Judo vs Tai Chi

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Doug
These "deadly techniques" as you call them are readily available to these "restrictive martial systems" and can be used at any time.

Have you ever actually ever seen anyone use any of these "deadly" techniques? If so, what happened to the person on whom they were used?

[SPJ]

Hi, MT;

To throw is not the monoply by Judo.

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

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

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

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

Shuai Jiao was incorporated into a lot of Wushu.

Shaolin and Wu Dang also have throws in their systems.

And none of them ever learned Judo.

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

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

You may incorporate Judo into your WC or vice versa.

That would be awesome, too.

[Miles Teg]

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

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

[Doug]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Have you ever actually ever seen anyone use any of these "deadly" techniques? If so, what happened to the person on whom they were used?

There are two faults with your question. First, I say I have seen them and describe them, and you still do not believe me because you have not seen them. Second, I say I have not seen them, and you believe your claim has been justified. Neither answer is suitable for an online discussion forum because nothing is actually proven. Therefore, on what I have seen and know I will not talk about because it will not help you any. So do not bother asking this question.

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

Doug M

[Ray Pina]

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

My two cents:

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

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

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

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

[Doug]

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

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

Then how can you claim to know so much about any -do or -jutsu if you are just a beginner? Geez, kid, you surely think highly of yourself if you are ready to make such claims right away.

I dont want to see the difference, I want to see similarities and useful applications.

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

Correct me if Im wrong, but don't life and death battlefield encounters require a greater focus on "the way" meditation and so forth. Bettering yourself mentally and physically in preparation for the few seconds of fighting eventuate in killing or being killed. Was it not the samurai that would meditate for hours a day sometimes right before a challenge. Wasnt their whole philosophy the most dangerous warrior is one that doesnt fear death.

Are you doing this when you go to your classes, or are you doing something like it? See, there is a difference. Unless you are doing these things that you describe above, you are dealing in -do, not -jutsu.

I think you're making this more complicated than it needs to be and I dont think the creators of these arts had these differences in mind when they made them. Iaido for example is the art of drawing a sword and that is a "Do".

Yes, they did. You are a funny beginner, jumping to conclusions about martial arts in ways you do not fully understand. You will in time, but you should not jump around like this. Iaido is the art of drawing the sword, yes, not the system or technique of cutting a man in two. Different intentions are for different methods. When Morihei Ueshiba created Aikido, he had a specific idea that was separate from Aikijutsu or Daitoryu. You do not practice either of the latter methods (including the ideology and actions that support that ideology) when practicing Aikido. The same is true for the other Japanese arts mentioned.

I didnt think taking someone out�Enecessarily equated to killing someone. Killing people with martial arts hasnt crossed my mind.

And that is the difference. It is pretty simple.

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

Come again sunshine? What judgments?

Look back at your comments. Think about them. Then, re-read my comment, moonlight.

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

What blaket statements? That taichi has good body mechanics?

Again, re-read your comments and think about them.

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

The generalization arrived with you, so you clarify what you meant and mean. Then, we can go from there.

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

Well, you are a beginner.

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

No I havent. But what assumption? That Taichi has awesome body mechanics?

How would you know since you have never practiced it?

I just have an interest and have had a few demos from/through friends. There are a few overlapping principles in W.C and Taichi. Namely whole body unity, sensitivity, wecome-stick-follow, uprooting rooting etc. However, before you get going on your separation fetish �Eyes, as you unnecessarily said before they are different arts.

They are not my differences, squirt. Do you really feel so arrogant that you feel you can re-define -do and -jutsu?

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

You are contradicting yourself.

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

Doug M

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Doug
There are two faults with your question. First, I say I have seen them and describe them, and you still do not believe me because you have not seen them. Second, I say I have not seen them, and you believe your claim has been justified.

If you have seen or done them, then you are speaking from experience, as well as theory. If you have not seen or done them, then you are speaking from theory only, squirt.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
If you have seen or done them, then you are speaking from experience, as well as theory. If you have not seen or done them, then you are speaking from theory only, squirt.

You are a funny guy or gal. You now seem to take up the position and/or defense of another argument. This is because you have no more argument of your own and need to take up someone else's defense. Nice try--no, wait, it is clearly without merit.

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

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

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

Anything else?

Doug M

[Miles Teg]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Christopher M]

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

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

[Doug]

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

I ahve not these distinctions. They exist, period. They are as natural to the respective systems as H2 is to O. You may not see it right now, but that is not my doing.

Doug M

[Doug]

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

I do not contest that point at all. I think that is a given. If that is what he meant, my apologies to you, him, and anyone else.

Doug M

[SPJ]

Excellent Do vs Jitsu discussions.

Not a Japanese expert.

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

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

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

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

Such as Wu Shu, Yi Shu, etc

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

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

[SPJ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Peace.

[SPJ]

Here is a link.

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

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