes there are vast differences in the Tai Chi, between most adepts. That is the nature of all the martial arts.

In that different instructors, IMVHO, chose to accentuate different aspects of their studies, the result often looks very different. Unfortunately a video tape is not an adequate method to really understand what is being presented, you only see the camera's angle of entry.

In addition ot his various arts, Dr. Yang has preformed a vast service to the martial community as a whole with his onging efforts to document and spread the Chinese Martial Literature contained in his writings.

An intersting sidelight to his two texts on Advanced Tai Chi Chaun, the 2nd volume on the Martial Applications was the first public template on the real depth of technique application in any art I've found. There are many today in other arts who have taken his efforts and built forth upon them (most times without acknowledging the source, too.).

Does 'bad' tai chi exist, undoubtedly that is true. But the fact that there are variant themes within the Tai Chi community doesn't necessarily mean those variations are worthless.

Victor Smith
Bushi No Te Isshinryu
www.funkydragon.com/bushi (http://www.funkydragon.com/bushi)

Victor Smith
Bushi No Te Isshinryu
www.funkydragon.com/bushi (http://www.funkydragon.com/bushi)

[Crimson Phoenix]

Well if you want my humble opinion you cannot judge taiji on a video...it's like jing, the master is said to PASS jing, not SHOW or demonstrate it...what your eyes can see is only skin deep, real taiji has to be felt...chen taiji and yang taiji look very different...but they are both sharing the same roots that enable us to call them both taiji...no two masters forms look alike...who's right? who's wrong? The problem is that we look at the flowers and they all look different, so we forget they share the same single root...
Plus it's so obvious to me that theory will never make up for a lack of practice...some of Dong Hai Chuan's students were illeterate and didn' care about the theory of bagua...nevertheless they reached a deep level as boxers...they practiced like crazy!
Unfortunately I see that too often in gong fu especially, that someone's words are totally in inadequation with their moves, and yet they don't seem to mind it...
Anyway, I have to go train...got a lot to do to make up for my words hheheehehehehe

[Kaitain(UK)]

I have trained with Ip Tai Tak (a few seminars, nothing more)and John Ding (a bit more substantial). They are representative of Yang style as it is seen from the 'family' POV - Ip Tai Tak is also the recognised top applications master in the family.

Ip Tai Tak can't speak English - yet I learned from him. There was no discussion of theory or principle - just demonstration and practice.

I am of the opinion that theory comes after the practice - there is no necessity for it and I don't believe knowing it before being able to do it accelerates the learning process in anyway. How do you describe rooting to someone who cannot root? "I try and be the most efficient conductor of energy to and from the floor" - it sounds nuts. On the other hand we have to store and pass on knowledge somehow - I think the issue I have is that people are reading all the knowledge and believing that makes them master.

WRT Dr Yang - I already acknowledged that video is not a fair medium to assess by. John Ding has some training videos that are really funny - he manages to do the form in a completely basic manner whilst still maintaining good form. It could be the same scenario here.

"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"

[Daniel Madar]

Okay,

I didn't go to the Lilly Lau tournament tonight, so I have no comments.

I did want to comment on the "is theory just BS" part of kaitain's post.

My answer to this question is an emphatic yes.

First off. theory is not the same as fact. For example, the theory of cold fusion postulates that you can create releases of energy by joining molecules in an environment cooler than the sun. Can you do it? Nope. At least no one has.

And even when a theory has been proven true--as they sometimes are--that does not mean you can do it. It means someone can, but maybe not you. Why not? You don't have the practical training to do something like splicing genes, etc.

Taiji theory is the same. You can write books till your fingers fall off, and make seemingly intelligent comparisons between jing and body mechanics, or jing and magnetism, or jing and the force--especially in Empire Strikes Back--, but when push comes to hands, you are going down. You spent all your time thinking and none of it practicing.

So yes, theory is just BS. Practice is far better.

Merciless is Mercy.

[Wongsifu]

The one thing i can say is that theory is only useful if you have experience d whatis said in the thoery and then it becomes fact.If you cannot experience how all power is generated from the waist no matter how much you read about it and believe it comes from the waist and want it to come from the waist it just wont. In this sense theory is nice to guide you but like kaitan said i cant stand hearing people talk about how to flow when they move about like elephants.
However it is possible to have lots of power and concepts of tai chi and still do the form wrongly. For example I studied many martial arts including a seminar under chen xiaownag in tai ji and that day i noticed how he did his fa jing. I wanted to learn this. Luckily 1 year later i found a good tai chi teacher, and learnt tai chi form and the chi kung for power. My form really really sucks i am heavy footed and my body does not align right but when it comes to concepts about flowing and about exploding energy and using the mind to guide the force it looks as if i have been doing it for 10 years. So in essence my tai chi form sucks but my generation of power tai chi style is great. I can generate fajing in any move i want and its all subcoscious i dont do it willingly the dantien moves all the body first. In a way it is because of the theory i have red and the small seminar with chen xiaowang.
Anyway guys take care
its getting late

Ive finally done it I can train longer by getting paid to do nothing , and my parents always called me lazy :)
get paid online http://www.spedia.net/cgi-bin/tz.cgi?run=show_svc&fl=8&vid=2475225

[stephenchan]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Kaitain
If an instructor on a video cannot even demonstrate the ten essential points of Taiji then we are in a bad situation.

Am I being too harsh? Is this some revelation most people go through?

[/quote]
Despite what someone else said, if someone can't get the basic external aspects of the form right (which you can see on tape), they aren't going to have proper neijin. I've never seen any exceptions to that rule.

Taiji theory isn't totally BS, but it only makes sense after you've figured out 75% of how to do it. Then the theory may be able to give you the 25% more you need to get it right. The theory itself is so ambiguous and metaphorical that it can be interpreted in almost any way. But once you've figured a few things out, it comes in handy - Taiji theory is useful after the fact, not before.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Daniel M.
The Lily Lau tournament is this weekend in the bay area. Jimmy Wong is going to be demonstrating the Wu Style, flying in all the way from texas. ((I pick Jimmy Wong, because I've never seen him. Maybe he is good. I'll tell you tomorrow, if I waste the money.)) Now, in the bay area, I know of two *extremely* skilled Wu stylists. Why aren't they invited?

Feng Zhiqiang's disciple Zhang is teaching in Golden Gate park. Is he at the tournament? No.

And for that matter thanks to whoever tipped me off that he is teaching there, because he does not know how/does not advertise.
[/quote]
I dropped by the tournament today to see the finals. I think the right person won the internal forms trophy, and he seemed to be a political outsider.
And in general, I thought the folks who won the top prixes were good.

But, the tournament didn't draw much of the local talent. I think that, the level of internal and Wushu competition was much higher at the annual Berkeley tournament. But the team from Tai Yim and Lily Lau's schools were really, really good at traditional Shaolin.

Anyway, too much is made of the theory when it comes to Taiji. If you think about it, guys like Yang LuChan and Yang BanHou were illiterate fighters - and they were probably the best in their generations. How many of the taiji classics quoting intellectuals ever made a name for themselves as a professional martial artist?

--
Stephen Chan