Chen Taijiquan Various Form and Application Videos

[Mo Ling]

Variety of different form demo and application teaching clips here from Chen Zhaokui lineage. Please enjoy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_nlcTNnWUk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYcnCzgg-rM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMlJGW-gQsU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrEiMzW7OHQ

[sanjuro_ronin]

Variety of different form demo and application teaching clips here from Chen Zhaokui lineage. Please enjoy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_nlcTNnWUk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYcnCzgg-rM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMlJGW-gQsU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrEiMzW7OHQ

You may not like to hear this but those applications prove only one thing:
That taiji will only work vs itself.
Which is typical of 99% of all the MA being demoed on youtube, so you are not alone.

No one will ever attack you like that and learning to apply Taiji in a way that is not practical doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?

[KC Elbows]

No one will ever attack you like that and learning to apply Taiji in a way that is not practical doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?

In the last app clip, would it be fair to say that if, after practicing it, the two did it in a way where the attacker threw the fist and then withdrew it like a normal striker, with distance not presert, and the technique worked, you'd be fine with it?

This is why I strongly avoid dwelling on training this sort of app training: the distance is set, and the puncher always holds their hand out for a long time. It's a way to get an idea for what you're physically supposed to do, but it must quickly be followed up by facing a real strike(which, for people learning, requires gloves) coming from non-set distance.

It's also why I avoid declarations on what is useful and what isn't that I haven't myself tested a lot. A demo that doesn't show the full app in a live setting cannot be used to judge the technique it is demoing either way.

I didn't mind those demos and the forms at all, but I still have a taste for seeing the move applied further in a more realistic manner. To judge whether the technique is realistic based on this sort of demo is, imo, judging off of something one was not given the info to judge.

I myself am requesting footage of the same inviolving gloves and a distance that isn't set, not because I doubt the technique, but because, if the technique is being taught, those details are vital to teaching it.

Just my opinion. Arguing all day will never provide the info that asking for more info or footage might. If I share my work, I would do so in the hopes of constructive contributions that I might not have thought of, so I assume others are doing the same, not making a declarative statement on what all fighting is.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Reactive fighting is just that, reactive.
I am not a big fan for many reasons but the most obvious is that it makes your body react to the situation based on how it is drilled, in other words:
Training to defend a punch coming at you WHEN you want it, to WHERE you want it and HOW you wanted will do nothing for you when Billy-Bob tries to tee of your head with 5 years of pro boxing experience AND when you didn't even know you were in a fight yet !

[KC Elbows]

Reactive fighting is just that, reactive.
I am not a big fan for many reasons but the most obvious is that it makes your body react to the situation based on how it is drilled, in other words:
Training to defend a punch coming at you WHEN you want it, to WHERE you want it and HOW you wanted will do nothing for you when Billy-Bob tries to tee of your head with 5 years of pro boxing experience AND when you didn't even know you were in a fight yet !

Definitely.

However, let's assume that you picked two techs, one that presumed a lead, one that presumed a cross, and the attacker chose when and which one, and they could move about(though not change their relative stance, meaning if it was orthodox facing ortodox at the start, it stays orthodox facing orthodox, just allow "stalking"), so that the other would have to deal with judging distance.

It's still reactive, but less reactive, because it involves choices the defender does not get to make, and ingrains timing and distance.

Would doing such techs in such a drill, in your opinion, be valuable?

[KC Elbows]

...when Billy-Bob tries to tee of your head with 5 years of pro boxing experience AND when you didn't even know you were in a fight yet !

Speaking of training against things that mostly don't happen!:p:D

Five years pro boxing experience? I mean, I'm all for training against refined technique, but I've met the average *******s who start fights, I've met the average criminal who'll do sketchy stuff, and, living a lot closer to Billy-Bob's than the average Canadian, I've met the average Billy-Bob, and none of them were pro boxers for five days, much less five years!:D

Will I be facing a rock troll after this confrontation?:D

[Mo Ling]

Well, these are skills that one would want to have in taijiquan, and these are situations and methods in which to examine and learn them.

"In the last app clip, would it be fair to say that if, after practicing it, the two did it in a way where the attacker threw the fist and then withdrew it like a normal striker, with distance not present, and the technique worked, you'd be fine with it?"

Yes I would be fine with it of course. The result would be very different but certainly normal. If one were to allow the time for the opponent to retrieve his fist before the second one launches this particular application method will not be viable. If this is done very very fast, there must be no gap and there are other specific pieces that must be added that are not shown here. This is simply the 'laboratory' for positional and methodological learning.

In a real fight one may or may not ever stumble upon the particular opportunities presented in these videos, but if they did, it would be nice to have these abilities. If the action occurs such that what is presented here is not viable, there are other methods that become viable, not shown here. In terms of gloves, we don't do that. This is not sport. Thanks for watching.

[taai gihk yahn]

Well, these are skills that one would want to have in taijiquan, and these are situations and methods in which to examine and learn them.

"In the last app clip, would it be fair to say that if, after practicing it, the two did it in a way where the attacker threw the fist and then withdrew it like a normal striker, with distance not presert, and the technique worked, you'd be fine with it?"

Yes I would be fine with it of course. The result would be very different but certainly normal.
In a real fight one may or may not ever stumble upon the particular opportunities presented in these videos, but if they did, it would be nice to have these abilities. If the action occurs such that what is presented here is not viable, there are other methods that become viable, not shown here. In terms of gloves, we don't do that. This is not sport. Thanks for watching.

I think you are missing the point somewhat; what KC and Sanjuro are suggesting is that, if you don't train these techniques in the manner in which someone will more realistically attack you, then one will not know if in fact they are viable in the context of a resisting opponent attacking in an unpredictable situation; in other words, when you change the contextual parameters of a task, the techniques themselves may not fit the task requirements of that new context, and may therefore either ned to be significantly modified or discarded all together; you yourself state that one "may or may not stumble upon the particular opportunities presented in theses videos" - well, if you do "stumble" upon them, they are not going to be in quite the same manner as in the vids, so training them in the context you show isn't going to realy prepare you to use them; and if one doesn't "stumble" upon these opportunities, then why bother to train them at all? this is what is talked about when people are concerned with "high pecentage" techniques - the ony way to really know what is high percentage is to pressure test and see if they work often enough in that situation to be viable;

as far as your rather abrupt dismissal of using gloves: I think you fail to realize that using gloves to train doesn't imply a sporting context: what it allows you to do is go full speed and power and to make mistakes without getting so injured that you need to stop training; for example, if you are trying to defend off of a face punch combo at full speed and power, you are, sooner or later (more likely sooner), get hit; if your partner is wearing gloves, both your face and his knuckles are going to survive much longer in order to be able to analyze what went wrong and practice fixing it; so it's just a training tool, much in the way that push-hands or forms training is as well - get it? then, having done that and being more confident, one could train with out the use of gloves to add to the realism even more;

don't misunderstand - no one is bashing you here - on the continuum of taiji practice, what you are practicing is at least reasonable, as opposed to the sort of thing where we see students being thrown back 100' feet by their teacher flexing his pinkie finger; to that sort of silliness, the only reasonable response is derision; in your case, it seems you are making a sincere and realistic attempt to work things that could be useful; what is being suggested is that by altering the context of practice, you might derive greater benefit and discern more clearly the effectiveness of what you are doing in a non-compliant and unpredictable situation;

otherwise, thank you for sharing your efforts, best to you;

[KC Elbows]

In a real fight one may or may not ever stumble upon the particular opportunities presented in these videos, but if they did, it would be nice to have these abilities.

I think one thing Sanjuro Ronin is saying is that he would like to see the technique done at speed, where the attacker is retracting his arm after the attack, as is the norm in both chinese martial arts and western ones.


In terms of gloves, we don't do that. This is not sport.

For a drill that requires defense against a punch, gloves on the attacker allows the defender to train defending against the actual thing he is trying to defend against, whereas the lack of them tends to lead to several problems, namely not targeting, not withdrawing the arm(which turns into compliance), and not using reasonable force, so that the defender, in the end, is no longer training against what he or she initially intended to train against.

Gloves are merely tools. That some associate them with sport does not mean that they are only useful for sport. I am not saying you cannot put up clips where those techniques are being worked against an actual attack, but those clips are not that: in each case, the attacker holds his arm out for demonstration purposes, but this should be followed up with actual usage, as that is where the taiji lies, not in the static explanation, but the joining of energies. A dead arm being held out cannot be used to demo taiji well, it can play a role in the beginning of an explanation, but the next part must be dealing with a real blow.

Back on the topic of gloves. I understand that some techniques don't work with gloves on, but one cannot train those techniques well against weak or noncommital attacks, and, without the aid of gloves, those learning the techniques would suffer unnnecessary blows from the attacker as they worked on the technique when the attacker had intent(and, more often, the attacker would fail to use intent and throw meaningless blows or hold their limb out compliantly), while, with gloves on the attacker, they would more consistently be working the technique against what it is intended for than in training without.

Again, if you have a means to showcase the technique without gloves that is better, it would be enjoyable and informative to see, but in these clips, each technique the attacker is holding his limb out, so we can't really judge from these clips their effectiveness at speed.

I understand not wishing to use gloves all the time, but for simple punches as another person is trying to work their technique, I argue they are superior than going without. If it is a throw, the attacker can wear gloves while the defender is gloveless. This does not suddenly make what is happening a sport, just as training on plum flowers does not suddenly make a practitioner an acrobat: it is merely using tools to acheive goals.

[taai gihk yahn]

LOL, KC - we are of one mind, you and I <shudders>

[KC Elbows]

LMAO, Taai Gihk Yahn! We're like a dual channel cognitive thesaurus, vous et moi<shimmies>.

[Mo Ling]

Ah, I have not missed any of your points.
I understand what you WANT to see, however these videos are of something different than you want. They are what they are, and it is fairly apparent that there is plenty of standing still and talking and examining position and method. These videos are about particular methods that can be used at particular positions, and that has value on it's own. The particular methods shown, are not at all common to be shown, nor especially easy to learn, regardless of the fact that they LOOK easy and light on the videos. So, there is value here for those who are interested.

For those who are not interested in this, naturally, you'll wait for the particular videos that you are interested in involving gloves, striking and realistic speed etc.

[KC Elbows]

Ah, I have not missed any of your points.
I understand what you WANT to see, however these videos are of something different than you want. They are what they are, and it is fairly apparent that there is plenty of standing still and talking and examining position and method. These videos are about particular methods that can be used at particular positions, and that has value on it's own. The particular methods shown, are not at all common to be shown,

I've seen those methods from two different teachers in China, and countless other footage from China of similar. More importantly, they were always shown by breaking down the movements, and then by doing the technique.


nor especially easy to learn, regardless of the fact that they LOOK easy and light on the videos.

No one is saying they are easy, just that they are designed to function with the energy from a real strike, and there is no way to fully demonstrate and explain them without that energy as part of the lesson; it was a recommendation, not to say you didn't have something of worth at all.


So, there is value here for those who are interested.

I wouldn't have responded if I have no interest. When one posts, one should be open to response, not only praise. It's how we all improve.


For those who are not interested in this, naturally, you'll wait for the particular videos that you are interested in involving gloves, striking and realistic speed etc.

The point is that the techniques you showed exist only at speed, not in analysis, and so analysis of the energy of the actual move(which is fed in part by the opponent) is the only way to complete one's explanation, after the part you have done already. Should those of us in the internal world not hold ourselves to higher standards when showcasing the methods? Should we avoid disagreement instead of discussing and improving all of the ways we come to express our individual styles?

[KC Elbows]

"In the last app clip, would it be fair to say that if, after practicing it, the two did it in a way where the attacker threw the fist and then withdrew it like a normal striker, with distance not present, and the technique worked, you'd be fine with it?"

Yes I would be fine with it of course. The result would be very different but certainly normal. If one were to allow the time for the opponent to retrieve his fist before the second one launches this particular application method will not be viable. If this is done very very fast, there must be no gap and there are other specific pieces that must be added that are not shown here. This is simply the 'laboratory' for positional and methodological learning.


Sorry, I was responding to Sanjoro Ronin's statement. Obviously if there is no time to apply the technique it will not be used, my view is simply if the technique should be applied before the attack withdraws, it is helpful to those studying it to see this at speed, whereas if there are many aspects that must be applied succinctly, and explanation requires one dwell on this space, but demonstration does not occur of it at speed after the explanation phase, students tend to not realize how quick the details should all line up, so they do it all as independent points, not links in a chain that lead to the techniques' results.

[Mo Ling]

These are just clips from class, showing a way to look at moving through various positions and situations and think about what methods to develop for them.

"No one is saying they are easy, just that they are designed to function with the energy from a real strike"

Well then, we are in agreement that they actually function and are real methods then, and that is good enough for me.

I have found that this approach of slowly moving through and examining positional and situational changes in leverage and available method produces very good results in students. I am sure someone else can make a video better than I that is more satisfactory to you as well. In terms of teaching, this method, however, works exceptionally well in my experience. In terms of the methods being shown by other teachers and countless videos, I'd be happy if that was the case. Who and what videos might you be referring to?

"The point is that the techniques you showed exist only at speed, not in analysis"

Speed and analysis are simply not opposites. If you understand the speedy action you can analyse what is happening as various points in it. When done at speed it may look or occur differently, as speed itself brings a broad set of variables, but the analysis can still be absolutely accurate for at least a narrow set of variable situational results, IF you have the understanding. The here is that Taijiquan and movement itself provides infinite variables in action and change. In order to learn one must examine and gain focused experience with at least some sets of controlled variable actions. Within those controlled settings one can develop Jin and method. As ability broadens, so does the ability to improvise in speedy changing environments.

To claim that only a speedy changing environment is valid for the student, that any controlled careful study is useless, in my view, is useless for the student to develop anything of value. I have seen this repeated time and time again internationally as well as in the US as the ego game is usually the primary game in martial arts schools. These are my views, you may disagree, but I am not concerned with proving that my view is more important than yours. I am content to train and teach what yields practical results.

I am glad you found value in the videos.
Beyond that I am not likely able to satisfy everyone.

[Mo Ling]

Sorry, I was responding to Sanjoro Ronin's statement. Obviously if there is no time to apply the technique it will not be used, my view is simply if the technique should be applied before the attack withdraws, it is helpful to those studying it to see this at speed, whereas if there are many aspects that must be applied succinctly, and explanation requires one dwell on this space, but demonstration does not occur of it at speed after the explanation phase, students tend to not realize how quick the details should all line up, so they do it all as independent points, not links in a chain that lead to the techniques' results.

Well put. I agree 100%.
These videos do not show that final demonstration. In my experience that final demonstration is neither necessary, nor helpful until students have reached the point of actually putting together the pre-requisite chains of methods and details. It is just distracting and often creates the feeling that they should go for the fast action (trying to be good at it) before they even have the details and methods within acquired.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Definitely.

However, let's assume that you picked two techs, one that presumed a lead, one that presumed a cross, and the attacker chose when and which one, and they could move about(though not change their relative stance, meaning if it was orthodox facing ortodox at the start, it stays orthodox facing orthodox, just allow "stalking"), so that the other would have to deal with judging distance.

It's still reactive, but less reactive, because it involves choices the defender does not get to make, and ingrains timing and distance.

Would doing such techs in such a drill, in your opinion, be valuable?

Semi-freestyle sparring like that is a great building block and is one of the best way to work on creating and developing correct reactions to certain attacks not seen in day-to-day sparring.

[KC Elbows]

Semi-freestyle sparring like that is a great building block and is one of the best way to work on creating and developing correct reactions to certain attacks not seen in day-to-day sparring.

Thanks, just getting your opinion.

[sanjuro_ronin]

There is an intangiable that makes all fighting chaotic, regardless of the skill level and that intangiable is "timing" and nowhere is it more a factor than in a system that is reactive.

Building reflexes and counters and reactions and skills to attacks that will never happen that way is counter-productive.

Thing is, we all have that view when it applies to other systems and we can see what THEY are doing wrong, but we tend to be blinded to what OUR system does wrong, even if it is the same thing.

[KC Elbows]

Well put. I agree 100%.
These videos do not show that final demonstration. In my experience that final demonstration is neither necessary, nor helpful until students have reached the point of actually putting together the pre-requisite chains of methods and details. It is just distracting and often creates the feeling that they should go for the fast action (trying to be good at it) before they even have the details and methods within acquired.

This may be also a difference in approaches to training. I view training taiji is not unlike training language. The longer one puts off diving into conversation, despite the limits of one's vocabulary, the worse the communication skills, the smaller the vocabulary, the more limited the grammar. One muscles through the initial conversations, and, provided they have a good teacher and that teacher makes certain to keep stressing the important points and expands the student's knowledge of the language, they will improve much faster than if avoiding conversation.

Likewise with taiji, imo. Yes, they will be tempted in their first experiences to muscle through, but they will be tempted later to do the same if they don't get it out of the way early: if they can learn to avoid unnecessary tension early, though they don't know a response to a situation yet, they will be able to gain that response faster once shown it than if they were still dealing with tension. Crossing hands is a simpler form of conversation than language, so the more like what the actual situation is the training approaches, the earlier, the better.

Yes, at the beginning stages, in either language or taiji, the student will feel overwhelmed by this method.

But, delaying it, imo, does not get rid of that feeling, it puts it off.

Granted, for a commercial school, this method could not be applied to someone who joined for light workout or something to take the edge off of their day(as opposed to love of the arts).:)

[Mo Ling]

There is an intangiable that makes all fighting chaotic, regardless of the skill level and that intangiable is "timing" and nowhere is it more a factor than in a system that is reactive.

Building reflexes and counters and reactions and skills to attacks that will never happen that way is counter-productive.

Thing is, we all have that view when it applies to other systems and we can see what THEY are doing wrong, but we tend to be blinded to what OUR system does wrong, even if it is the same thing.

I my experience (perhaps contrary to the mainstream) Taijiquan is actually not a 'reactive' system. It is in fact simply dynamic; both active and reactive. However, it is certainly useful to understand reaction, develop methods for it and use the chess board as a tool for learning.
I suggest keeping in mind that not everything is shown in videos (at least not mine) and some of what can be thought to 'never happen in reality' may be forced or enticed to happen. Taijiquan is only partially like surfing; in surfing you cannot control the wave but you can try to control your position and navigation of the wave. In Taijiquan there are ways of controlling the wave (the opponent) as well as your navigation and position relative to it- just something to think about.

[sanjuro_ronin]

People surf and learn to surf by surfing, not by having people throw water at them.

[Mo Ling]

This may be also a difference in approaches to training. I view training taiji is not unlike training language. The longer one puts off diving into conversation, despite the limits of one's vocabulary, the worse the communication skills, the smaller the vocabulary, the more limited the grammar. One muscles through the initial conversations, and, provided they have a good teacher and that teacher makes certain to keep stressing the important points and expands the student's knowledge of the language, they will improve much faster than if avoiding conversation.


A difference of approach, hard to say really.
I am not interested in delaying the more active conversational practice. It is trained concurrently with more focused application development practice. Neither one of these must be neglected. Conversation may build dexterity, but it is does not really help with reading or grammar on it's own. The structure of a language must be developed in a focused environment. I am also speaking from experience having become proficient in Mandarin and having met many people overseas who attempted to learn it by simply showing up in China (useless).

So, these videos show a particular area of training, not ALL the areas.
The area that is shown is absolutely as important as the one you are asking for.

[Mo Ling]

People surf and learn to surf by surfing, not by having people throw water at them.

Red herring there...
Surfing was not offered as an analogy to TRAINING, but to what one must attempt to control. Waves cannot be 'thrown' at anyone, but people can be. You think a wave tank would not be useful to a surfer? How about wind tunnels for airpane designers, no one learns to fly by having air thrown at them?

No one learns Taijiquan methodology at any depth without actually being taught it and then practicing it with focus. With an equal measure of hyperbole as your last post, attempting to learn Taijiquan by simply having an opponent work you is utterly, completely futile.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Red herring there...
Surfing was not offered as an analogy to TRAINING, but to what one must attempt to control. Waves cannot be 'thrown' at anyone, but people can be. You think a wave tank would not be useful to a surfer? How about wind tunnels for airpane designers, no one learns to fly by having air thrown at them?

No one learns Taijiquan methodology at any depth without actually being taught it and then practicing it with focus. With an equal measure of hyperbole as your last post, attempting to learn Taijiquan by simply having an opponent work you is utterly, completely futile.

Dude, don't feel that I am being overly critical of you or your taiji, I am this way with ANYONE that post demo's like that.
Why?
Because there is NO REASON why the demo can't be done with the types of actions that actually happen in a "real fight".
You know how I knew my Chen Taiji sifu was "practical"?
First time I saw him demo an application the guy attacking attacked like a little school girl and got slapped across the face for it.
"Attack like you mean it or there is no energy to be used"
I agree.

[taai gihk yahn]

Ah, I have not missed any of your points.
I understand what you WANT to see, however these videos are of something different than you want.
actually, no one WANTS to see anything one way or another; we are just making the comment that if one is trying to demonstrate combat efficacy of a given approach, then the context that you show is really not providing that in toto;


They are what they are, and it is fairly apparent that there is plenty of standing still and talking and examining position and method. These videos are about particular methods that can be used at particular positions, and that has value on it's own.
no one is disagreeing about the fact that what you show has intrinsic value - it does; however, that value needs must be understood as relatively limited beyond an initial phase of training


The particular methods shown, are not at all common to be shown, nor especially easy to learn, regardless of the fact that they LOOK easy and light on the videos. So, there is value here for those who are interested.
oh, come now - don't go all "special K" on us here - what you are showing isn't all that rarified, it's pretty standard in the realm of TCMA and taiji in particular, and not that hard to learn; indeed, if u want to qualify it as being some sort of unfathomable practice, then what's even the point of putting them out to pubic perusal if you feel that people aren't going to be able to understand what they are seeing in the first place?


For those who are not interested in this, naturally, you'll wait for the particular videos that you are interested in involving gloves, striking and realistic speed etc.
well, that would be interesting to see, but based on your previous comment about not using gloves, it does not appear that this sort of thing will be forthcoming...

again, no one is bashing you or saying that what you demonstrate is in and of itself lacking in anyway - it appears to be reasonable technique; it's just a question of where the general dialogue about these sorts of things is at present, and that necessarily requires demonstration in context reasonably close to what one might face "for real"; if that's not there, then one has little basis with which to make an accurate assessment of a given system's combat efficacy, especially given that there exist other approaches that provide it; in essence, it comes down to this: if one cannot demonstrate context dependent usage to at least some degree, then someone viewing has to say to themselves, "why ought I to bother with this approach if it is not demonstrating it's usability under adverse, realistic conditions?" ; since you have made a point of putting your stuff out there for public appraisal, that suggests that you are looking for some sort of response from those viewing it; and as such, the response is feedback regarding what the public (at least some members) are looking for in terms of giving credibility to a given practice;

best to you

[taai gihk yahn]

Well put. I agree 100%.
These videos do not show that final demonstration. In my experience that final demonstration is neither necessary, nor helpful until students have reached the point of actually putting together the pre-requisite chains of methods and details. It is just distracting and often creates the feeling that they should go for the fast action (trying to be good at it) before they even have the details and methods within acquired.
yes and no - I agree that for some students, you have to take them step by step; others actually do better being thrown into the mix sooner, by nature of their constitutional type / learning style; but in general, you are correct, in fact Motor Learning Therory discusses this point in great detail vis a vis what is termd the "contextual interference effect", which looks at how levels of randomness can be inserted into motor skill acquisition in order to optimize acquisition, retention and ultimately transfer of motor skill;


I my experience (perhaps contrary to the mainstream) Taijiquan is actually not a 'reactive' system. It is in fact simply dynamic; both active and reactive. However, it is certainly useful to understand reaction, develop methods for it and use the chess board as a tool for learning.
I suggest keeping in mind that not everything is shown in videos (at least not mine) and some of what can be thought to 'never happen in reality' may be forced or enticed to happen. Taijiquan is only partially like surfing; in surfing you cannot control the wave but you can try to control your position and navigation of the wave. In Taijiquan there are ways of controlling the wave (the opponent) as well as your navigation and position relative to it- just something to think about.
in general, I agree with this - however, if one examines something wrestling, we can see a similar skill set that is also "dynamic" as opposed to reactive; and in general, I agree that taiji is not reactive, because at a given level, if one truly "lives" taiji, then one demonstrates a field of awareness that keeps one several steps ahead on the chess board in life in general...

[taai gihk yahn]

Dude, don't feel that I am being overly critical of you or your taiji, I am this way with ANYONE that post demo's like that.
actually, on the continuum of commentary vis a vis this sort of thing, I'd say that we are being far less critical and more constructive than is usual; maybe we didn't get enuf fiber this morning?

[Mo Ling]

actually, no one WANTS to see anything one way or another; we are just making the comment that if one is trying to demonstrate combat efficacy of a given approach, then the context that you show is really not providing that in toto;


no one is disagreeing about the fact that what you show has intrinsic value - it does; however, that value needs must be understood as relatively limited beyond an initial phase of training


oh, come now - don't go all "special K" on us here - what you are showing isn't all that rarified, it's pretty standard in the realm of TCMA and taiji in particular, and not that hard to learn; indeed, if u want to qualify it as being some sort of unfathomable practice, then what's even the point of putting them out to pubic perusal if you feel that people aren't going to be able to understand what they are seeing in the first place?


well, that would be interesting to see, but based on your previous comment about not using gloves, it does not appear that this sort of thing will be forthcoming...

again, no one is bashing you or saying that what you demonstrate is in and of itself lacking in anyway - it appears to be reasonable technique; it's just a question of where the general dialogue about these sorts of things is at present, and that necessarily requires demonstration in context reasonably close to what one might face "for real"; if that's not there, then one has little basis with which to make an accurate assessment of a given system's combat efficacy, especially given that there exist other approaches that provide it; in essence, it comes down to this: if one cannot demonstrate context dependent usage to at least some degree, then someone viewing has to say to themselves, "why ought I to bother with this approach if it is not demonstrating it's usability under adverse, realistic conditions?" ; since you have made a point of putting your stuff out there for public appraisal, that suggests that you are looking for some sort of response from those viewing it; and as such, the response is feedback regarding what the public (at least some members) are looking for in terms of giving credibility to a given practice;

best to you

Hey take it easy fire chief.. I don't think you can see me getting all upset behind the keyboard can you? I am not particularly worried if you are being critical or not, that is your right. Regardless of how anyone feels, I am also not obligated to agree with or automatically accept whatever critique or response is offered am I.

In terms of 'special K' etc ideology. If you think these methods are standard available fare on the internet in Chen Taijiquan, as I said I'd love to see the actual items you refer to. I said this before and it was not responded to. I do not recall having seen almost ANY punch and parry work in Chen Taijiquan at all on the internet, but you may know different.

[KC Elbows]

I think where the discussion lies is in the distance between the explanation and the realistic usage.

I think many tend to explain for years, producing teachers who explain, but cannot do.(Not saying this relates to the thread, just a broad statement here.)

I think many tend to overstate the length to a lesser degree.

Very few apply too early as much as fail to make certain that the techniques are being done properly every time.

I tend to point out every error every time.

No matter what, the student, when doing the actual usage(not the application, which is a stylized rendition of what the actual usage in fighting is), will do it wrong at first, for some time. BUT, in most cases, the version that does not misplace tension has the best chance of succeeding, so they will consistently fail at applying until they let go UNLESS the attack is not realistic, in which case they might spend time using a move incorrectly but seeming to succeed, because the format for testing is tailored to allow their error, whereas live usage would, in one fell swoop, show their error.

In short, if done at speed, success goes to the technique with the least unecessary tension done with the best timing, and so there can be no cheating, forcing the move, without it leading quickly to failure under repeated testing, which drives understanding the importance of relaxation far faster than our words and lessons on it ever could, provided the practice is kept safe(thus gloves, if only I had stock, so that I received a profit every time I said this).

Now, knowledge of the correct way must come from somewhere, so one doesn't learn just by crossing hands, but one becomes able to apply the concepts only by crossing hands.

I see them as inseparable, the lesson and the ingraining of it, and, to ingrain it, I see as inseparable the training the details and trying to pull it off live; thus, I might go over the details on one occasion without the live training, but thereafter focus is on applying those details live. Last week, two students worked one technique for two hours, attacker stalking wearing gloves, defender trying to blend and setup a particular throw: every weak spot in their technique wore them out, leading to new questions or understandings of things they were already told. I was quite proud, as I wasn't intending them to spend the whole class working one technique, they just wanted to hone it just a little more every time I worked with them. They made good progress, and while I still will have to watch to get on them about little issues in their technique, those issues are far fewer than explanation would have cleared up, imo.

However, there is always the question with some things how long to wait before the two parts, the detailed formalized practice and the live practice, are brought together. One only really starts to more completely understand to formal explanation after it is executed live, but some explanation is necessary.

[taai gihk yahn]

Hey take it easy fire chief.. I don't think you can see me getting all upset behind the keyboard can you?
no, I don't - why would I? I am just engaging in analytic discourse with you - why would you get upset by that?
although your use of a borderline-pejorative moniker to address me and admonition to "take it easy" would suggest the possibility of some projection of defensiveness on your part, especially considering I have addressed you in nothing but a respectful manner throughout...


I am not particularly worried if you are being critical or not, that is your right. Regardless of how anyone feels, I am also not obligated to agree with or automatically accept whatever critique or response is offered am I.
of course not; no one is suggesting that you are; we are just communicating in a limited medium here, so it's hard to discern whether our respective points are being made clearly, and so we try to be as clear as possible;


In terms of 'special K' etc ideology. If you think these methods are standard available fare on the internet in Chen Taijiquan, as I said I'd love to see the actual items you refer to. I said this before and it was not responded to. I do not recall having seen almost ANY punch and parry work in Chen Taijiquan at all on the internet, but you may know different.
fair enuf, i was talking about my own personal experience in TCMA, taiji included (not Chen, tho); as far as online, I don't know - I've seen so much crap out there, as have you no doubt, it's hard to know what is what; if you haven't come across anything similar, I can believe that;

regards;

[bawang]

your air fajing is very good! u destroy all those bad co2 molecules and stop global warming. u save world.

[ShaolinDan]

honestly...I don't understand the cause of this discussion...
The description says "form and applications" and the video shows applications from the forms...if you know how to fight, you don't need more than what's provided to figure out how/if to make it real. The videos are sufficient and exactly what they're labeled.

Why judge a school on their free demo videos...do you give your best out for free?

As far as gloves...you don't need gloves to punch realistically.

Mo Ling, you've shown patience and intelligence...more than I would and more than most of the people who get these responses do. Nice.

[KC Elbows]

honestly...I don't understand the cause of this discussion...
The description says "form and applications" and the video shows applications from the forms...

The sparring label was confusing some, so it's not bad to clear things like that up.


if you know how to fight, you don't need more than what's provided to figure out how/if to make it real.

People find it nice to see the people showcasing a skill using it realistically. Additionally, one attracts better students by attracting discerning students. There's many apps online that are not workable; since I like the internals, and enjoyed watching his stuff, I suggested he might make it clear he is above that group by including actual usage. There's really nothing wrong with doing so.


The videos are sufficient and exactly what they're labeled.

He changed the label based on the feedback from here, so it was good. Of course, sometimes miscommunications occur and arguing almost happens, but overall, there was no harm in the discussion.


Why judge a school on their free demo videos...do you give your best out for free?

Would I want the students who are attracted by less than that?


As far as gloves...you don't need gloves to punch realistically.

You need gloves to HIT realistically.

If there is no risk of being hit, then the punch isn't realistic.

If there is a chance of getting hit, but the hit is ineffective, then the punch still isn't right.

So, if the punch is effective enough to hit, and effective enough to damage(as a gongfu man punching should be able to), without gloves, this is going to be a short training session ending badly.

Students who punch each other without gloves as they are learning hold back, even the ones who don't think they are, often. If the idea is to train the technique, then gloves allow a greater guarantee that the strike coming out is effective.

[/quote]Mo Ling, you've shown patience and intelligence...more than I would and more than most of the people who get these responses do. Nice.[/QUOTE]

These responses? If I post footage here, I don't think I should be above critique, but I would value critiques attempting to be helpful far above someone agreeing but not adding anything to my own view on what drills we discussed. I have not posited that I am better than him, I suggested some ideas he could use or not, and took part in some discussion. As did a former semi-pro fighter with experience in the internals, and another internals sifu. There were some agreements and some disagreements, but mainly when it seemed, due to the limitations of text, that one or the other might have been thinking they were somehow above the rest.

[Mo Ling]

no, I don't - why would I? I am just engaging in analytic discourse with you - why would you get upset by that?
although your use of a borderline-pejorative moniker to address me and admonition to "take it easy" would suggest the possibility of some projection of defensiveness on your part, especially considering I have addressed you in nothing but a respectful manner throughout...

My point was that I was NOT upset, therefore you did not need to let me know not to get upset about critique. I have not been the least defensive, just standing behind my view and letting you all have your say. Regarding "fire chief", it's just a light joke phrase, means you were getting all serious as if to run off and put out a fire where there was not one. No reason to take offense.


your air fajing is very good! u destroy all those bad co2 molecules and stop global warming. u save world.

I am not trying to save the world, just occasionally one lost internet martial artist at a time. :)
Fajin, either one has the skill or not. Form is relaxed flexibility and recycling of power. Actual impact is a different thing altogether.

Dan,
Thanks for your understanding.

[Mo Ling]

The sparring label was confusing some, so it's not bad to clear things like that up...He changed the label based on the feedback from here, so it was good.

What might you be referring to?
Apparently you have made some mistake. Nothing in this thread, nor those videos on youtube has ever been labeled or even included the word "sparring". Nothing was edited nor changed. Please check your facts, the confusion is entirely yours.

[KC Elbows]

What might you be referring to?
Apparently you have made some mistake. Nothing in this thread, nor those videos on youtube has ever been labeled or even included the word "sparring". Nothing was edited nor changed. Please check your facts, the confusion is entirely yours.

Sorry, my mistake, two different conversations from two different threads.

As far as the attitude and needing Dan's "understanding", what use is understanding of the fact that people every bit as experienced as you are trying to give constructive feedback of something you shared, even if it occasionally has misunderstandings?

There's not a guy posting on here consistently with less than twenty years experience, yourself included.

I stand by the fact that your style deserves students who would not choose your style without seeing the full expression of the moves and the steps to get there, not people in awe of fundamental internal approaches.

[ShaolinDan]

Dear KC

I happen to have been studying writing for far longer than I have been studying kung fu.

In writing there is something called tone.
I suggest you reread posts for tone...sometimes it can be a bit subtle, but if you pay attention it is unmistakable.

Personally, as a reader who has no invested interest, I felt that Mo Ling (and many others who post here) was being attacked...and for no good reason.

Maybe I'm nuts, but that's my two cents for today.

(As far as the 'sparring' comment, I think you're confusing this with another thread.)

By the way, I like a lot of what you write on here, so please don't take me wrong...I just don't understand what's happening on this thread.

-ShaolinDan

Now, I'm going to class, so don't expect me to respond for a while.

[Mo Ling]

Sorry, my mistake, two different conversations from two different threads.

As far as the attitude and needing Dan's "understanding", what use is understanding of the fact that people every bit as experienced as you are trying to give constructive feedback of something you shared, even if it occasionally has misunderstandings?

There's not a guy posting on here consistently with less than twenty years experience, yourself included.

I stand by the fact that your style deserves students who would not choose your style without seeing the full expression of the moves and the steps to get there, not people in awe of fundamental internal approaches.

You seem to be looking to create a conflict where there is none.
You've just decided that I 'needed' someone's understanding simply because they offered it? I simply thanked him for it, where does the need come to exist?

He apparently understands something about the nature of, or reasons for the presentation in these videos (not talking about skill, just presentation or context) that you may not, at least judging by your viewpoint. What I do know is that you are inventing this supposed need on my part. If I needed that I would not have posted anything here. I am equally equipped to stand behind my viewpoints and simply acknowledged another's understanding of the situation. You do not need to take the extra step of inventing feelings and needs.

Stand by all the opinions (fact is not automatically attributed to your views either) that you like. There is not a single video of Chen Taijiquan in existence that I know of wherein someone is demonstrating the 'full expression of the moves and the steps to get there", yet the style continues to attract students. I have to say that while your viewpoint or desire may be worthy of consideration, it is not aligned with, nor has much influence on the reality of the situation for those who are actually interested in this system. In reality, most teachers will not show the full anything or the steps to get there without a long term educational and financial commitment on the part of a student. I am no different. I am not convinced that I owe the anonymous public anything at all.

Regarding "...people in awe of fundamental internal approaches..." again I am not sure what you are referring to. The approaches I am showing are not exactly fundamental, they are a bit more complicated than that. Secondly, they are missing big chunks or necessary fundamental material, by decision. And thirdly, again you invent a state of affairs in which myself or someone suggest that anyone should be in awe of anything.

If you are not in awe, then you are not. If you are then you are. I made no suggestion either way, however it is still very clear that almost none of these types of methods, fundamental or complex are visible on anyone's Chen Taijiquan videos at all. That is not something be in awe of, it is just reality as far as I know. Again if you or anyone knows otherwise, you'd have pointed us in that direction a page or two ago.

That is a reality until someone proves otherwise. These videos, like them or not, show more related to actual martial application (non-tuishou) than the great majority of Chen Taijiquan videos I have ever seen. Request or demands to show or explain more don't really move me, but as always thanks for contributing to a discussion.

[KC Elbows]

Dear KC

I happen to have been studying writing for far longer than I have been studying kung fu.

In writing there is something called tone.
I suggest you reread posts for tone...sometimes it can be a bit subtle, but if you pay attention it is unmistakable.

Personally, as a reader who has no invested interest, I felt that Mo Ling (and many others who post here) was being attacked...and for no good reason.


Sanjuro Ronin's initial post was strong, I know that, but I think a lot of experienced and good internals folk feel that we should keep an open dialog, and that even our own stuff should be open to criticism, not to destroy that stuff, but to improve what comes next from each of us.


Past that, I can detect tone in each of the people posting on this thread, myself occasionally included. None stick with the tone in the long run so far, so how important can it be?




(As far as the 'sparring' comment, I think you're confusing this with another thread.)


Yes, I realized that. Funny thing, the internet.



By the way, I like a lot of what you write on here, so please don't take me wrong...I just don't understand what's happening on this thread.



This is fairly tame. It's true that, put something up, and others have their right to critique it. I think here it is also paired with the feeling that, if the qualified do not put their best game forward, those styles will not carry forward, and that would be a shame. I will eventually be putting vids up here, and I would expect no less than what Sanjuro Ronin or Mo Ling or TGY provided here.

All of us have made some remarks that verged on risking a tone, but this must be less important than the systems and their cultivation. There is merit to many of these comments, so their discussion is more important than each of our positions as sifus or experts or what have you, imo. We should be respected sifus because our ideas and skills, not our reputations, are respectable. When I post some clips, I sincerely hope Mo Ling provides open and frank feedback.

[taai gihk yahn]

My point was that I was NOT upset, therefore you did not need to let me know not to get upset about critique. I have not been the least defensive, just standing behind my view and letting you all have your say. Regarding "fire chief", it's just a light joke phrase, means you were getting all serious as if to run off and put out a fire where there was not one. No reason to take offense.
ok; gotcha; none taken

addendum: as for your other points about not wanting / needing, etc. - hey, that's all cool - no one is projecting anything onto you; whether you take anything anyone says to heart is, of course, your prerogative; obviously u r aware that when u submit something to the public square, it will get chewed up, bandied about, etc., etc.; overall, i think that the reception here is positive, which could actualy explain the "requests" for seeing things in another context - if it was negative, it would just b dismissive;

anyway, that's as may be; regards;

[taai gihk yahn]

Dear KC

I happen to have been studying writing for far longer than I have been studying kung fu.

In writing there is something called tone.
I suggest you reread posts for tone...sometimes it can be a bit subtle, but if you pay attention it is unmistakable.

Personally, as a reader who has no invested interest, I felt that Mo Ling (and many others who post here) was being attacked...and for no good reason.

Maybe I'm nuts, but that's my two cents for today.

(As far as the 'sparring' comment, I think you're confusing this with another thread.)

By the way, I like a lot of what you write on here, so please don't take me wrong...I just don't understand what's happening on this thread.

-ShaolinDan

Now, I'm going to class, so don't expect me to respond for a while.

Dan

Mo Ling is not being attacked - if u think otherwise, go check out the thread on "sparring" that KC was confusing this one with - THAT is attacking;

as far as what's happening on this thread, what I THINK is the case is this: Mo Ling posted a clip that apparently several of us, independently, felt had intrinsic value; as such, the nature of our commentary was to basically suggest (in different ways) that he might consider putting up something showing what he does in a context other than what he was showing - this is not to cut him down, but in fact to give him the benefit of the doubt, in so far as saying that because there appears to be value in what he is doing, showing it in a more "live" (that word again!) context would be a useful component of his over all "argument";

I don't think anyone was condescending, overly critical or aggressive - in fact, I think the comments we made were generally supportive as opposed to dismissive;

and certainly it is his purview whether or not to provide additional footage; if he does, then that would be interesting to see and the dialogue can continue; if he doesn't, well, so be it;

I don't think anyone is making anything more of it than that...

[Mo Ling]

...if the qualified do not put their best game forward, those styles will not carry forward, and that would be a shame.

Before you get too deep into this area of discussion, please realize that I am not out to save the world, the Taijiquan world, the 'internal' world or any other world. I am not involved in that. I privately practice and run a very small traditional yet innovative school that teaches students who are willing to do the bitter work, period.

[KC Elbows]

Before you get too deep into this area of discussion, please realize that I am not out to save the world, the Taijiquan world, the 'internal' world or any other world. I am not involved in that. I privately practice and run a very small traditional yet innovative school that teaches students who are willing to do the bitter work, period.

I am the same. Being innovative, I will continue to suggest you use gloves and non-stationary footwork in a rational manner, because it will achieve what you are trying to do more effectively and teach the core faster.

[Mo Ling]

I am the same. Being innovative, I will continue to suggest you use gloves and non-stationary footwork in a rational manner, because it will achieve what you are trying to do more effectively and teach the core faster.

I believe you will notice that I especially did demonstrate non-stationary footwork in those videos. In fact my footwork is rather the focus of the video is it not? Stepping to create different positional dynamics is on display is it not? Yes the student steps less, but that is for a reason; to demonstrate what one may do to elicit action and disadvantage on the part of the opponent. Additionally, the student would have to already know the steps. I initially suggested he walk in one of the videos and then proceeded to demonstrate ways in which to walk and change the situation.

Again, I appreciate your input, but you are not only preaching to the choir, but suggesting things that are already present. You may simply not like the pace, the lack of aggression or whatever, but that is simply not going to change here. These videos exist as they do for a reason. It is not an accident. Again, as far as what is generally available in videos of traditional gongfu, this is already far beyond the norm.

[KC Elbows]

Before you get too deep into this area of discussion, please realize that I am not out to save the world, the Taijiquan world, the 'internal' world or any other world. I am not involved in that. I privately practice and run a very small traditional yet innovative school that teaches students who are willing to do the bitter work, period.


"In reality, most teachers will not show the full anything or the steps to get there without a long term educational and financial commitment on the part of a student. I am no different."

Given this, then how can you achieve this claim on your website?

" Due to the pronounced shortage of authentic Chinese gongfu in the western world, this site serves to preserve and share a dying and valuable art. Internal gongfu is a lifetime practice left to us by generations stretching back to pre-dynastic periods of Chinese history, and should not be lost due to reasons of profit or ego."

Showing the full deal cannot be stolen, and it's the only way students become true practitioners. Withholding that kills the art. The founders of these systems used every training tool of their era, and they would have used modern tools as well, had they existed back then.

[YouKnowWho]

the puncher always holds their hand out for a long time.
You can train your moves by waiting for your opponent to punch or kick at you. You then react to it. The problem is if he pulls his punch back too soon, you may not be able to train your move. If he pulls his punch back too late, it may not be realistic.

You can also train your moves by attacking first, when your opponent reacts, you then react to his reaction. The training will be more realistic IMO.

[KC Elbows]

I believe you will notice that I especially did demonstrate non-stationary footwork in those videos. In fact my footwork is rather the focus of the video is it not? Stepping to create different positional dynamics is on display is it not? Yes the student steps less, but that is for a reason; to demonstrate what one may do to elicit action and disadvantage on the part of the opponent. Additionally, the student would have to already know the steps. I initially suggested he walk in one of the videos and then proceeded to demonstrate ways in which to walk and change the situation.

Again, I appreciate your input, but you are not only preaching to the choir, but suggesting things that are already present. You may simply not like the pace, the lack of aggression or whatever, but that is simply not going to change here. These videos exist as they do for a reason. It is not an accident. Again, as far as what is generally available in videos of traditional gongfu, this is already far beyond the norm.

No, it isn't.

Additionally, you totally mistook what I meant by footwork. The person you are applying to is at a set distance from the start. You doing footwork on someone whose moves are preset and distance preset requires no distance skills or timing skills, both things that must be worked with the move.

If both players take a right lead, they can "stalk" each other in right lead in order to deny the defender total control of the distance, thus working distance skills. Since the attacker should also control the timing of attack, at this point the defender is now working distance and timing, blending with a real attack(assuming gloves), and thus having a chance of practicing the real technique, which can only exist with the attackers added energy.

This is not present in those videos. And what is present is gongfu lessons, but it is neither rare nor far beyond any norm in gongfu. In fact, it's fairly typical application training, which, on it's own, teaches theory and cannot impart usage.

[Mo Ling]

Given this, then how can you achieve this claim on your website?

" Due to the pronounced shortage of authentic Chinese gongfu in the western world, this site serves to preserve and share a dying and valuable art. Internal gongfu is a lifetime practice left to us by generations stretching back to pre-dynastic periods of Chinese history, and should not be lost due to reasons of profit or ego."

Showing the full deal cannot be stolen, and it's the only way students become true practitioners. Withholding that kills the art. The founders of these systems used every training tool of their era, and they would have used modern tools as well, had they existed back then.

Firstly, I made the site many years ago.
Secondly, again you seek non-existent conflict. I AM preserving this art, by practicing it and teaching it authentically, in person. I do not need to teach it, for free over the internet to anonymous IP addresses as a preservational service to the world of internet gongfu. :D

Thirdly, showing the full deal can not only not be stolen, it cannot even be learned. Who are you assuming I am withholding this "full deal" from? Who are you deciding I am abligated to show this "full deal" to in order to qualify as Taijiquan preservationist of the year?

[Mo Ling]

...And what is present is gongfu lessons, but it is neither rare nor far beyond any norm in gongfu. In fact, it's fairly typical application training, which, on it's own, teaches theory and cannot impart usage.

I really do get this by now. These 'lessons' videos are not what you want, and I, or someone, should feel that what you want is more important than what we want.

Additionally, the methods shown in the 'lessons videos' are not at all rare, even though no one on this thread, including yourself can point anyone towards any other examples of punch and parry method lessons in Chen Taijiquan.

Not trying to be clever here, but very clearly, you are saying, you want something else, and this, which you do not have other examples of, is very plentiful. I get this. I don't give it creedence, but I do get it, so repeating it would be.. redundant at best.

Perhaps you just don't see this, but it reads very clear here to me.

[KC Elbows]

You forgot about me wanting you to use gloves so that there's less compliance, don't forget that part.

Seriously, if you're claiming that these are novel because of punching being present, and there is a less than realistic aspect to the punching, you're going to draw some criticism.

[Mo Ling]

You forgot about me wanting you to use gloves so that there's less compliance, don't forget that part.

Seriously, if you're claiming that these are novel because of punching being present, and there is a less than realistic aspect to the punching, you're going to draw some criticism.

I am stating that these methods are rare to see at all in Chen Taijiquan.
If you know what I am (or you are) talking about on this count (which is now quite in doubt due to your repeated inability to address the question) than we would have contrary evidence from you already, but we do not. Unless you have something beyond an imaginary insistence that these are commonly seen, there is simply no point to argue that point. Don't you agree, or are you simply a fan of wasting words that have no support? I have never been afraid of criticism, but less so of the uninformed type.

Regarding 'how to punch' realistically. No problem, that is another subject and is also not the point of the videos. As I said, cannot satisfy everyone, and less so, those looking for conflict on the net.

[taai gihk yahn]

no one on this thread, including yourself can point anyone towards any other examples of punch and parry method lessons in Chen Taijiquan.

um, well...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEbupVWZ6mk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WPQJoqmGPo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r5aCPeaoiQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ1OOPdkiPs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu0KAbPZ6Ms
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7pTeyrRHLo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIpU6S_RDew&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYjG3j6-seY&feature=related

[taai gihk yahn]

I really do get this by now. These 'lessons' videos are not what you want, and I, or someone, should feel that what you want is more important than what we want.
dude, enough with that already - you are the one setting up an adversarial tone by constantly projecting on what you THINK others "want", and to contextualize it by saying that KC or others feel that what they want is more important than what you want is just being really piszy;

you are starting to act in a most jejune manner, which is pretty untoward given that everyone here has been rather respectful towards you; even when other concede a point to you, you demonstrate a significant lack of graciousness; which is certainly your prerogative, but man, get over yourself - what you are showing isn't all that big of a deal, despite what you may think about it (as I believe my previous post demonstrated)

apparently, your m.o. is to act like a spoiled child when others proffer opinions contrary to yours;

good luck with all that

[taai gihk yahn]

You forgot about me wanting you to use gloves so that there's less compliance, don't forget that part.

Seriously, if you're claiming that these are novel because of punching being present, and there is a less than realistic aspect to the punching, you're going to draw some criticism.

dude, forget it; he's obviously got some interpersonal issues that preclude his participation in reasoned discourse, which he couches in some sort of bizarre persecution complex;

he's posted what he's posted, he's obviously not interested in other people's opinions when they differ from his, and his posts demonstrate a concerted passive-aggressive lean that nullifies any hope of composed exchange;

move on to more fertile fields

[Mo Ling]

regarding the links posted, well glad to see someone is dealing with punch and parry at least sort of.
Still don't not cover the territory I am looking for, but nice to see something.
I hope those satisfy your need to have the world saved better than mine did. That is a load of my shoulders.

Regarding the psychological critique, I'll pass on the session even if it free of charge. I feel I've been very nice to you folks, and will continue to be. However I am in no way obligated to post a video and then automatically submit to all of your requests, suggestions and what have you.. Just take a moment to realize that we all live our own lives. You don't owe me anything and that works in reverse as well. You may not get the response or external validation you want from someone whom you choose to critique on the net, that is just the way it is.

I posted the vids and said "please enjoy". I do not mind the discussion or the critique, but let's be honest in acknowledging at least that some of you folks are requesting of me some other kind of video.. I am making no requests of you. When you ask someone for something different than they have provided, then don't take no for an answer, that is an assertion that your desire for something different or additional should supplant the desire of the one declining to.

Simple enough. I don't have much interest in getting adversarial with you. If you want to keep it up on your own I cannot stop you.

[ShaolinDan]

Mo Ling, thanks for the videos. Actually used a technique from them tonight to escape a chin na.

I just do a touch of chen on the side and have not been taught any apps. It's nice to see some...no matter how they're presented.

I'm done with this 'conversation,' shame it couldn't have been a thread on apps from chen, that would have actually been interesting.

Peace.

[Scott R. Brown]

Hmmm....well as very basic training vids showing very basic principles I think they were okay.

One of the problems I have with training demonstrations and even training in many classes is the way people strike and the footwork. These never reflect real life encounters. Instructors tend to have their students attack using stylized strikes and body moments reflective of the principles of that specific martial art and not reflective what one would encounter in a real fight.

I understand the need for some formalized movement in order to learn basic principles, but I think many students and especially instructors do not recognize the blind adherence to stylized actions reflective of the principles of their style and that these are not reflective of the real world.

An example to further illustrate my point:

Years ago I trained for a short period of time at a local Aiki-jujutsu school. This was after attending Aikido classes for a number of years. The Aiki-jujutsu school was very traditional in their method of teaching classes. There was no student to student interaction allowed and no questions allowed if one did not understand the manner of executing a technique. They wanted students to learn by doing. Observe the technique as demonstrated and basically figure it out as you went.

For a period of time another student attended who had experience in Judo. During one particular class a specific technique was being practiced. None of the upper students nor the number two instructor, (the guy just under the master and who had trained in the art for 20 years) could throw this guy using the chosen technique. This guy was basically being a jerk and playing with them. He didn’t even really know what he was doing to mess with the instructors; he just knew he could stop them from executing the technique. You could see these instructors baffled by why they couldn’t throw the guy. This guy could execute the technique on them, but they could not execute the technique on him.

After watching all this go on for some time, I decided to mess with the guy myself and not allow him to execute the technique on me either. Now he was the one baffled! I was amused by all of this because the only reason no one could perform the technique was because the technique would only work with the feet placed in a specific configuration. That is, the technique worked according to a stylized form of attack. Change something enough, the fixed style, and the technique didn’t work. In this particular case the change was in the footwork.

The mere changing of the footwork neutralized the technique and no one recognized this; not the advanced students, not the instructors, including the master, and not even the guy messing with them. Since there was no discussion allowed in the class I could not tell them this simple explanation for their failures. It was a completely ridiculous episode, but one that illustrated plainly the problems with some or most MA classes.

The stylized forms of attack used for teaching purposes create a generally unrecognized flaw in training. They do not accurately reflect the chaotic nature of real life encounters, the intensity of real life encounters or the swiftness of real life encounters. So questions are created within a real life encounters about why something is not working as it worked in class. In many cases it is because the right foot was THERE instead of HERE, or they struck in this manner, instead of that manner when this foot was where it was supposed to be, or etc.

A partner KNOWS the technique to be performed. He also KNOWS how to react to it in a manner in which he will not be injured. In the real world this will not happen. A real bad guy is unlikely to react in any manner a trained person can anticipate unless he has some real life encounters or has at least observed a number of real life encounters and analyzed the actions of both parties.

How does all this apply to the presented videos?

While a student must learn the basics in a formal and of necessity, stylized, manner, it must be recognized that these formal and stylized actions create patterns of action that do not reflect what is most likely to be experienced within real life encounters. These videos demonstrate stylized actions and responses to those stylized actions. They can be used to learn and demonstrate principles of movement, but should not be confused with actual real life possibilities. Just because someone can effectively perform specific techniques against stylized and well anticipated attacks does not mean the techniques AS LEARNED will be effective in real life encounters.

So, because the vids demonstrate the application of basic principles, they should be viewed according to this context and viewers should avoid projecting any greater value onto them than this.

[tiaji1983]

Very good post Scott! :)


Thats why no 1 movement can only have 1 application, and why every movement has a counter, and every movement should be examined individually. If you examine them correctly, you can find applications and counters in different situations. Small changes like the type of attack used, the different types of resistance and footwork, and the size/speed/strength/ability of the opponent can make a huge difference to how the technique must be applied. Thats why I say these videos are good to give ideas to applications, but they should not be seen as THE applications.

[sanjuro_ronin]

You can train your moves by waiting for your opponent to punch or kick at you. You then react to it. The problem is if he pulls his punch back too soon, you may not be able to train your move. If he pulls his punch back too late, it may not be realistic.

You can also train your moves by attacking first, when your opponent reacts, you then react to his reaction. The training will be more realistic IMO.

Quoted for the truth.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I have always believed that demo's of techniques should show how the technique is done, its principles and such and not really bother to show it applied VS A,B or C.
BUT, if one is going to show an application then it should be done as realistically as possible:
See it taught, see it fought.

[Scott R. Brown]

See it taught, see it fought.

Hey......did anyone notice that rhymes?:eek:

But unfortunately I cannot understand such a simple ditty without a semi-graphic illustration accompanying it!!

Hint.....hint.....hint......hint!!!!


Did I mention HINT?

[Mo Ling]

Starts to look like the debate comes full circle:

Applications should be trained against attacks that will happen.
But Different types of attacks will happen.
And, different applications may be used against them.

So, again eventually one must chose one type of attack and then one type of application to train against it, because one must start with and work on at least something in a focused way in order to learn.

One cannot train everything to learn everything. One must train something to learn everything. These videos are examples of training SOMETHING, not everything.

[Scott R. Brown]

Actually, the best way to train is to learn basic skills and underlying principles. With a comprehensive understanding of both any martial artist can create and adapt on their own according to the circumstance. What is important is not to get caught up in specific techniques. This is the blind adherence of which I spoke above.

It is not specific techniques that are important, but the underlying principles that specific techniques express that are important. If you understand the principles involved you can spontaneously adapt your techniques according to each circumstance as required.

[Mo Ling]

That is a very old debate of course.
I am a big fan of 'underlying principles' but they alone cannot be used to attain the actual practical method. There are a very good number of actual techniques in Chen Taijiquan that not only are very practically functional, but also translate those very 'underlying principles' into something tangible. If you have no way to translate those principles into functional reality, well you will have to just invent the action yourself. That may sound real nice for maybe some varieties of Yang style or perhaps some factions of Yiquan, but if you want to learn actual Chen gongfu for example, then you would want to actually not just invent it all yourself. There is actually a curriculum in existance for this art, it is very old.

Chen Taijiquan is not a system simply of 'principles' that are open to your enterpretation completely. It is a system of functional martial art methods that abide by and put into action certain principles, in certain ways. If everyone could just learn the principles and then invent how to bring them into tangible reality, well there would be no need for long term training. A simple thorough reading of a book or one or two sessions with a teacher and then off to creating your own masterpiece in a few weeks!

There is of course a level at which improvisatory infinite creation of application/action is reached. This is based on a solid knowledge of the basic curriculum. The solid knowledge of the application curriculum provides the physical understanding to begin to use this flavor and method of gongfu to create application. This is essentially the 'underlying principles' of Chen Taijiquan: a physical understanding one gets, not from words.

Chen Taijiquan is a very detailed path, that has been pretty well charted with actual technical applications that work in particular ways, not just vague adherence to worded principles.

[Dragonzbane76]

I think the biggest thing you could have shown in the vid. was full speed application, I know you were just showing the general premise and break down of the tech. but these days a red flag given is the 2 step outreaching punches on a compliant individuals.

In all honesty you could have done both... show the break down and then show in full speed. Not much more to show both in conjunction.

as for the gloves... I think everyone should use, and apply them into training. The thought of them just being used in "sport" context is a false thought. they are a tool that should be implemented and used.

[KC Elbows]

At the same time, a lot of openings for applications in some varieties of Chen are provided by the principals. Transitioning in a bowed manner, in at least one branch, is the underlying principal that allows for a number of throws and takedowns, as the low end of the bow puts the dan tian under the opponents if need be. Opening and closing actions allow footworks to be quicker by making them effortless, etc.

That said, I also feel that ingraining the specific usage is of benefit, and can be a good way to ingrain the principals. However, this works best the closer one is to the actual specific usage, and can entrench bad habits the further from the specific usage the training is. Students need the teacher to show them that the technique is so effective that, if the teacher does not counter, even he will fall before it, imo.

[KC Elbows]

I think the biggest thing you could have shown in the vid. was full speed application, I know you were just showing the general premise and break down of the tech. but these days a red flag given is the 2 step outreaching punches on a compliant individuals.

In all honesty you could have done both... show the break down and then show in full speed. Not much more to show both in conjunction.

as for the gloves... I think everyone should use, and apply them into training. The thought of them just being used in "sport" context is a false thought. they are a tool that should be implemented and used.

You love poking things with sticks, don't you?:D

[YouKnowWho]

Applications should be trained against attacks that will happen.
A police will need to learn how to put a handcuff on bad guy and not how to take off handcuff. A bank robbery will need to know how to rob bank and not how to stop bank robbery. Application should also be trained "how to attack".

[Dragonzbane76]

You love poking things with sticks, don't you?

eh just throwing my 2 cents and a 1/2 in there. A lot of what i wanted to state had already been stated... didn't want to sound like a totally broken record.

If you put it up expect crit. on it. Take it or leave it in my book. :)

[KC Elbows]

eh just throwing my 2 cents and a 1/2 in there. A lot of what i wanted to state had already been stated... didn't want to sound like a totally broken record.

If you put it up expect crit. on it. Take it or leave it in my book. :)

I was just kidding you. But you did bring up a good point that wasn't mentioned(oversight on my part, as it was the reason I first posted)- these kinds of demos do tend to be a red flag, and I thought the guy should know that, just by going a little further, it would let people know that wasn't the case.

[Mo Ling]

I was just kidding you. But you did bring up a good point that wasn't mentioned(oversight on my part, as it was the reason I first posted)- these kinds of demos do tend to be a red flag, and I thought the guy should know that, just by going a little further, it would let people know that wasn't the case.

You guys assume a LOT, and this is a problem found exclusively on the internet. Just as you state that 'red flags' may come up due to some sort of demonstration video, there are also red flags that comments can bring up which reveal just how far down the well of internet frog in the well one may become.

The very important bit that you seem to have lost sight of is that the only people who see 'red flags' from slow demonstrations that do not feature 'real' attacks are people who spend their time frequently on internet martial arts forums. People like this get the habit to judge and critique anything on video based on criteria that relates only to this particular internet world.

Not to say that these supposed 'red flags' might be valid in some cases, but the point is that valid or not, mostly your red flag matters to no one but you. In the real world, where people might actually be looking to train gongfu with a real person who is local to them, long term (the only way it can be learned), the red flag you refer to will not often exist. Mostly, if you show applications it will scare people off who think they want to learn 'Tai Chi'. If people really do want to learn Taijiquan martial art they would be lucky to find any authentic applications at all. Mostly what they will find available will be kickboxing or longfist methods dressed in white silk. If someone is discerning enough to have an idea what the actual Chen Taijiquan applications are then they would be lucky to happen upon our school.

The 'red flag' you folks are referring to really applies to people watching a video clip to see whether or not it contains the 'real thing' to help them decide whether or not to purchase an instructional video, or attend a 'fighting' seminar. This is for people who are not able or interested in training with said teacher on a daily long term basis, and/or would like to learn over the net or on a video.

Since I am not offering any of those things, this virtual red flag that may arise because my video clip does not show what someone who has no interest or likelihood of ever visiting my school might want, simply does not matter.

That is your internet martial art red flag, matters to the internet. The actual in the flesh student is a totally different situation.

[KC Elbows]

You guys assume a LOT, and this is a problem found exclusively on the internet. Just as you state that 'red flags' may come up due to some sort of demonstration video, there are also red flags that comments can bring up which reveal just how far down the well of internet frog in the well one may become.

The very important bit that you seem to have lost sight of is that the only people who see 'red flags' from slow demonstrations that do not feature 'real' attacks are people who spend their time frequently on internet martial arts forums. People like this get the habit to judge and critique anything on video based on criteria that relates only to this particular internet world.

Not to say that these supposed 'red flags' might be valid in some cases, but the point is that valid or not, mostly your red flag matters to no one but you. In the real world, where people might actually be looking to train gongfu with a real person who is local to them, long term (the only way it can be learned), the red flag you refer to will not often exist. Mostly, if you show applications it will scare people off who think they want to learn 'Tai Chi'. If people really do want to learn Taijiquan martial art they would be lucky to find any authentic applications at all. Mostly what they will find available will be kickboxing or longfist methods dressed in white silk. If someone is discerning enough to have an idea what the actual Chen Taijiquan applications are then they would be lucky to happen upon our school.

The 'red flag' you folks are referring to really applies to people watching a video clip to see whether or not it contains the 'real thing' to help them decide whether or not to purchase an instructional video, or attend a 'fighting' seminar. This is for people who are not able or interested in training with said teacher on a daily long term basis, and/or would like to learn over the net or on a video.

Since I am not offering any of those things, this virtual red flag that may arise because my video clip does not show what someone who has no interest or likelihood of ever visiting my school might want, simply does not matter.

That is your internet martial art red flag, matters to the internet. The actual in the flesh student is a totally different situation.

Ease up, Fire Chief!

Perhaps Skokie is different, been awhile since I was there.

In most urban areas, more and more people do some research before joining a school, and are hesitant to throw their money into classes based on compliant demos.

I've also seen this happen in my stays in China.

[Mo Ling]

I generally don't take anyone seriously and don't care at all if they cannot actually meet me in person. If they cannot actually visit a class and a teacher to check out a school then they are basically..scared. I am not selling anything so the video is just for fun and interest. If someone is potentially interested in training but must see everything on video first before even being willing to meet someone, I am actually not at all interested in teaching them. These people are simply time wasters to me. Maybe it is a generational thing, but I am just not interested in living in a totally virtual world.

Gongfu is a physical art. If you cannot deal with it in the physical world we can simply ignore, it is not a loss.

[KC Elbows]

Yet you have videos on your website for potential students to peruse. But you don't care about the sort of students who would make the informed decision of perusing them before spending their time visiting your school?

Interesting.

[Mo Ling]

Yet you have videos on your website for potential students to peruse. But you don't care about the sort of students who would make the informed decision of perusing them before spending their time visiting your school?

Interesting.

I am sure you can twist it to create a debate, but it is pretty simple really.
The videos are there, people can see it is authentic Taijiquan including both martial methods and all the other health related aspects etc. That is enough for someone who is looking for that.

Interested parties with a bit of wisdom generally understand that the full martial teaching in Taijiquan is not given away for free in 5 minutes on the net in a video. If it is the type of person who thinks there is no martial value whatsoever in those videos that reflects that they will not have the patience for this training anyhow and probably want 5-minute fight skill. What is shown in those videos is closely related to the pace things might look like for students. If they don't like it, it is best if they don't waste their and our time.

It is not like we put up empty force videos, let's be real. It has already been said by some here that apparently those videos do have something of value for martial arts so I do not see the point debating that. If there is something of value, less than ideal presentation notwithstanding then people can have the maturity to actually meet someone if they are interested or move on. I have no regret whatsoever on that count.

[KC Elbows]

Try using gloves.

[taai gihk yahn]

You guys assume a LOT, and this is a problem found exclusively on the internet.
LOL - I think you should look in the mirror; to wit:


The very important bit that you seem to have lost sight of is that the [B]only people who see 'red flags' from slow demonstrations that do not feature 'real' attacks are people who spend their time frequently on internet martial arts forums.
I can't believe that you don't take into account that there is a sizable subset of practitioners who regularly train live under pressure from resisting opponents (whether MMA, TCMA, MT or any other system that trains in this maner) who would see this as a major concern; so I don't know where you are getting this particular perspective from at all...

point is this: showing techniques worked out on a compliant individual is certainly interesting; and quite frankly, what you do show appears to be valid; but in this day and age, the level of discussion amongst serious practitioners tends to focus on how stuff works against resisting opponents working unpredictably, and that's just how it is - it's the zeitgeist, if you will; now, you certainly are under NO obligation to show anything beyond that, and no one has ANY expectations of you to do so; the "request" is based purely on the fact that this is where many people's head are at these days, given so many years of people providing compliant demos up the wazoo, but not having the abiity to work their stuff in a mroe realistic context; now, that may or may not be the case w/you, but one really has no way of knowing this, right? but since hat you show appears to be valid, the "request" is proferred (because if what you showed was pure crap, no one would ask that in a serious way - so it really is a validation of sorts from independent views - and again, i KNOW u don't care, u don't need anyone else's validation, etc., etc.); anyway, point is that compliant demos just don't provide the same level of "evidence" as they used to, regardless of content;

now, maybe there is something about what you demo in a compliant manner that will cause some people to be able to extrapolate that if really attacked, you'd be able to pull this stuff of; personally, I don't know one way or the other, but IMPE, I no longer give benefit of the doubt; and of course I know that you don't care if I do or not, I get it, it's just conversation;

again, in general, I liked what you show; it is very similar to the way that I interpret and apply the pre-Beijing Yang system I practice; as such, it would be nice to see it done in a more realistic context; and if you r not interested in providing that, it's fine of course, and so the discussion ends there;

[Mo Ling]

LOL - I think you should look in the mirror; to wit:


I can't believe that you don't take into account that there is a sizable subset of practitioners who regularly train live under pressure from resisting opponents (whether MMA, TCMA, MT or any other system that trains in this maner) who would see this as a major concern; so I don't know where you are getting this particular perspective from at all...

point is this: showing techniques worked out on a compliant individual is certainly interesting; and quite frankly, what you do show appears to be valid; but in this day and age, the level of discussion amongst serious practitioners tends to focus on how stuff works against resisting opponents working unpredictably, and that's just how it is - it's the zeitgeist, if you will; now, you certainly are under NO obligation to show anything beyond that, and no one has ANY expectations of you to do so; the "request" is based purely on the fact that this is where many people's head are at these days, given so many years of people providing compliant demos up the wazoo, but not having the abiity to work their stuff in a mroe realistic context; as such, compliant demos just don't provide the same level of "evidence" as they used to;

now, maybe there is something about what you demo in a compliant manner that will cause some people to be able to extrapolate that if really attacked, you'd be able to pull this stuff of; personally, I don't know one way or the other, but IMPE, I no longer give benefit of the doubt; and of course I know that you don't care if I do or not, I get it, it's just conversation;

again, in general, I liked what you show; it is very similar to the way that I interpret and apply the pre-Beijing Yang system I practice; as such, it would be nice to see it done in a more realistic context; and if you r not interested in providing that, it's fine of course, and so the discussion ends there;

No problem really. Maybe I am just a bit dated and a bit traditional. The people I learned from would never have shown nearly as much as I have and that is the tradition. In the old days they would have shown simply nothing at all, and there are reasons for that. Many of those reasons are still valid today, so I might be a bit old school, and I can live with that.

I am not looking to compete with or service the commercial martial art school model. The people who really want to fight and see visual evidence before meeting people are probably best suited for those schools that are less traditional, and offer faster, less detailed training roads.

In my experience you get what you work for. Those who need to see realistic fighting in a video have many many places to go train that will offer them a quick effective fighting course. Taijiquan is simply not that and I do not see any point in pretending it is. None of my teachers would even discuss that with prospective students. As far as what is known as 'gongfu' goes, we are actually well past it's heyday. Regardless of the changing demands of the internet public, the changes in gongfu culture are not positive, in fact it is a difficult thing to preserve at all now. I don't have any reason to believe that giving up the old views that have well founded reasons supporting them simply to suit a new generation of impatience is valuable.

I respect the old ways and what my teachers taught me. That is not about to change, especially given the practical value I see from it daily. My way is not for everyone, and mostly the gongfu is too hard anyhow.

[taai gihk yahn]

No problem really. Maybe I am just a bit dated and a bit traditional. The people I learned from would never have shown nearly as much as I have and that is the tradition. In the old days they would have shown simply nothing at all, and there are reasons for that. Many of those reasons are still valid today, so I might be a bit old school, and I can live with that.

I am not looking to compete with or service the commercial martial art school model. The people who really want to fight and see visual evidence before meeting people are probably best suited for those schools that are less traditional, and offer faster, less detailed training roads.

In my experience you get what you work for. Those who need to see realistic fighting in a video have many many places to go train that will offer them a quick effective fighting course. Taijiquan is simply not that and I do not see any point in pretending it is. None of my teachers would even discuss that with prospective students. As far as what is known as 'gongfu' goes, we are actually well past it's heyday. Regardless of the changing demands of the internet public, the changes in gongfu culture are not positive, in fact it is a difficult thing to preserve at all now. I don't have any reason to believe that giving up the old views that have well founded reasons supporting them simply to suit a new generation of impatience is valuable.

I respect the old ways and what my teachers taught me. That is not about to change, especially given the practical value I see from it daily. My way is not for everyone, and mostly the gongfu is too hard anyhow.

in a lot of ways, albeit from a slightly different perspective, I pretty much agree with this...

[bawang]

to be fair in america this guy is "good enough". the standard of taijiquan is pretty low, and compared to most hes not that bad. ive seen a lot worse. ones whos form is so bad they can only post snapshot photos.

i mean most taijiquan peoples wont be fighting, they want to learn the forms and push hands, and thsi guys form is pretty good. and he pulls off those air fajings good too.

of course he cant pull off any of those applications in real life, he knows it we know it, thats perfectly fine. as long as your students will buy it and keep paying you, who cares. but if u post ur stuff on the internet of course ur gonna get criticism.
the lesson is dont post things you milk your students with on the internet

[Mo Ling]

to be fair in america this guy is "good enough". the standard of taijiquan is pretty low, and compared to most hes not that bad. ive seen a lot worse. ones whos form is so bad they can only post snapshot photos.

i mean most taijiquan peoples wont be fighting, they want to learn the forms and push hands, and thsi guys form is pretty good. and he pulls off those air fajings good too.

of course he cant pull off any of those applications in real life, he knows it we know it, thats perfectly fine. as long as your students will buy it and keep paying you, who cares. but if u post ur stuff on the internet of course ur gonna get criticism.
the lesson is dont post things you milk your students with on the internet

Seems you are well versed in that story. Those who know me, including my students, know I don't milk anyone for anything. You may be speaking from your own experience, but in the reality outside your idea, like my training for example, I simply do not make enough money to be qualified as 'milking' anything.

There are lots of people taking advantage of hapless students out there, this is true. However taking advantage has to make some sort of profit you know. If it feels good for you to believe this about me, I am not in any great need to change that. However it is false to the point of amusement on the part of anyone who trains with me.

Trying to convince the 'asshammer' is probably above my paygrade too.

[bawang]

i dont understand how u talk yourself a thousand miles into the sky like your some sort of amazing guy. maybe ur students kissed ur ass too much.

this isnt the 1970s anymore. just 10 seconds to youtube you can easily see the standards of "advanced" taijiquan teachers and compare to yourself.

if u dont realize youre milking then you got milked by ur teacher and didnt realize it, and thought it was the proper way to teach. teaching taijiquan isnt about dumping tons of complex confusing concepts to your students its about silent diligent training. white students get bored so chinese teachers usually gave more fancy concepts to them.

when i was starting i did nothing but standing post and silk reeling and qigong for 2 years every day. i still dont post video of myself because i know im not good and i dont let my ego take control. theres lots of video of kung fu guys whose forms and apps look much better than yours getting their ass kicked. which is another reason i dont post videos.
i think ur form looks good but ur "sparring" is sh1t, and thats my opinion.



chairman mao said we should not only accept criticism from others, but actively critisize ourselves. u should take his advice

[Dragonzbane76]

There are lots of people taking advantage of hapless students out there, this is true.

hence we have the "red flag" come out. Everyones a sceptic these days and I think we should be. it's only fair after the amount of a$$ screwing most people recieved from chi dim mak fire blasting hadokens "masters" over the years. it's evolution.

I'm not condeming what you are doing, just pointing out that people in general have stepped away from the "movie" based wushu that brought the windfalls of money in the 70-80's.


In my experience you get what you work for. Those who need to see realistic fighting in a video have many many places to go train that will offer them a quick effective fighting course. Taijiquan is simply not that and I do not see any point in pretending it is. I see your point here and bow to logic.


respect the old ways and what my teachers taught me. That is not about to change, especially given the practical value I see from it daily. My way is not for everyone, and mostly the gongfu is too hard anyhow.

i respect the origins, and look past the flashy contrived. no one is attacking you on this, it takes a lot to post a vid and have people crit. it. I respect those whom stick to there guns and don't try to tell others that what they are doing is wrong. If it makes you happy and no one is getting screwed in the process then by all means have at it and be merry about what you have. :)

[Mo Ling]

i dont understand how u talk yourself a thousand miles into the sky like your some sort of amazing guy. maybe ur students kissed ur ass too much.

this isnt the 1970s anymore. just 10 seconds to youtube you can easily see the standards of "advanced" taijiquan teachers and compare to yourself.

if u dont realize youre milking then you got milked by ur teacher and didnt realize it, and thought it was the proper way to teach. teaching taijiquan isnt about dumping tons of complex confusing concepts to your students its about silent diligent training. white students get bored so chinese teachers usually gave more fancy concepts to them.

when i was starting i did nothing but standing post and silk reeling and qigong for 2 years every day. i still dont post video of myself because i know im not good and i dont let my ego take control. theres lots of video of kung fu guys whose forms and apps look much better than yours getting their ass kicked. which is another reason i dont post videos.
i think ur form looks good but ur "sparring" is sh1t, and thats my opinion.



chairman mao said we should not only accept criticism from others, but actively critisize ourselves. u should take his advice

Hey you know, I am actually an adult and I am just not likely to find value in a ****ing match with you online, really that is passe.

I have not talked myself up at all here. I posted some videos and stood behind what I posted and have let people say whatever they like. I don't call myself master or 'sifu' this and that. I have not made any big claims. I am a guy, however who has eaten the bitter and followed the traditional path, lived in China and trained there, traveled there for years etc. It is a long story that I am not really interested in telling here. So, before you make assumptions about people cheating their students without any evidence, or knowing nothing simply because they showed some isolated methods in a video, take a moment to examine your own behavior. That is pretty insulting and without any basis in fact whatsoever.

I expect critique when I post something online, but that does not mean I have to agree with it all. I am also entitled to my opinion. Not agreeing with your critique is not a basis to accuse me of dishonesty and ignorance of which you have no basis in knowledge. Being nice is not overrated.

If you know you are not good and you don't let your ego take control as you said, you might try to reflect that in your conversations here, because you are coming across as if you really think you are good and you ego is very loud.

Myself, I have a good idea of where my own skill is at, but my contributions to this discussion have been pretty civil and humbly accommadating compared to what you've just shown. Does being nice and respectful mean I have no skill? Does being insulting for no reason about someone you do not know make you better?

Clearly I must not know the way of things.

[Scott R. Brown]

Just keep in mind that "bawang" means "garlic"......in Tagalog.

Not everyone likes this type of seasoning!

Others only take it in small doses.:)

[bawang]

If you know you are not good and you don't let your ego take control as you said, you might try to reflect that in your conversations here, because you are coming across as if you really think you are good and you ego is very loud.

Clearly I must not know the way of things.
my ego isnt loud. if my ego was loud i would film myslef doing tai chi and add weird chinese pop music to it then post it on the internet.

i tried using stuff like u showed in the video in high school and got the ass beating of my life. i practiced one technique for hours, and it still doesnt work. that is why i am being so direct with you. people like you feel absolutely no guilt in your lies because you live the lie. what if your student tries soemthing and gets horribly beaten or killed? have you thought about that?
the stuff u showed can never work. i dont know you, so i am being very honest with you. tahts the whole point of the internet. im not asking u to agree wit me. im just saying my opinion.

u say u endured bitter training in china. but u clearly look out of shape and wobbly. ive been training chen 13 spear with 20 pound iron spear and 40 pound weight vest for 3 hours a day in the summer, my thumb is constantly bleeding and all the blister in my hand exploded. u dont look like someone who trained in china seriously. u look like the token foreigner student

[Mo Ling]

my ego isnt loud. if my ego was loud i would film myslef doing tai chi and add weird chinese pop music to it then post it on the internet.

i tried using stuff like u showed in the video in high school and got the ass beating of my life. i practiced one technique for hours, and it still doesnt work. that is why i am being so direct with you. people like you feel absolutely no guilt in your lies because you live the lie. what if your student tries soemthing and gets horribly beaten or killed? have you thought about that?
the stuff u showed can never work. i dont know you, so i am being very honest with you. tahts the whole point of the internet. im not asking u to agree wit me. im just saying my opinion.

u say u endured bitter training in china. but u clearly look out of shape and wobbly. ive been training chen 13 spear with 20 pound iron spear and 40 pound weight vest for 3 hours a day in the summer, my thumb is constantly bleeding and all the blister in my hand exploded. u dont look like someone who trained in china seriously. u look like the token foreigner student

I hope by posting my out of shape, wobbly token foreign student video on the internet and teaching some students I did not make you feel less important than you really are. I have no intention to take away needed attention from someone who deserves it more than I do. You probably should be teaching and get lots of credit for your hard work. I wish you success in the future, not really excited about arguing with you. You might be very skilled.

[cerebus]

Bawang, it's easy to make judgements based on a video, and it's easy to talk alot of garbage about someone you've never met. If someday you meet some of the people you talk so freely against on the internet, you may end up being surprised. I've met many of the people I've corresponded with over the internet and crossed hands with some of them, I've often been pleasantly surprised. Your mind seems very closed. That's too bad for you...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ah, Bawang-Fu, it makes this forum worthwhile !!
:D

[taai gihk yahn]

Ah, Bawang-Fu, it makes this forum worthwhile !!
:D

although we seem to have a had a lack of Uki Ryu lately...:(

[Dragonzbane76]

Ah, Bawang-Fu, it makes this forum worthwhile !!

that it does...the random b!tch slapping he hands out is just epic awesomeness of the highest calibur which cannot be replicated by anyone on this planet. :p

[cerebus]

that it does...the random b!tch slapping he hands out is just epic awesomeness of the highest calibur which cannot be replicated by anyone on this planet. :p

Are you serious or being sarcastic? Bawang is a nutjob looney toon who usually sounds like his only exposure to martial arts has been through old "Hong Kong Phooey" cartoons...

[Dragonzbane76]

Are you serious or being sarcastic? Bawang is a nutjob looney toon who usually sounds like his only exposure to martial arts has been through old "Hong Kong Phooey" cartoons...

Like I said some people take this sh!t way to serious....;)

[KC Elbows]

My recommendations are not based on commercial intent: take the suggestions, and you'd have less students.

They're based on ability to maintain the tradition.

The tradition included fighting, whether in war, bodyguard work, police work, or criminal work.

This lifestyle was usually intrinsic to the strong traditions.

If those are absent, they must be replaced by something, or the tradition is not alive at all.

Conversely, students sought out the best teachers because they needed the best info, and teachers kept in mind to take trustworthy students(trustworthy to them, in cases), but also tried to get the most talented, and people with experience.

So, in seeking students, the tradition also included aiming one's efforts at good hearted people, but preferring ones with a good heart AND talent.

To get the talented to the good teachers, introductions and word of mouth were important.

We don't have the same system to make use of introductions, and the talented, if they're aware of taiji, cannot be blamed for the fact that taiji does not have the best reputation. To punish them for the fault of taiji proponents by not seeking to teach them is senseless, it only punishes the good versions of taiji by denying the style the best proponents possible and welcoming those who exoticize it. To overcome the bad info, one can present something more real.

[taai gihk yahn]

Are you serious or being sarcastic? Bawang is a nutjob looney toon who usually sounds like his only exposure to martial arts has been through old "Hong Kong Phooey" cartoons...

I've communicated with him privately, he actually has done some serious research into Ming Dynasty records re: taiji techniques / origins, etc. and has some pretty solid experience and ideas

he just acts like a goof ball on the forum, because, well, that's pat of the reason why we's alls here

[bawang]

i used to be very serious on the internet. but people on kung fu forums just ask and say the most rediculous things. the final straw was when some dragonballgoku1991 asked is it ok to masterbate while doing iron palm and asking for dim mak manuals. after that i just troll internet and make poeple mad for fun.
just last week someone on this forum asked me to translate secret text a taoist wudang monk gave to him, turns out this is just common info u can find on chinese google. i wasted fukin 20 minutes translating his secret text.


i just dont like low standards in chinese martial arts in america where total sh1t is considered decent or good. where kung fu students dont understand the basic concept of "face" and shame and talk out of their ass and talk themselves into godhood. is that too much?

[Mo Ling]

i used to be very serious on the internet. but people on kung fu forums just ask and say the most rediculous things. the final straw was when some dragonballgoku1991 asked is it ok to masterbate while doing iron palm and asking for dim mak manuals. after that i just troll internet and make poeple mad for fun.

i just dont like low standards in chinese martial arts in america where total sh1t is considered decent or good. where kung fu students dont understand the basic concept of "face" and shame and talk out of their ass and talk themselves into godhood. is that too much?

Enjoying making people mad for fun (trolling) on the net is not a novel or unique pastime, it is very common. Admitting that this is what you prefer to do does not excuse or negate a basic rudeness and lack of manners that is on display.

Regardless of you apparent idea that you represent and understand martial arts 'standards' in China, from people who have actually lived and trained there, your behavior here is distinctly American (lacking basic manners, lacking humility, believing you are number one).

Chinese generally would see it this way:

脸皮太厚

If you know what this means.. only a fool continues this way.

[bawang]

i talk this way on the internet because this it the internet. wat happens if i critisize a kung fu guy in real life?
"yes, yes of course, you are right. hey i have to go, see you later."
then he will go away and open a torrent of sh1t talking and gossip and slander behind my back as revenge.

u mistake american arrogance for me refusing to lie and pretend to be polite to you. im telling u what chinese people in real life wouldnt be telling you. theyd just smirk and walk away, maybe say youre good.

[taai gihk yahn]

i
u mistake american arrogance for me refusing to lie and pretend to be polite to you. im telling u what chinese people in real life wouldnt be telling you. theyd just smirk and walk away, maybe say youre good.

my sifu always says that for Chinese, the best "revenge" is allowing someone to continue to do what they have been doing without them realizing that they are wrong (as opposed to the US where we want to tell everyone else how wrong they are); not saying anything about this specific case, but it does make one wonder...although actually, after hanging around w/sum of the old-skool sifus like CTS, if you see them doing the mock praise vs the genuine praise, you actually do get the difference (the mock praise tends to be of a greater quantity and an end unto itself; genuine praise is more restrained and always ends w/the sifu pushing you into a new zone of discomfort, lol)

[bawang]

yeah mang. i think the mock praise helped destroy kung fu in america. the sh1t student cant tell, and he goes forth and multiplies
its part of the laisaiz faire attitude of just letting things take their own course that ruined kung fu. the old sifus didnt realize how powerful the american ego is.

[Mo Ling]

i talk this way on the internet because this it the internet. wat happens if i critisize a kung fu guy in real life?
"yes, yes of course, you are right. hey i have to go, see you later."
then he will go away and open a torrent of sh1t talking and gossip and slander behind my back as revenge.

u mistake american arrogance for me refusing to lie and pretend to be polite to you. im telling u what chinese people in real life wouldnt be telling you. theyd just smirk and walk away, maybe say youre good.

Wow, you figured me out!

[bawang]

i win internet fight

[Lucas]

Actually, though it may not have looked like I was involved, I won.
:p

/internetmuscleflex

[Sardinkahnikov]

hy bawang

i want to be your discipul so i can learn asshammer style and make monies by seling garlic stuffs and conning the white devils so i can eat burger food. please say yes? praised be guanyu

[cerebus]

i just troll internet and make poeple mad for fun.

You don't think there are enough angry, pizzed-off people in the world? You feel like it's fun to add to that? Then you are an idiot and the world would be far better off without you. Sucks to be you...

[bawang]

You feel like it's fun to add to that?

yes. i love it when white people cray.

[cerebus]

yes. i love it when white people cray.

So you're racist. That explains alot...

[bawang]

noe. ur rasist u lie
LIER

i love the white peoples. i love colonel sanders.

[bawang]

You don't think there are enough angry, pizzed-off people in the world?
at 17 after high school i left my family on east coast and went all alone to toronto 1000 miles away. i wanted to devote myself to kung fu and find kung fu people. then a obvious problem came up: i dont have money, noone will teach me. i find a cheap ass club, then "i dont like that guy. hes never learning the buddha palm. *snort snort giggle" that ends my short dream.
then i waste 2 years making money for college. i endured hell just for kung fu. i know your westerner kung fu too well.
then i see limp wristed motherfukers treating this like a game , limply and softly touching each other like h0m0sexuals and call it sparring , even have the nerve and ego to film that sh1t, why shouldnt i be mad? and he claims he endured bitter training in china. why shouldnt i be pised off?? u tell me motherfuker u tell me

maoshan got his ass beat just few months ago, some guy just claim yang hai got beat, and you guys still live in your bubbles. unless u guys receive a brutal beating trying to use your internal skills u will never wake up

[cerebus]

at 17 after high school i left my family on east coast and went all alone to toronto 1000 miles away. i wanted to devote myself to kung fu and find kung fu people. then a obvious problem came up: i dont have money, noone will teach me. i find a cheap ass club, then "i dont like that guy. hes never learning the buddha palm. *snort snort giggle" that ends my short dream.
then i waste 2 years making money for college. i endured hell just for kung fu.
then i see limp wristed motherfukers treating this like a game , limply and softly touching each other and call it sparring , even have the nerve and ego to film that sh1t, why shouldnt i be mad? and he claims he endured bitter training in china. why shouldnt i be pised off?? u tell me motherfuker u tell me

maoshan got his ass beat just few months ago, that guy just claim yang hai got beat, and you guys still live in your bubbles.

You made bad decisions, so everyone else must pay for your mistakes? That really makes alot of sense (not). I was a member of the Tang Shou Tao Association from 2002 til 2007. The Tang Shou Tao was created by master Hung I-Hsiang in Taiwan to teach Chinese internal arts for fighting. Every year we had an annual full-contact tournament. I don't claim to be any expert, but I am a good fighter and a dedicated practitioner of Tai Chi Chuan.

I also have personally met Mo Ling. When he first returned from China he lived in Oakland near my house. I pushed hands with him a number of times and we sparred on several occasions (light contact). He really does know what he is doing and I have felt him apply it. You only know what you've seen on a video, and you don't seem to have understood it at all.

You want to call me a "motherfuker" (as you spell it) and you don't even know me. You've shown yourself to be a real loser who has serious psychological problems. Get yourself a therapist, no one's paying me enough to try and point this stuff out to you...

[bawang]

why would i need a therapist. i lived in a small city and heard lies about how theres great kung fu people with amazing skills, so i didnt listen to my parents and traveled to toronto. turns out theyre pure dogsh1t. im mad cuz i wasted all my saved up money looking for real kung fu, when theres none, because no one takes it seriously. now im pointing out how u guys talk yourselves into badasses because i see thru ur facade.

[cerebus]

why would i need a therapist. i lived in a small town and heard lies about how theres great kung fu people with amazing skills, so i didnt listen to my parents and traveled to toronto. turns out theyre pure dogsh1t. im mad cuz i wasted all my saved up money looking for real kung fu, when theres none, because no one takes it seriously.

You need a therapist because YOU are the one who made the mistake which you made, yet you wish to take it out on everyone else instead of just realizing that it was YOUR mistake. No one else is responsible for it, just you. So stop calling other people "motherfukers" just because you want to act like a whiny little baby. Be a man. Accept that you made a mistake and move on with your life.

Instead of trying to always talk crap about people you don't even know, take the time to do a little research before you gamble everything on what someone tells you.

[cerebus]

now im pointing out how u guys talk yourselves into badasses because i see thru ur facade.

No facade here. I've been training in the martial arts since 1978. I've been fighting full-contact since 1983, first as a boxer, then as a kickboxer and San Da fighter. In 2002 I began training in the Chinese internal arts. In 2008 I fought for the USKSF International Championship Full-Contact title. I had two hard-fought matches and was ranked 4th. Most recently, at the age of 40 and weighing 170 lbs at around 5 ft 10.5 inches tall I fought and won a full-contact match against an opponent in his 20s who was over 6 ft tall and weighed around 225 lbs. What have YOU done?

[bawang]

You need a therapist because YOU are the one who made the mistake which you made, yet you wish to take it out on everyone else instead of just realizing that it was YOUR mistake. No one else is responsible for it, just you.
people like u talk yourselves into high skilled kung fu gods when ur just weekend warrior hobbyists. u show ur true colors when naive people buy into your lies and try to become "kung fu warriors" but fail horribly. then you look down on them and call impressionable young kids losers.

Most recently, at the age of 40 and weighing 170 lbs at around 5 ft 10.5 inches tall I fought and won a full-contact match against an opponent in his 20s who was over 6 ft tall and weighed around 225 lbs. What have YOU done?
i tried to use "internal kung fu concepts" in high school and got my ass beat. i got kneed in the face, my teeth was loose and i got a concussion. i was brave and dumb enough to listen to lies of people like u and paid my price but also learned an important lesson. no matter how much u inflate ur self i can c rite thru u.
u can close ur eyes and slug some amateur nobody and claim u had a fight, whens the last time u tried to use what you preach.

[cerebus]

people like u talk yourselves into high skilled kung fu gods when ur just weekend warrior hobbyists. u show ur true colors when naive people buy into your lies and try to become "kung fu warriors" but fail horribly. then you look down on them and call impressionable young kids losers.

i tried to use "internal kung fu concepts" in high school and got my ass beat. i got kneed in the face, my teeth was loose and i got a concussion. i was brave and dumb enough to listen to lies of people like u and paid my price but also learned an important lesson. no matter how much u inflate ur self i can c rite thru u.

The only one calling me a "highly skilled kung fu god" is you. I never made any such claim, I simply stated the facts, which were apparently too much for you to comprehend.

And no, you never listened to someone like me or you wouldn't have gone out and gotten into fights in the first place, much less have gotten your azz kicked that badly. You're a fool, plain and simple. Everytime you write something on this forum you make it clear...

[cerebus]

u can close ur eyes and slug some amateur nobody and claim u had a fight, whens the last time u tried to use what you preach.

Wow. You really ARE extremely stupid, aren't you? My eyes were open just fine, and the last time I fought a guy much larger, stronger and more aggressive than me was just this past June. I even posted the photos of the fight, but hey you were too busy whining about your poor little self to have noticed I suppose...

[bawang]

i wasnt a fool for getting into that fight. the first rule of wulin is dont be a cowerd.
i WAS a fool because i believed in what your friend showed in his tai chi application videos , diligently trained them every day and tried to use them and got horribly beat up. i even recognize some same stuff.i drilled those sh1t for months everyday.

when someone dont train your internal kung fu properly, you call them lazy. when they train them diligently and find out it doesnt work, you call them losers. when they naturally feel betrayed and lied to and get mad, you say they need psychological help. sounds like ur a sociopath who uses kung fu to make easy money.

[cerebus]

i wasnt a fool for getting into that fight. the first rule of wulin is dont be a cowerd.
i WAS a fool because i believed in what your friend showed in his tai chi application videos and tried to use them. i even recognize some same stuff.

Ah, so you think it's the actual TECHNIQUE that either wins or fails. That's where your problem lies. It's not the technique (or the art) that wins, fails, or does the fighting. It's the person who practices it. All techniques CAN work IF they are trained properly. I've seen people try to use a jab/ overhand right combo and fail miserably, getting their butt kicked in the process. Does that mean that the jab/ overhand right combo doesn't work? Of course not! It just means that the person didn't use it properly.

Oh well, I'm wasting my time here. You've already decided what you want to believe. Trying to talk sense to you would be like trying to talk sense to someone who has decided to believe the Earth is flat. It just won't work. Enjoy being miserable and deluded. Goodbye...

[bawang]

i win internet fight

[cerebus]

i win internet fight

Yet you lose at life because "winning" at an internet fight is so important to you. Wow, you are a real idiot, the world will be much better if you would just get run over and killed while crossing the street. Please do us all a favor and try to make that happen. Thanks. :)

[bawang]

Wow, bro. You have some anger issues. You should see a psychiatrist dude.

[cerebus]

Wow, bro. You have some anger issues. You should see a psychiatrist dude.

:rolleyes: Wow, what an incredible come-back. No wonder you always get your azz kicked... :p

[cerebus]

Here's a thought "bawang", why don't you try to grow up, pull your head outta your azz and stop acting like a 20 year old kid who can't fight his way out of a wet paper bag? Unless that's what you really are (though it's sounding like that might really be the case).

[Mo Ling]

Poor kid. Sorry to hear that he made such a mess of his life.
Being a westerner wishing to be Chinese must not be easy for him either.

I am sorry to see just how low this board can go. I have not posted anything here for years, but I don't remember it being quite so dregs.

[bawang]

sometimes i cry at night because i am not chiense

[cerebus]

sometimes i cry at night because i am not chiense

You should actually be crying because you are such an azzhole to everyone. If you could only solve THAT problem you probably wouldn't get beat up the way you always do.

[Mo Ling]

You should actually be crying because you are such an azzhole to everyone. If you could only solve THAT problem you probably wouldn't get beat up the way you always do.

Some people ... well as he said he wanted to join a 'cheap ass club' that already sounded troubling, now this night crying thing along with the emotional outbursts about westerners. It all paints a very troubling picture.

I met kids like this when I was younger, lost kungfu or religion true-believers who wandered around repeating dogma to everyone they met etc.. making no plans for the future, never able to grow up or handle much of real life. This is also a bitter path. It is just not gongfu bitterness, it is psychological.

Whoever you are kid, you are not funny on the net, just depressing and negative. I wish you progress making a real life (not on the internet) for yourself. Your situation cannot be comfortable. Working towards that end would be a nicer way than just attacking people you do not know online.

[Dragonzbane76]

wow seriously.... can I not stress this enough......IT'S THE INTERNET...AGAIN........IT'S THE INTERNET......

you guys take this sh!t way to serious.......dam....

[cerebus]

wow seriously.... can I not stress this enough......IT'S THE INTERNET...AGAIN........IT'S THE INTERNET......

you guys take this sh!t way to serious.......dam....

Relax man, you're taking this way too seriously... :D:p

[Mo Ling]

wow seriously.... can I not stress this enough......IT'S THE INTERNET...AGAIN........IT'S THE INTERNET......

you guys take this sh!t way to serious.......dam....

mmm yeah? .. you really told the world with that one. Everyone here is very serious and should instead post stupid drivel. At least you can stand up for what is important to you.

[tiaji1983]

Bawang,

Wow. I actually came to you looking for help homie. I did get that information from a practitioner from Wudang. I do not read Chinese characters. I practice Wudang, and my teacher was not given the poems when he learned, so I asked someone from Wudang for traditional poems that I could not find online. He sent some in english, and some in chinese he didnt have time to translate. I had a Chinese person here that does not practice martial arts, so could not fully translate the texts, mislead me to what was in some of the poems. I was not trying to be an @sshole or try to say I was something I wasnt, or even say I had something I did not. I have nothing to hide here, and am just looking for help and giving advice on an internet forum... I do not understand the agression and the bad mouthing. Where did this come from, and why couldnt you just lead me to the source instead of making an incorrect assumption?... :confused:

[tiaji1983]

And I'm sorry, but believe I asked if you could translate some Wudang forms and "secret" texts... But I also told you I do not read Chinese characters, so I dont see why you didnt take that with a grain of salt or just tell me no... Or at least question what I thought I had on there more... But Im sorry if you felt mislead by what I was asking you to translate... Ill be more careful who I ask for help next time.

[Dragonzbane76]

mmm yeah? .. you really told the world with that one. Everyone here is very serious and should instead post stupid drivel. At least you can stand up for what is important to you.

Oh im sorry did i interupt cer. taking up for you??