Are my theories correct on this?

[tiaji1983]

Hello everyone. I have been studying Taijiquan for a long time. I learned the most in the past 3 years. I was hoping if someone could verify something for me.

In a lot of demonstrations that some people call Fa Jing or the Taiji Punch, they do a punch or a simple movement and the opponent moves back 15 feet. I understand that would be very easy to do if the opponent was off balance or attempting a step in either direction, or was retreating, you basically just follow their energy and add your own energy to it, with of course sinking and using the earth to push them away. Now I have seen some presentations, when the person being hit or pushed is in a strong stance, not moving, perfectly stable. The Fa Jing is done in a way the opponent should be able to ground, or shouldnt do much as far as a moving the opponent is concerned, yet the opponent is "uncontrolably" pushed back like 15 feet.

Now my question is, is that for real, or in every instance is the opponent playing along? The reason I asked, is because in practice, I havent seen someone pushed back more than 1 or 2 steps from being "pushed" in a good strong stance... Or is there something Im missing in MY practice or in the demonstrations?

[jdhowland]

A well conditioned (and well cultivated) student should stumble back at least 15 feet. It makes your demonstrations more impressive.

Seriously though, even in push hands a training partner shouldn't move that much if he is practicing his skill rather than just helping you show yours. That's a low-level demonstration of kung fu, or showmanship if you like.

With real fa jing the opponent should (ideally) drop. More realistically, the body reacts to a fa jing strike as it will to any good boxer's punch.

[tiaji1983]

;) My thoughts exactly. Its purely for demonstratation. I asked a Master that told me that its just body mechanics, which in a sense is true, but in a sense is not, because if they have a strong stance they shouldnt move... I personnaly dont believe its right masters have to do "demotnstrations" like that to impress students while hiding secrets. Specifically when its masters saying they are GIVING the secrets...

[bawang]

u practice fajing day and night on a sandbag to get good. it has nothing to do with body mechanics

[tiaji1983]

lol hitting a sandbag is the best way to improve fajing. Very true, but without tthe proper body mechanics your fajing will have no power...

[YouKnowWho]

they do a punch or a simple movement and the opponent moves back 15 feet.
If any Taiji master can send a 120 lb throwing dummy (less than a human body weight) back for 15 feet, that Taiji master will have some great skill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbNi19c_MRg

[dirtyrat]

;) I asked a Master that told me that its just body mechanics, which in a sense is true, but in a sense is not, because if they have a strong stance they shouldnt move... .

It depends on the direction of the force being applied. If the force pushes an opponent towards his feet then good chance he shouldn't move. The force is absorbed into the ground. But apply the force in an upward direction fashion and in just the right way (against the weak points of the opponent's structure) then no matter how strong the stance is the opponent can be moved... Of course, how the force is generated is also important.

[tiaji1983]

Thats interesting. I was taught when you do peng for example, you sink then raise to make your force go forward and upward. I tried it before to a straight forward moving force to someone in a bow stance, and they didnt move much. What would you think was wrong with that, or what can I do to generate that type of power? Cuz honestly, everyone I seen in real life do it has been faked, so I would like to know if it really exists and how I can do it.

[tiaji1983]

If someone has a good bow stance, and you push straight into the front, where the stance is more stable, that shouldnt happen, right?

[dirtyrat]

If someone has a good bow stance, and you push straight into the front, where the stance is more stable, that shouldnt happen, right?

Tim Cartmell explains many of the body mechanics pretty good. Here's a clip of his upcoming dvd. Hope it helps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM-KXUggQ2c

[Subitai]

If someone has a good bow stance, and you push straight into the front, where the stance is more stable, that shouldnt happen, right?

No, VS. that set up a guy shouldn't be thrown back. Especially if the so called master is doing such a no-no, IMO.

I.e. a master would never preffer to strike VS. an opponants strong point or Directly INTO that trajectory.

*&#@% I personally hate when I see fake demos of students flying and jumping back wildly. Especially when all the old master does is Wave his hand slightly and BLAMO the student is Jumping a back!!

If a guy could do that to me....against my will, i'd quit the martial world forever.

"O"

[tiaji1983]

I also dislike it, which is why Im asking. If its true, its all good, but I dont know... We'll see...

[Violent Designs]

Tim Cartmell explains many of the body mechanics pretty good. Here's a clip of his upcoming dvd. Hope it helps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM-KXUggQ2c

If I wasn't so committed already I would most likely be training under Cartmell sifu. He really understands body mechanics extremely well and everything is explained concisely and precisely.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

everything is explained concisely and precisely.

Extremely underrated skill alert!

[KTS]

a really really good player will be able to send u back very far, very easily. the far-thest i was ever tossed in air was just a mere 7 or 8 feet, but that was 7 or 8 feet through the air until landing. and it didnt feel like anything except maybe like a large breeze just picked me up and moved me.
and i didnt even give much force to be manipulated.

there are indeed a lot of fakery(if that is even a word), and a lot of exaggerations. and also ways to cheat and kinda set this up - but these are different. play with the right people and this type of skill isnt so uncommon.

btw, the auto-censoring on here is terrible and doesnt even allow some "clean" words, in case u noticed why "far-thest" is written that way.

[omarthefish]

No, VS. that set up a guy shouldn't be thrown back. Especially if the so called master is doing such a no-no, IMO.

I.e. a master would never preffer to strike VS. an opponants strong point or Directly INTO that trajectory.

No....actually, that is exactly where a "so called master" would prefer to strike. The stronger the resistance and the stronger the root, the better.

Now for a throw you might want to avoid his strong points but for a strike, angling it right into his strongest point of resistance is how you cause the most damage.

[Scott R. Brown]

;) My thoughts exactly. Its purely for demonstratation. I asked a Master that told me that its just body mechanics, which in a sense is true, but in a sense is not, because if they have a strong stance they shouldnt move......

It is just body mechanics. There is no such thing as a strong stance. A stance "appears" strong to a novice, but an experienced practitioner knows where the weakness is located and attacks the weakness. You only attack a stance along its strong point if your strength far outclasses your opponent's.


Thats interesting. I was taught when you do peng for example, you sink then raise to make your force go forward and upward. I tried it before to a straight forward moving force to someone in a bow stance, and they didnt move much. What would you think was wrong with that, or what can I do to generate that type of power? Cuz honestly, everyone I seen in real life do it has been faked, so I would like to know if it really exists and how I can do it.

If you lower your center of gravity below your opponent's and extend your arms, merely stepping forward will unseat them. You must move from your center however and do not use the strength of your upper body to push. If you are unable to do this you just haven't discovered the proper execution yet. Keep practicing and you'll figure it out.

However, it is an unwise use of energy to attack a bow stance along its axis of stability/power. The weakest point of any stance is the apex of a triangle that is opposite the base, which is determined by drawing an imaginary line between the two feet. So, if your opppnent is in a bow stance, move behind him and put your hands on each shoulder, bring your elbows close to, or touching, his back and pull straight down. He will topple easily!

[taai gihk yahn]

So, if your opppnent is in a bow stance, move behind him and put your hands on each shoulder, bring your elbows close to, or touching, his back and pull straight down. He will topple easily!

not me - I have a secret third leg that instantly extends to form a tripod base whenever someone tries this on me!

you want to have one too - maybe with enough practice you could get one; but I don't know, I'm pretty special and better than you, so it may not happen...

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Holy Kangaroo Tails and Elephant D1cks, Batman!

[Scott R. Brown]

not me - I have a secret third leg that instantly extends to form a tripod base whenever someone tries this on me!

you want to have one too - maybe with enough practice you could get one; but I don't know, I'm pretty special and better than you, so it may not happen...

Uh....that third leg points in the wrong direction.......unless you are standing on your head or grossly deformed. If you are grossly deformed you are in the wrong business, you could be making millions in a certain field your wife might not be too supportive of!!!!:eek::D

[Knifefighter]

Hello everyone. I have been studying Taijiquan for a long time. I learned the most in the past 3 years. I was hoping if someone could verify something for me.

In a lot of demonstrations that some people call Fa Jing or the Taiji Punch, they do a punch or a simple movement and the opponent moves back 15 feet. I understand that would be very easy to do if the opponent was off balance or attempting a step in either direction, or was retreating, you basically just follow their energy and add your own energy to it, with of course sinking and using the earth to push them away. Now I have seen some presentations, when the person being hit or pushed is in a strong stance, not moving, perfectly stable. The Fa Jing is done in a way the opponent should be able to ground, or shouldnt do much as far as a moving the opponent is concerned, yet the opponent is "uncontrolably" pushed back like 15 feet.

Now my question is, is that for real, or in every instance is the opponent playing along? The reason I asked, is because in practice, I havent seen someone pushed back more than 1 or 2 steps from being "pushed" in a good strong stance... Or is there something Im missing in MY practice or in the demonstrations?

Examples in this thread will show you the way that it really plays out:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57820

[Subitai]

No....actually, that is exactly where a "so called master" would prefer to strike. The stronger the resistance and the stronger the root, the better.

Now for a throw you might want to avoid his strong points but for a strike, angling it right into his strongest point of resistance is how you cause the most damage.

Well, I STRONGLY DISAGREE!!
I cause the most damage if strike my opponant when he is off balance or is empty of power. Besides, I didn't say trying to do damage, I said "WAVE HIS WRIST AND MAKE ME FLY BACKWARDS".

Bullsh!t, my original statement holds...there is no master out there that can make me FLY BACK OFF MY feet, if I put my direct structure against his strike. Mabe a step back, but NOT FLYING

ESPECIALLY IF ALL HE DOES IS WAVE HIS WRIST SLIGHTLY!!

That kind of thinking is exactly why MOST people can't use Tai Chi...

Never become lost and never go head on into your opponant.

** Never go HEAD ON against a strong Base.

** Allow your opponant to become "off balance", empty or weak... then hit him with all your power. That is the proper way. === Realistically it is the only way that a 100lb OLD LADY could make a 200lb man fly off his base.

[tiaji1983]

Earlier, when I said "good strong stance" I meant in relation to what the master was doing. I do understand that every stance has a weakness, and I do understand it is possible to defeat 1000 lbs of force with 4 oz. But, I am not sure that it is possible for someone to push someone 15 feet away when the person is in a stable position to defend against the oncoming force.

[omarthefish]

ooohh....I'm so impressed by your use of all caps to make your point. :cool:

You said, and I quote:

I.e. a master would never preffer to strike VS. an opponants strong point or Directly INTO that trajectory.
Emphasis mine. Your statement here, as written, makes no sense.

You also said, just now actually:

Bullsh!t, my original statement holds...there is no master out there that can make me FLY BACK OFF MY feet, if I put my direct structure against his strike. Mabe a step back, but NOT FLYING
That's true. You would need to throw a person or even just push them.

That is the difference between a push and a strike. One causes the person to move and the other causes them to break.

In order to cause damage with a strike, you really need to get the person to resist. That's just basic physics. When you throw a right hook, for example, and the person manages to offer you no resistance whatsoever (aka "rolls with the punch") then you don't do much (if any) damage. In contrast, if you hit him with even a fairly weak right hook right as he is turning his head to his own left (into your hook) a KO or broken jaw is a really good possibility.

The broken logic you offer here, this idea that a strong stance can protect you from getting hit, is exactly why typical Karate or TKD or even Kenpo guys of 10 years ago were totally sitting ducks against Thai Boxers. Taking a good strong stance as a way of defending against a leg kick is just begging for either a broken leg or at least a leg that is rendered useless for the next 5 minutes or so and kind of purple and black for the next week.

And incidentally:

...there is no master out there that can make me FLY BACK OFF MY feet, if I put my direct structure against his strike. Mabe a step back, but NOT FLYING

Good luck wit that.

[omarthefish]

Earlier, when I said "good strong stance" I meant in relation to what the master was doing. I do understand that every stance has a weakness, and I do understand it is possible to defeat 1000 lbs of force with 4 oz. But, I am not sure that it is possible for someone to push someone 15 feet away when the person is in a stable position to defend against the oncoming force.
Well you didn't present a specific example so we can only discuss it in the general.

I won't deny that many are fakes but there are many other examples where it is quite real. The key is in the part I highlighted. The first step to making someone fly back 15 feet like that is to remove their base. You destabilize their position. Then you get to borrow force. You take advantage of their deep instinct to correct their balance. To vastly over simplify the details, the person attempts to push you but instead of pushing back with your "strong stance" you yield to their push and suck them in. Right at the point where the person starts to semi-consciously panic (because they are falling over forward) and try to push them selves out of the situation, you help them along adding your push to their push and off the go "flying" 15 or more feet away.

One last detail people tend to miss:

If any Taiji master can send a 120 lb throwing dummy (less than a human body weight) back for 15 feet, that Taiji master will have some great skill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbNi19c_MRg
I disagree. That Taiji master would have great power but not necessarily a lot of skill. In the demos we are talking about, the person does not fly through the air like a shotput. That would be impressive. What generally happens is they fly back maybe a meter or so and then stumble back another 10 feet tripping over themselves while they try to regain their balance. If the legs of the person being pushed are doing all the work to support the guy against gravity, the push only needs to take care of the horizontal movement. The proper analogy is not throwing a 120lb. back 15 feet through the air. It is more like shoving a 120lb bag across an ice ring so that it slides 15 feet.

I'd say a similar effect happens all the time when people get thrown out of bars, especially when the bouncers have a decent running start. A drunk will get ejected and easily travel 10 or 15 feet from the door before he either falls over or stops stumbling.

[Knifefighter]

I'd say a similar effect happens all the time when people get thrown out of bars, especially when the bouncers have a decent running start. A drunk will get ejected and easily travel 10 or 15 feet from the door before he either falls over or stops stumbling.

Only happens in demos in which the participant is "helping" the instructor to make him look good. Doesn't happen to someone with half a clue. Again, all you have to do is watch the clips in the extreme push hands thread to see what really happens when you go against a resisting opponent.

[Subitai]

Earlier, when I said "good strong stance" I meant in relation to what the master was doing. I do understand that every stance has a weakness, and I do understand it is possible to defeat 1000 lbs of force with 4 oz. But, I am not sure that it is possible for someone to push someone 15 feet away when the person is in a stable position to defend against the oncoming force.



Ok, 1st of all it's Not "Defeat" 100lbs but "divert" or perhaps "redirect".


I love your last sentence cause that's the reality of your query...

[Subitai]

Originally Posted by Scott R. Brown

However, it is an unwise use of energy to attack a bow stance along its axis of stability/power. The weakest point of any stance is the apex of a triangle that is opposite the base, which is determined by drawing an imaginary line between the two feet. "snip"

Thank you Scott, that is exactly what I was getting at...finally someone who gets it!

*************************************


Omar you are so fricken cluess, Do you understand Tai Chi at all???

You're using Western Boxing as your model of experience??? Rolling the shoulder vs a hook is not Yielding into emptiness. In fact your example is poor because there is NO Stick point, no yin or yang exchange between you and your opponant. In your example you're just trying to dodge a blow.

Do you Understand what yeilding to emptiness means? It means that I wait untill your power is mostly dissapated before I attack. Thus you are Incredibly vulnerable when you get hit.


If I touch hands with you, and you Attack or you push and I suddenly yield so you loose balance.... It's at that exact moment, when YOU ARE AT YOUR WEAKEST that I will stike, with full power.


I never implied that strong stance protects you from a hit, I understand what you are saying about RESISTENCE, that concept is like hitting a heavy bag. I SAID... it makes it harder to MAKE A GUY FLY!!!

Your so Bass Akwards, I was the one NOT in favor of a strong stance to begin with....In order to make someone fly. I gave examples.

You seem to persist with this whole other idea. You don't want to talk about the original question...how to make a guy fly.

You want to argue about striking and whether that target is Strong or not. That's not my issue.

Its a seperate point: I think your wrong because in your own example, A Muay Thai round kick is going to hurt or break a guys leg whether he's in a strong stance OR ESPECIALLY IF HE'S OFF BALANCE when he gets hit. It happens all the time, in your own model:
Example 1 The dude is stunned with a punch...he's groggy, off balance and WHAMO he takes a leg kick. DONE!!! Example 2 I duck and slip a big over hand right, the guy is NOT IN A STRONG STANCE...he's just trying to recover from his miss. Blamo!!! Comes the counter punch!!





That was my point, making the guy vulnerable. It's different.






ooohh....I'm so impressed by your use of all caps to make your point. :cool:

You said, and I quote:

Emphasis mine. Your statement here, as written, makes no sense.

You also said, just now actually:

That's true. You would need to throw a person or even just push them.

That is the difference between a push and a strike. One causes the person to move and the other causes them to break.

In order to cause damage with a strike, you really need to get the person to resist. That's just basic physics. When you throw a right hook, for example, and the person manages to offer you no resistance whatsoever (aka "rolls with the punch") then you don't do much (if any) damage. In contrast, if you hit him with even a fairly weak right hook right as he is turning his head to his own left (into your hook) a KO or broken jaw is a really good possibility.

The broken logic you offer here, this idea that a strong stance can protect you from getting hit, is exactly why typical Karate or TKD or even Kenpo guys of 10 years ago were totally sitting ducks against Thai Boxers. Taking a good strong stance as a way of defending against a leg kick is just begging for either a broken leg or at least a leg that is rendered useless for the next 5 minutes or so and kind of purple and black for the next week.

And incidentally:


Good luck wit that.

[omarthefish]

You're using Western Boxing as your model of experience???

Using it as a model.

Rolling the shoulder vs a hook is not Yielding into emptiness.
Who said anything about "yielding into emptiness"? I am talking basic physics. That's why I used a generic example. Physics are universal.



In your example you're just trying to dodge a blow.
No. I am talking very specifically about a blow that lands. If it lands and you yield to it, then you dissipate the force. It's the difference between a rear end collision and a head on collision.


Do you Understand what yeilding to emptiness means? It means that I wait untill your power is mostly dissapated before I attack. Thus you are Incredibly vulnerable when you get hit.
Do you? I believe you have miss-quoted the idea you are trying to make a point about.


I never implied that strong stance protects you from a hit...
Oh really?

No, VS. that set up a guy shouldn't be thrown back. Especially if the so called master is doing such a no-no, IMO.

I.e. a master would never preffer to strike VS. an opponants strong point or Directly INTO that trajectory.
emphasis mine.

[tiaji1983]

Ok, 1st of all it's Not "Defeat" 100lbs but "divert" or perhaps "redirect".


I love your last sentence cause that's the reality of your query...


:D ok Im sorry to call out this particular post but the first reply confused me... If you successfully deflect an attack, didnt you in essence defeat it? If it has been deflected, it can no longer hit you. Either you must attack or they must attack again... The texts on Taijiquan are only understood after you fully know the skills, if not, they are very misleading to the laymen. Why must we quote them exactly?

Thank you for understanding, Im not the best at always getting my quote across.

[tiaji1983]

a really really good player will be able to send u back very far, very easily. the far-thest i was ever tossed in air was just a mere 7 or 8 feet, but that was 7 or 8 feet through the air until landing. and it didnt feel like anything except maybe like a large breeze just picked me up and moved me.
and i didnt even give much force to be manipulated.

there are indeed a lot of fakery(if that is even a word), and a lot of exaggerations. and also ways to cheat and kinda set this up - but these are different. play with the right people and this type of skill isnt so uncommon.

btw, the auto-censoring on here is terrible and doesnt even allow some "clean" words, in case u noticed why "far-thest" is written that way.

I heard that before from semi experienced players that wouldnt yet be called masters, (not that Im doubting your skill, or saying you claim to be a master, just stating who I heard that from). When you were tossed in the air 7 or 8 feet, were you already off balance before you were tossed? Did the master do something subtle to upset your foundation? Or do you feel there was something more? Was it Qi? Do you feel you can repeat it or know how to repeat it even if you havent accomplished it yet?

Really? not uncommon? Where do you train?

Im sorry if I sound rude or condesending, Im not trying to, I really want to understand this so if its something I am missing I can learn how. I been told the secret is in the Kua and rooting, but I have played around with variations of both, and cannot create anything similar unless the opponent is already off balance.

[tiaji1983]

subitai and omar the fish...

To me it seems you are both right....

Omarthefish: For a strike as in punch, kick, dim mak, to be effective and cause the most physical harm, its best to strike a point that has stability to cause penetration. just like its pointless to stand up a 4x4 piece of wood with nothing supporting it and trying to hammer in a nail on one of its sides...

Subitai: If the opponent is off balance, and you strike, it will off balance them further and the force of your strike mixed with thier body wieght in that direction will surely send them to the ground or an object a few feet away. Also if someone attacks and the force is redirected, the force has to go that direction until something stops it, while it is going that direction it leaves the opponent open to attack.

Neither one of you are wrong, just offering 2 different true points and attacking the other for not understanding the other point, when Im sure you both truly understand. Im sorry for intruding on your conversation but it seems counterproductive. Pls let me know if Im misunderstanding either of your points or missing something.

[Subitai]

Nice try, I did not misquote. .

You quote me on this...

I.e. a master would never preffer to strike VS. an opponants strong point or Directly INTO that trajectory.

And in your own words, you read this and think i'm saying
"a Strong stance will protect you from getting hit"

Project you own thoughts onto other people much?

Once again, you just don't like it that I preffer to strike someone when they are weak. It's ok to disagree but stay with me on this.
I'm talking about answering Taiji1983's question about making a guy fly and you are hung up on the strike deal.



Soooooooooo back to the question that I was trying to answer
Originally Posted by tiaji1983
If someone has a good bow stance, and you push straight into the front, where the stance is more stable, that shouldnt happen, right?


Let me teach you something you may not realize yet:

In the context of Tai Chi, if someone is NOT in a good stance (ala off balance) when they are HIT... then they can be thrown back with a Strike OR a Push.

Basic example: "Press" in Tai Chi can be used as a Strike, a Push or steady pressure. Depends on how violent you want it to be. But it will not make a guy fly back if you attack straight into his power.

If I yield and make my opponant stumble slightly forward and I HIT (or strike or push) him at a line perpendicular to where his feet are on the floor...ala his weakest angle. He can easily be made to fly backwards.


This was the question at hand: Taiji 1983 asked about a GOOD STANCE. I was telling him NOT to attack in that power line. It's common Tai Chi Theory.



P.S. And yes I can do this vs resisting people (but it's stand up close fighting or stand up grappling) Of course impossible if it goes to the ground. Anyway, the end result is never a 15 foot Fly back like in the movies. Thats for Movies and for demos. But 2 or 3 steps is very possible and even better if they trip and fall down. Which also happens depending on if your around furniture for example. Haha

[tiaji1983]

"Let me teach you something you may not realize yet:

In the context of Tai Chi, if someone is NOT in a good stance (ala off balance) when they are HIT... then they can be thrown back with a Strike OR a Push.

Basic example: "Press" in Tai Chi can be used as a Strike, a Push or steady pressure. Depends on how violent you want it to be. But it will not make a guy fly back if you attack straight into his power.

If I yield and make my opponant stumble slightly forward and I HIT (or strike or push) him at a line perpendicular to where his feet are on the floor...ala his weakest angle. He can easily be made to fly backwards. "

Was that one directed towards me or Omar?

If it was, thats something Ive heard called "the seret of lines." basically there is a weak spot to any structure. If you strike the weak spot, you off balance the structure. a simple example could be either, if you access the opponent and push towards you on thier lower back, and away from you on their chest, they will lose balance and fall, or to you use bump to a good strong bow, you just need to access thier centerline and sink as you bump.

But if that wasnt directed towards me, sorry for responding...

[omarthefish]

Nice try, I did not misquote. .

You quote me on this...


And in your own words, you read this and think i'm saying

"a Strong stance will protect you from getting hit"

Project you own thoughts onto other people much?
lol. Thanks for proving my point about the projection. Now go back and find the post where I said that. ;) You can't. You know why? Because I only think you said that in your imagination. You are arguing with yourself.



I'm talking about answering Taiji1983's question about making a guy fly and you are hung up on the strike deal.

No I actually wrote a nice long post responding to that part. I'm just trying to draw out what you actually are trying to stay because you are communicating so unclearly and, more than that, because I don't like having your moronic ideas shoved into my mouth. Ideas like your fantasy that I was answering the question with a reference to some section from the Taiji classics or that I was making some ridiculous irrelevant argument that "a strong stance will protect you from getting hit".

Btw, there is no Taiji principle of "yield into emptiness". :p




In the context of Tai Chi, if someone is NOT in a good stance (ala off balance) when they are HIT... then they can be thrown back with a Strike OR a Push.

Basic example: "Press" in Tai Chi can be used as a Strike, a Push or steady pressure. Depends on how violent you want it to be. But it will not make a guy fly back if you attack straight into his power.

If I yield and make my opponant stumble slightly forward and I HIT (or strike or push) him at a line perpendicular to where his feet are on the floor...ala his weakest angle. He can easily be made to fly backwards.

This was the question at hand: Taiji 1983 asked about a GOOD STANCE. I was telling him NOT to attack in that power line. It's common Tai Chi Theory.
Two problems with your theory.

1. You are pretending that pushing or throwing is the same as striking. The implication is that a strike is just a fast push. That is only true if you are practicing an empty form in the air. As soon as you are in relationship with another person, what makes for an effective push/throw is very different from what makes for an effective strike. The difference is in what tiaji1983 alluded to with the example of driving a nail into a 2x4.

2. As you get a better, your stance becomes less and less relevant. If you must keep using only Taiji specific examples (which I was trying to avoid) then you could go to a little demo I like to use to demonstrate to martial artists who have never been exposed to Taiji what the difference is. I'm not even very good, just good enough to do the demo. Generally I like to take a nice classic bow stance and challenge them to push me back by pushing along that strongest line of force, the one running from my chest to my back leg. That is exhibit A; it's my example of how they probably already understand what is meant by "a strong stance". Then I like to stand normally, feet shoulders width apart and invited them to try to push me back off that weakest line, the one that Scott described earlier. That's exhibit B. For that one, I use my arms to push the pusher a little bit, or pull them into me or whatever and adjust my body and neutralize their push using what little Taiji I know. To date, I have never met anyone without some sort of IMA training who could push me off me feet using the "weak stance". Remember, no sweeps or real grappling, just pushing. It's a demo, not a fight.

I'm gonna hate myself in the morning for saying this but.....*gdmmit*....Taiji principles are designed to work best from a point of weakness.

As an aside to someone else I know is probably reading this thread:
*you know who you are.....just don't....don't say it....*

[Subitai]

Ok Omar,

You are backpedaling now and you loose.


UM...On page 2 of this thread Post # 24... is where said: :
The broken logic you offer here, this idea that a strong stance can protect you from getting hit, is exactly why typical Karate or TKD or even Kenpo guys of 10 years ago were totally sitting ducks against Thai Boxers. Taking a good strong stance as a way of defending against a leg kick is just begging for either a broken leg or at least a leg that is rendered useless for the next 5 minutes or so and kind of purple and black for the next week.


So EAT man and you got it wrong and I just proved it. I was NOT saying that NOR implying that at all.


Theres nothing to draw out, I said something that doesn't Jive with your little world of striking. We can do this all day. And yes there is "Yield into Emptiness", the concept was passed to me by my own Sifu Years ago. "There are many ways to skin a cat"


There are no holes in my theory, Because i've done what I said I can do. Everything I do is hands on and tested. There are still many things I can't do...but on this point your clueless. Once again your obsessed with "Striking". But my previous post blew you out of the water and you didn't counter. If you lack experience with what i'm saying then, it's your problem.

The "Press" (PUSH or STRIKE) I spoke of was in terms of Kocking the guy back....Prefferably when he's in a weak stance. NOT whether a strike was Faster or better or equil to a push. Do you have A.D.D.???


In your last example 2, ala weak stance: HAHA, I've met so many people who think they can stand like that and they get pushed back off thier stance. It's called finding and Getting to the other persons center and i'm pretty darn good at it.

If nobody could do it to you, it's either because they don't attack your center, they either chase your arms or they plain suck. It's the easiest thing to defeat since you can't move your feet. You probably had Pu$$ies trying to push you on your shoulders. For peets sake, all you have to do it reach down (double hands and attack the dan tien) BOOM your gone. And you couldn't stop me from doing that. Because you can't move, i'll flow and follow your energy until I get you.

If we ever met and I couldn't knock you back off your weak stance i'd GIVE you my pride and joy....MY BASS BOAT!!!


Lastly :
I'm gonna hate myself in the morning for saying this but.....*gdmmit*....Taiji principles are designed to work best from a point of weakness.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :p

[omarthefish]

Theres nothing to draw out, I said something that doesn't Jive with your little world of striking. We can do this all day. And yes there is "Yield into Emptiness", the concept was passed to me by my own Sifu Years ago.
Nope. You are misquoting the saying. I can provide a citation of the correct passage from the Taiji classics if you like. The term is "lead". That's a very different concept from "yielding". They are both related but not the same.



The "Press" (PUSH or STRIKE) I spoke of was in terms of Kocking the guy back....Prefferably when he's in a weak stance. NOT whether a strike was Faster or better or equil to a push.
I have not made an argument for what's better. I am simply pointing out that they are different. If you have knocked the guy back, then, pretty much by definition, that's a push.

Again, no need to go grasping at Taiji secrets here. The whole point of a strike is to break something. The point of a push is to move it. It's obviously not a binary thing and any impact can be more of a strike or more of a push but depending on what you want to do, you're approach should be different. That's just common sense.



In your last example 2, ala weak stance: HAHA, I've met so many people who think they can stand like that and they get pushed back off thier stance. It's called finding and Getting to the other persons center and i'm pretty darn good at it.
Hiding your center is not particularly important for that exercise. Giving the pusher direct access to your center can be a very useful way of uprooting them and tossing them off to the side. Your center becomes the lever under the middle of a seesaw and you just lever them over it. Like I said, so far it's only been people with IMA experience who can push me over. If I were to add grabbing and leg attacks in then I expect an average Judoka would have no problem either but I keep the demo simple in order to demonstrate the point which is basically:

There is no such thing as a strong stance.

All that counts is your ability to change. Dynamic balance is what counts. "Strong stances" are, in the big picture, not very useful.

It's the easiest thing to defeat since you can't move your feet. You probably had Pu$$ies trying to push you on your shoulders. For peets sake, all you have to do it reach down (double hands and attack the dan tien) BOOM your gone.
Yes. That's what most people think. It's like a party trick. Really, all you have to do to neutralize a dan tian push is to lift up under the elbows of the person pushing. If you have a little basic understanding of joint locks then you can do even better and pull them in towards yourself and create a joint lock on their hands and fingers.

Hiding your center is irrelevant.
Strong stances are irrelevant and focusing on them too much reduces agility.

[omarthefish]

p.s.


In your last example 2, ala weak stance: HAHA, I've met so many people who think they can stand like that and they get pushed back off thier stance. It's called finding and Getting to the other persons center and i'm pretty darn good at it.


It's quite possible that you could do that to me. If we met, I would definitely want to test it. As I did say, no one who has not trained in IMA
has been able to push me over in that test yet. I checked your profile and you list Taiji as a style and the link in your sig suggests that you even teach it so it could be an interesting challenge.

I use the exercise as a lesson for non Taiji people but also as a test for actual Taij people....to see if they have any taiji skill.

So it could be fun.

[Subitai]

Ok, #1 I got you, #2 I disagree, #3 No argument and lastly :p:p:p:p:p:p I think that pretty much covers it.

YOU CHALLENGED ME to find what you wrote and I did. DONE!! :p

FOR me...The purpose of a strike is not to break, but simply to penetrate the target with as much velocity and power as you can. Just like if I train heavy bag... It is a tool for power development. And you must NOT JUST hit the surface but PENETRATE the bag as if you could go through it.

However, If you strike a guy when he's off balance, he can be made to fall back and stumble. I know cause I kocked people back when Striking.


Like you said about your weak stance trick, it's a party trick and yes I do have IMA training. The goal for most Push hands IS TO CONTROL the center. So if your able to just give your center to someone and they can't succeed by countering you. They suck. For peets sakes, at that point you've already done your opponant a huge favor.


Strong stances, (Which again by the way I was NOT in favor of)......Are usefull but in small snapshots of time. It's like looking at frames on a roll of film.
The term Horse or "Ma" (romanization) reffers to a Horse. And a Horse is not a static standing still animal, it likes to run and move. So if your saying what I think your saying, I agree with you and we have no argument there....We never did.

You've pretty much admited that Tai Chi is not your strong suite so I don't know who your trying to convince here...surely not me.

Oh and by the way... I love your quote below :):):)


I'm gonna hate myself in the morning for saying this but.....*gdmmit*....Taiji principles are designed to work best from a point of weakness.

[omarthefish]

Seem to have lost my last response to the mysteries of the interwebs....here we go again....


YOU CHALLENGED ME to find what you wrote and I did. DONE!!
Yes. I can see that I quoted you in a way that you feel misrepresented what you were trying to say. Then I will rephrase it to say that you seem to be arguing that a strong stance will protect you from the effects of getting hit, a "stance" (forgive the pun) that I feel is untenable.

Ok, #1 I got you, #2 I disagree, #3 No argument and lastly I think that pretty much covers it.

Since I didn't number my points of include bullet points, could you clarify? The whole post isn't necessary, just an opening sentence from each point or brief recap.

However, If you strike a guy when he's off balance, he can be made to fall back and stumble. I know cause I kocked people back when Striking.

That can certainly happen but simple physics will tell you that their stumbling back is having the effect of dissipating the force of your strike. It looks dramatic but is indicative of a smaller percentage of the force of your strike being transferred to the target. Think of it this way...compare hitting 2 different people with a side kick. The first person is standing in the middle of the room. You kick him so hard he flies through the air a meter or so back and lands on his ass. The second person is standing with his back against the wall when you kick him. . . .

One of those two people is going to be hurting a lot more than the other.

Rooting, strong stance. Anything at all that keeps you in place is going to increase the damage you take when you get hit.

You've pretty much admited that Tai Chi is not your strong suite so I don't know who your trying to convince here...surely not me.
No. I actually haven't. You have read your own ideas into my post. I have made a point of avoiding Taiji theories when possible because an argument is stronger when it is based on universal assumptions. If I framed everything in terms of Taijiquan, then it would only hold water to that small percentage of people who make the a priori assumption that Taiji principles are absolute. Since the original topic is about wether or not certain kinds of Taiji demonstrations are fake, arguing from a set of base assumptions that come from within the Taiji cannon would be presenting a form of circular logic. So I have intentionally stepped outside of IMA theory in order to present a stronger case.

That being said, I will now, at this point in time, admit, that Taiji is not my strong suite. My primary art is Bajiquan. I train taiji as well but am not nearly as good at it as I am at Baji. Bajiquan, ironically, operates from a set of ideas contradictory to what I have been arguing for on this thread. I can argue that point as well but at the end of the day, even though I mainly train Baji and am much better at it, I can still step outside of that paradigm and objectively analyze what I am doing. From that perspective, IMO, Taijiquan is based on a more highly refined understanding of physics and physiology than Baji is.

[YouKnowWho]

That is the difference between a push and a strike. One causes the person to move and the other causes them to break.
That's the difference between a push and a throw. One causes the person to move and the other causes them to fall. Since "push" is neither strike nor throw, I truly don't know why we need to train it.

I don't think we should re-define CMA as kick, punch, push, lock, and throw.

[Subitai]

True Omar I made an assumption of your skill in Taiji,

But only cause of your post # 35,

Snip...
That's exhibit B. For that one, I use my arms to push the pusher a little bit, or pull them into me or whatever and adjust my body and neutralize their push using what little Taiji I know.

You know what they say about making assumptions right? :)

Lastly, I focused more on the Taiji point of view, mostly because if you read the original post / query that started this whole deal it's pretty obvious.

It's a taiji forum question, asked by a guy who does Taiji, asking about Taiji demonstrations and using Taiji terminology.



Haha,
"O"

[omarthefish]

That's the difference between a push and a throw. One causes the person to move and the other causes them to fall. Since "push" is neither strike nor throw, I truly don't know why we need to train it.

From a physics standpoint, I think a push is part of a throw. It's funny that people say a push is just a slow strike because I think of it, nowadays anyways, as more of an incomplete throw. As you have pointed out yourself at times, "press" combined with leg hooking is a very nice throw. That is how I was taught to use Xingyi's "hu pu"/tiger pouncing/虎扑。


True Omar I made an assumption of your skill in Taiji,

But only cause of your post # 35
When you train with a guy who has been doing Taiji for roughly 60 years, it puts your own understanding of it into perspective. I talk about Taiji online a lot more than Baji and worry sometimes that I will over represent where I stand with the art. I am probably really more qualified to talk about Baji but there is just less to talk about.

As far as the context of the original question, sticking to a strictly Taij point of view would be pointless. From a "taiji point of view" there is nothing whatsoever suspect about demos where the guy is "uncontrolably" pushed back like 15 feet. The only way it makes sense to evaluate whether something being done within the style is legit or not is to step outside of the context of the style and see if it still makes sense. I do not believe that there is anything in Taijiquan that allows you to break the laws of physics. Getting back to that original post:

In a lot of demonstrations that some people call Fa Jing or the Taiji Punch, they do a punch or a simple movement and the opponent moves back 15 feet. I understand that would be very easy to do if the opponent was off balance or attempting a step in either direction, or was retreating, you basically just follow their energy and add your own energy to it, with of course sinking and using the earth to push them away. Now I have seen some presentations, when the person being hit or pushed is in a strong stance, not moving, perfectly stable.
Really have to evaluate each instance specifically. I have seen plenty of demos where people cried fake where if you slowed down the video you could see what happened was pretty normal. Look at this clip of Wang Peisheng doing some stuff that looks, at first blush, pretty fake:

Pay special attention to the technique at 3:18

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRlS3fBR2k0

[KTS]

tiaji1983. well, i only cited one example that was clear from memory. but about 8 feet through the air is correct.

so who threw me? a fairly well known guy from taiwan. known mostly for his baguazhang.

how i felt? well, it didnt really feel anything. i was expanding on some basic single palm change work we had just done. i started to check his front knee with mine while doing a fairly simple pattern. and, without feeling much at all, i got tossed upwards and backwards while spinning on an angle. i now have an idea what he did. but he did it so well it was not very detectable at that time.

kua, or root, or qi? i wouldnt say it is only one thing. but, tossing about a person seems a bit less spectacular for me now - except when done so cleanly u hardly can do anything about it. of course it is too late at that time unless u break a point. but, for it to happen cleanly, well it is amazing. like you get picked up by a giant gust of wind. so, you feel you think there is something else to it besides simply unbalancing a person? sure. there is - dont try to actually "lift" a person upwards.

[tiaji1983]

tiaji1983. well, i only cited one example that was clear from memory. but about 8 feet through the air is correct.

so who threw me? a fairly well known guy from taiwan. known mostly for his baguazhang.

how i felt? well, it didnt really feel anything. i was expanding on some basic single palm change work we had just done. i started to check his front knee with mine while doing a fairly simple pattern. and, without feeling much at all, i got tossed upwards and backwards while spinning on an angle. i now have an idea what he did. but he did it so well it was not very detectable at that time.

kua, or root, or qi? i wouldnt say it is only one thing. but, tossing about a person seems a bit less spectacular for me now - except when done so cleanly u hardly can do anything about it. of course it is too late at that time unless u break a point. but, for it to happen cleanly, well it is amazing. like you get picked up by a giant gust of wind. so, you feel you think there is something else to it besides simply unbalancing a person? sure. there is - dont try to actually "lift" a person upwards.

I learned a technique today where they grab your arms, you sink, send your Qi behind them or over their head, and as you shift your wieght forward, you use your shifting of weight to push your hands up, and had success throwing people that had no idea what I was doing and was resisting 6-8 feet back. Is that a similar technique? or is it more subtly pushing off balance and then fajing, as in gently pushing the chest with the palm and quickly shifting to Peng?

[omarthefish]

No. Not exactly. . . although that kind of visualization may help.

When someone flies through the air like KTS described they have to have been tricked into cooperating. I don't mean NLP or subconscious belief systems or anything. I mean they get set up. As has been pointed out, throwing 150lbs of dead weight through the air, 7 or 8 feet, is a feat of strength beyond most of the people doing that stuff in push hands. A better analogy is the kind of throw that happens all the time on the dance floor at any decent lindy hop. In the lindy hop, the two people do it on purpose and for that reason, those who can do it, can do it consistently and on cue. In push hands, it's the same dynamic only only the follow and the lead are reversed.

You push on a person and they yield and lead you in, drawing you forward past your base. Right at the moment you are extended forward in your push absolutely as far as you were prepared to go, the person pushes back. This back push has to be timed perfectly with your own push so that the two pushes form a compression like a spring in the middle except that at that moment where the spring uncompresses, only one of you is still rooted.

I find it really hard to describe the physics but anyone who has ever done a lindy move where the girl sort of flies into the guys arms and then springs away (with an extra boost from the guy) will know the thing I am talking about. The guy effectively "throws" his partner so far out the only thing stopping her from traveling more than 2 meters through the air is that they are still holding hands.

Once you get that sort of elastic connection going like you get in partner dancing, some pretty whacky stuff can happen. Dancers do it on purpose. Push hands guys sometimes can trick you into doing it unconciously.

About 1:27 on this clip you get the energy happening:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAh5dJ3T4vI&feature=related

;D

[tiaji1983]

thank you. makes sense, but essentially your using thier retreat against them, or the completion of thier movement still, right?

[YouKnowWho]

your using thier retreat against them,...

It's better to use your opponent's resisting than his retreating.

[omarthefish]

I think I agree on that.

It seems like it would be easier to throw them back when they are retreating but to get someone to really fly you need to do something trickier than that. They fly the ****hest when you manage to combine your push with theirs.

I think your second thought is more on target. You coordinate with the completion of their movement.

Shifu has kind of walked me through it so I could feel the mechanics from the side of the person sending someone flying but I can't generally do it on the fly. It was like you have to draw the person out to their point of maximum extension for whatever move they are applying. Lead them out right to the point where another millimeter of advancement and they would have to either take a step or be seriously off balanced forward. Then right as their weight starts to fall foward you sort of catch it and push back. They will instinctively push on you based on the same instinct that makes you throw your hands out forward if you trip. Then you combine your push with their push and ...voila!

Easier said than done.

[YouKnowWho]

You have to give before you can take. If you pull your opponent into you, the harder that he resists, the easier for you to borrow his force, add your push, and throw him back. Sometime when your opponent resists so hard, you just release your grip, your opponent's body will fly back like a bird. Again, if you don't like to "grab" then this approcah may not fit you need.

[Subitai]

Oh my friggin' GOODNESS OMAR.... Now your talking more like me...HELLO???????


The reason I spoke about "leading a person into emptiness" , was entirely so that you can have the different options of what to do to your opponant.

The example your sifu walked you through was just ONE of a few ways to USE the concept. Strike, throw, Lock, push...or eventually to make someone fly.
I didn't go into more detail cause you were caught up on striking.

Can I get some F#$king credit around here for bring up this concept early in the thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pulling my hair out reading this crap

Ahh forget this... Good Luck tiaji1983 trying to get a straight answer around here.

[omarthefish]

Sorry I couldn't be bothered to conform to your preconceptions about my views.

I got on you about "leading into emptiness" because you called it "yielding" rather that "leading" and the two concepts are different enough to make a huge difference in application.

And, oh yeah, you're still wrong about everything. :p

[YouKnowWho]

"leading into emptiness" because you called it "yielding" rather that "leading" and the two concepts are different enough to make a huge difference in application.
There is difference between these 2 approaches. When you "yield", you have to wait for your opponent to attack first. Your opportunity and timing are controlled by your opponent. If you "lead", then everything is under your control.

Instead of "if you do A then I'll do B", I prefer "if I do A then I want to see what you are going to do." The difference is I can do A whenever I want to. That will give me a lot of freedom. I don't have to wait for you to do A.

[Subitai]

So we're down to Nah nah nah boo boo now?

Omar, You're worse than a politician...flip flop and switch all you want. Where is all your strike talk vs Hardness now???? All this talk about yielding and leading and blah blah. Wow why are you so involved in that now? Hmmmm, I was already there from the get go.

You say potato I say potato... My school says this way, yours says that.

I don't care what you call it, If you're just getting this info from your sifu then I Know why you can't comprehend it yet. YOUR WRONG!!! haha

and by the way...



I'm gonna hate myself in the morning for saying this but.....*gdmmit*....Taiji principles are designed to work best from a point of weakness.


As to the comment on leading...

The problem with Leading in the CONTEXT OF PUSH HANDS is that if you are taking control in any way... then you are also giving your opponant a better chance to listen and counter. It's not ideal.

True greatness comes from when your opponant gives it to you and he doesn't know why or how he screwed up until it's too late. If you take control, it's lower level because you leave clues.

If you don't understand this, then it's because by your own admission that TC is not your strongest point.

[omarthefish]

So we're down to Nah nah nah boo boo now?

Omar, You're worse than a politician...flip flop and switch all you want. Where is all your strike talk vs Hardness now???? All this talk about yielding and leading and blah blah. Wow why are you so involved in that now? Hmmmm, I was already there from the get go.
I haven't changed my position on that. If you want to hit someone, it is definitely best to hit them when they are well planted. Falling into the hit is good too of course. It's when they are able to be thrown back that the hit does less damage. That's not martial arts, it's physics.



You say potato I say potato... My school says this way, yours says that.

I don't care what you call it, If you're just getting this info from your sifu then I Know why you can't comprehend it yet. YOUR WRONG!!! haha

YouKnowWho pointed out just now how it is not simply potato vs. potato. I didn't actually take this particular line from my Shifu. The wording is taking directly from the Chinese terms used in the classics. They talk a lot about "yin"/引/lead. There is a term in Chinese for "yielding" too, rang/让 but it doesn't show up much in those old poems because of the problems that YouKnowWho identified just now.



The problem with Leading in the CONTEXT OF PUSH HANDS is that if you are taking control in any way... then you are also giving your opponant a better chance to listen and counter. It's not ideal.
Wang Zongyue, Yang Jianhou, Yang Banhou, Wu Yuxian and the rest all those guys beg to differ.


If you don't understand this, then it's because by your own admission that TC is not your strongest point.
I readily admit that it is not my strongest point so I am not making appeals to my own authority. I wouldn't expect anyone to agree with my view on this just because I said so. That is why I continue to base my arguments on either simple physics or, if I must appeal to authority, I appeal the the one's most generally recognized with regards to Taiji strategy and tactics, the one's in the classics.

Your still wrong and your a weener. :p

[tiaji1983]

ok I see what yall are saying as far as leading and at the end of thier force use your own. The issue is how do you lead someone who is trained to overextend forward? Could anyone give me an example? Now I can understand pulling them forward and as they resist, strike/push/etc, but how would you lead them forward if they are good at keeping thier center?

[YouKnowWho]

but how would you lead them forward if they are good at keeping thier center?

When you "pull (lead)" your opponent, you will give him 2 choices, either resist against your force, or yield along with your force. In either cases, you can borrow his force to against him.

[tiaji1983]

When you "pull (lead)" your opponent, you will give him 2 choices, either resist against your force, or yield along with your force. In either cases, you can borrow his force to against him.

Ok I get you now. For some reason I thought you mean lead as in some crazy a$$ mind games to make them over extend themselves. :p thanks for clearing that up

[YouKnowWho]

crazy a$$ mind games

I don't believe in "fairy tale".

[omarthefish]

ok I see what yall are saying as far as leading and at the end of thier force use your own. The issue is how do you lead someone who is trained to overextend forward? Could anyone give me an example? Now I can understand pulling them forward and as they resist, strike/push/etc, but how would you lead them forward if they are good at keeping thier center?

Oh . . .you want to know how to apply a technique on someone who is better at it than you are. :(

May as well ask, "How do I punch a person in the face who is really good at keeping their guard up."

p.s.

Although I agree with YouKnowWho on the surface, in my case, I do mean crazy a$$ mind games. Getting back to the original purpose of the thread, that is, IMO, one of the things you train in push hands. And getting even more out there, if you are not playing "mind games" then it is not "internal" and one third of the triumvarite that defines "internal" is "the mind".

[tiaji1983]

Oh . . .you want to know how to apply a technique on someone who is better at it than you are. :(

May as well ask, "How do I punch a person in the face who is really good at keeping their guard up."

p.s.

Although I agree with YouKnowWho on the surface, in my case, I do mean crazy a$$ mind games. Getting back to the original purpose of the thread, that is, IMO, one of the things you train in push hands. And getting even more out there, if you are not playing "mind games" then it is not "internal" and one third of the triumvarite that defines "internal" is "the mind".

Lol no, not what I meant at all... In my school were taught not to lean and not to overextend the attack. There are other ways to connect or to off balance without overextending. I was asking that because it was stated when the overextend you use force against thier force to create a spring to push them back. My question was how do you get someone who is trained to overextend. I figured they were referring to a specific technique. An example being kick towards the groin to bring thier attention down and punch them in the face (mind game)... Which was cleared up that was not what they were talking about.

[Subitai]

Lol no, not what I meant at all... In my school were taught not to lean and not to overextend the attack. There are other ways to connect or to off balance without overextending. I was asking that because it was stated when the overextend you use force against thier force to create a spring to push them back. My question was how do you get someone who is trained to overextend. I figured they were referring to a specific technique. An example being kick towards the groin to bring thier attention down and punch them in the face (mind game)... Which was cleared up that was not what they were talking about.

Tiaji1983, it's different when it's your own people vs eachother. But go out to parks and seek out strange people YOU"VE NEVER TOUCHED HANDS WITH. Only then you'll have a true measure of how good you are.

Most people in Tai Chi that reach a high enough level will begin to seek eachother out. It's essential to test themselves. It is in those situations when you'll learn the most.

That is what I try to do the most in a year, touch hands with as many as are willing. I personally HAVE TO, because I cannot hide behind being an Old Chinese dude that nobody dares to challenge. Nope, all my seminars I have to pick the biggest dude for example and prove I can make it work. It puts me on the front lines all the time. I kinda hate it though..I can't relax.

So anyway,
1st of all if you're all from the same school you all know your own methodology.

2nd, patience...but if the person will not give, then he neither learns to receive. Someone has to give somewhat or learning will not take place.

That is a common thing you see begginers do...stick point, circle with peng envolved and never bring to fruition the true point of it all.

"A" should desire to push at or attack "B"s center, if "B" blocks, then that's not really good TC at all. If "B" wards off with Peng envolved (of course it works well) but the point can be missed sometimes. Why...Because A never practiced letting himself go to the point of emptiness (For practice i.e., not that you should)

It is only then at that moment, when you are at the limit of your comfort zone but not truely Overextended that you have no choice but to receive and learn from your opponant.

This is one of many basic drills with various energies:
One pushes, one yields and one redirects at the end of the energy curve (Good knowledge of footwork and directions is a must)....then repeat in the other direction.

IF i'm "A" and I never learn to feel empty, I truely never know what's it's like to be vulnerable and then it's only playing safe.

IF i'm "B" and I never learn to Allow my opponant to finish the direction of his energy ala push, then I never learn to absorb. I'm only interrupting and his energy and playing it safe.

[Subitai]

And Omar,

All this started because you accused me of having "broken Logic" which is pretty obvious was not the case.


by Omar, The broken logic you offer here, this idea that a strong stance can protect you from getting hit, is exactly why typical Karate or TKD or even Kenpo guys of 10 years ago were totally sitting ducks against Thai Boxers. Taking a good strong stance as a way of defending against a leg kick is just begging for either a broken leg or at least a leg that is rendered useless for the next 5 minutes or so and kind of purple and black for the next week.



by Omar, I'm gonna hate myself in the morning for saying this but.....*gdmmit*....Taiji principles are designed to work best from a point of weakness.

HELLO??? CRUX of my argument!!

And now you've finally got off your striking high horse and are discussing a Tai Chi question on a TC forum by a member with a Taiji Psuedonym. Kudos for you for getting back to the discussion.

As far as i'm concerned, I win.

I love you too Omar :)

[tiaji1983]

Tiaji1983, it's different when it's your own people vs eachother. But go out to parks and seek out strange people YOU"VE NEVER TOUCHED HANDS WITH. Only then you'll have a true measure of how good you are.



My goal of posting on this thread is not to realize how good I am. My goal is to learn what is real and what is not with the demonstrations people do, and how to do them, which Im learning. I used my own people as an example as I dont know how any of you train in your schools, so I had no one else to reference.

I am ready to test out my skills, but I will let it happen in its own time or Ill test myself on the streets when its time where I HAVE to test myself.

[omarthefish]

And now you've finally got off your striking high horse and are discussing a Tai Chi question on a TC forum by a member with a Taiji Psuedonym. Kudos for you for getting back to the discussion.
I'm on the same horse I rode in on. Didn't realize my horse was high but that figures. I mean heck, just check out the rider:

http://lh3.ggpht.com/__HKVaUYUxJg/S88ZjYAKUqI/AAAAAAAACz4/RDipCv12IwI/168798953_09b39d25c0_o.jpg



As far as i'm concerned, I win.

Just don't forget what they say about arguing on the internet. . .

[YouKnowWho]

In my school were taught not to lean...

If you throw a $100 bill on the ground, even Taiji master Yang Lu-Chan will lean. We lean to use our weight and borrow the gravity to give ourbody the initial momentum that we will need to perform certain body function.

Old CMA masters leaned all the time.

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/7383/diaginoalstrike.jpg

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6184/oldpic21.jpg

http://ensomartialarts.com/articles/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Wujianchuan.jpg

http://www.askt.it/Images/7bu05_b.jpg

[Subitai]

My goal of posting on this thread is not to realize how good I am. My goal is to learn what is real and what is not with the demonstrations people do, and how to do them, which Im learning. I used my own people as an example as I dont know how any of you train in your schools, so I had no one else to reference.

I am ready to test out my skills, but I will let it happen in its own time or Ill test myself on the streets when its time where I HAVE to test myself.



Tiaji1983, please don't take my comments as anything other than a friendly suggestion.

I never said, go get into fights... Given the right places, you'll find groups of old dudes playing Mah Jong, drinking tea, smoking lots of cigarets and Yes doing Push hands. (Not necessarily in that order) These dudes love to play and will teach you allot.

Have I not...for the most part stuck to your original question? I gave my own examples and opinions to try and help you and as such contributed.

I only suggested for you go out to places like parks (in San Francisco or NY for example) because it's in places like that, I have benefited greatly and I thought the same for you.

As to Omar, I never intended to engage him...not till he accused me out of the blue of "Broken Logic". It's the only reason I argued back.

There was no reason to separate Yield from Lead anyway, that didn't put a damper on me at all. Both are viable and although we may differ in opinion as to which is better, it only supports me further.

Why? Because by me giving my prefference to yield, it still proves that I gave an example and tried to answer your question.

"O"

[tiaji1983]

Tiaji1983, please don't take my comments as anything other than a friendly suggestion.

I never said, go get into fights... Given the right places, you'll find groups of old dudes playing Mah Jong, drinking tea, smoking lots of cigarets and Yes doing Push hands. (Not necessarily in that order) These dudes love to play and will teach you allot.

Have I not...for the most part stuck to your original question? I gave my own examples and opinions to try and help you and as such contributed.

I only suggested for you go out to places like parks (in San Francisco or NY for example) because it's in places like that, I have benefited greatly and I thought the same for you.

"O"

Ok well thank you for your suggestions. :) I heard of places like that, unfortunately there are none around here. I live in the desert. There are some yahoos that teach "taichi" around here, but the better ones learned from my teacher, some make up their own garbage, and others Ive never seen in action but heard they were "ify." But yes I will take your suggestions to heart, and maybe go push hands (to keep it friendly) with some of those students/teachers in the other schools... we'll see.

And thank you for answering my questions to the best of your ability :D I appreciate your help.

[tiaji1983]

If you throw a $100 bill on the ground, even Taiji master Yang Lu-Chan will lean. We lean to use our weight and borrow the gravity to give ourbody the initial momentum that we will need to perform certain body function.

Old CMA masters leaned all the time.

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/7383/diaginoalstrike.jpg

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6184/oldpic21.jpg

http://ensomartialarts.com/articles/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Wujianchuan.jpg

http://www.askt.it/Images/7bu05_b.jpg

You lean in Wu and Wu Hao style too. If you need to lean, its best to lean to add power at the point your opponent is most vulnerable and cannot take advantage of your leaning. I say, better not to risk it and dont lean at all, unless you have to lean, then you have no choice. Doesnt mean your wrong for doing it, I just would prefer not to as I have a tendency myself of taking advantage of leaning opponents.

[YouKnowWho]

If you need to lean, its best to lean to ...
This we can both agree on.

Here is another good reason to lean. To lean is more difficult than not to lean.

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/4315/linleglift.jpg

[omarthefish]

Lol no, not what I meant at all... In my school were taught not to lean and not to overextend the attack. There are other ways to connect or to off balance without overextending.
1. Leaning and overextending are two very different things.
2. Nobody overextends on purpose. If it's on purpose then it's just "extending" with no "over" about it.


extend you use force against thier force to create a spring to push them back. My question was how do you get someone who is trained to overextend.
Try to take the possible apparent sarcasm as more of a tongue in cheek joke but....you do it the exact same way as with someone who is not training. It's just harder. I don't think there are any special tricks to work with more skilled people. You just have to be better at it, just like anything else.

At the end of the day, this is where "leading" comes in and why simply yielding is not enough. When YouKnowWho talks about leading I think he may mean it in a different way from me. Maybe not. The original concept is "yin"/引 which means to lead not by pulling something along. It has a basic meaning that is more like "attraction" or "entice". The Taiji song that says to "lead energy into emptiness"/引进落空 does not mention yielding or redirection. It uses the word "yin"/attract/entice/lead. It's like the way a magician redirects your attention or, in more crude terms, the way a "fake high-hit low" combination "leads" your attention up high to create the opening to hit low.

I'm sure YouKnowWho actually could come up with some throws that apply the principle in the way I mean. It would be a throw where part of the set up was the other person attacking really aggressively for a leg sweep or something and you destroying their balance by removing your leg at the last moment. Also, you would have had to have present the "bait" on purpose.

[YouKnowWho]

When YouKnowWho talks about leading ...
You create an open space, give your opponent fake confidence, and make him to feel that it may be safe to step into that open area. The moment that he steps in, the moment that you attack his stepping leg. You can attack that leg before he realizes it is a trap, or after he has realized it's a trap and intend to move back. In either cases, you can borrow your opponent's force (commitment) and add your force.

It will be more effective to "force" than "attract" your opponent to do so. You can lead your opponent by using:

- 抹脖 (Ma Bo)
- 架樑 (Jia Liang)
- 崩 (Beng)
- 挽 (Wan)
- 撕 (Si)
- ...

[bawang]

emptiness is talking about counter punching. you step back they punch empty air. stop pretending tai chi is some sort of advanced science. its a art of pugilism and a contest of manliness

[YouKnowWho]

Another example for "lead into the emptiness" is when a wrestler shoots at your leg, you borrow his force, and press his head down to the ground as "dog eat sh!t".

If your opponent wants to do something, you always help him to do more than he can handle. This is general CMA strategy and not unique in Taiji.

[bawang]

internal boxing concepts was unique, 400 years ago LOL
even shaolin boxing is internal now. thats why newer shaolin poems contradict the older ones

all the "internal throws" are just step back reverse versions of common longfist throws. all the internal strikes are stepping back counterpunch versions of common longfist strikes.


tai chi guys need to stop acting like trannys taking estrogen in transition period.


1560 jixiaoxinshu says 而其柔也，知当斜闪 "so called soft means doding and evading"

im winning

[omarthefish]

im winning

But you're still "special".

[bawang]

reference:
Qi, J. (1558). New Treatise on Military Doctorine. China. second naval warfare edition

i use reference like scientist. i have proof to back my argument. i smrat.