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!

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!

Will I be facing a rock troll after this confrontation?

[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.