Combat Tai Chi, Qigong, Bagua - Page 7

Tom Yum · 04-29-2008, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TTEscrima

The top tactical trainer there Mercop trains with Boar and rated him one of the 5 deadliest men in any discipline hes ever met, take a look at the people and the credentials of the men Mercop trains and trains with. You'll find quite a few people who have come out and trained and they all comment Boar and his students have their shit together. On an open forum like this anyone can run their mouth with little or no experience since the mod staff doesn't know the difference. And since identities aren't verified and no one is ever made to back up their BS you wind up with nonsense like this, I assure you no site with Mods who were knowledgeable in the CMA's would pay Ted any attention other than laughter and a quick banning.

From what I've seen in Boar's videos and from speaking with him, he's the real deal when it comes to TCMA and its applications.

TTEscrima · 04-29-2008, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

My point is that everybody always sees the problems from their own points of view. It's never, "We do things differently." It's always, "He's wrong and I'm right" or "He's an idiot and doesn't know anything."

I just find it funny, that's all. I'm not backing anyone since I don't know any better myself.

Tai Chi done differently than the classics dictate is no longer Tai Chi, when someone says it generates power like Karate thats not just different, its incorrect and misleading. Letting misinformation go unchallenged just helps damage the art and peoples perception of it further. One of the reasons the internal arts are so tough to understand is the sheer number of people who trained for a couple of years in a park or dojo and run around proclaiming to know the art and it's principles. These types are quick to tell you what can and can't be done and how their arts are superior. It's like the SF posers, if we had one tenth the number of actual operators as the number of those who proclaim it we would have no military problems anywhere on the planet. It seems like every bar has a SF vet who made Rambo look like a pussy, internet forums can be the same way, asshats with little or no experience and knowledge of the subject give everyone who hasn't got actual experience a skewed view of reality. People who've been there done that know the difference but getting the truth out when you're outnumbered by all the "experts" can be nearly impossible. Mind you the internet "experts" rely on their sheer numbers and heckling and nit picking without ever really contributing to keep from being exposed for what they are.

Mike Brewer · 04-29-2008, 11:51 PM

I know where you're coming from, man. I do. And I'm not trying to instigate. All I'm saying is that the reaction I see in discussions like this is very, very black and white. Either someone's the legitimate item or they're an "asshat." There's no gray, no color, no middle ground. It's very adversarial in that sense, and it seems that there's a real instinct to proclaim our own interpretations as the one and only true "way," while all others are mall ninjas and Clothing Sales Rangers.

I would simply suggest that we very often don't have all the answers we think we do. I've found myself throughout my life changing my mind on things I previously would have defended as God's Truth. New exposure, new experiences, and new information often change our interpretations. And given that process, I'd suggest that maybe what you're defending - what Ted is defending, and what any of the rest of us are defending - may not be the black and white truth we think it is.

Interpretation is a tricky thing. Boar, as I recall is known to have said "If it was easy to explain, I'd be a rich man" or something to that effect, yes? Well, that means that the classics may not have explained them all that clearly either, and that your interpretations of obviously difficult ideas might be flawed or (dare I say it) incorrect, just as Ted's or mine or anyone else's might. Add to that a few thousand years of generational interpretation, new contexts, new translations, etc., and you come up with a lot of wiggle room.

Like I said, I just find it funny that it doesn't matter whether people are talking about their martial arts or their religion - it always seems to turn into, "That guy's an nutbag and he doesn't know his ass from third base."

I'm just glad it's not about Original JKD vs Concepts JKD this time.

TTEscrima · 04-30-2008, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

Either someone's the legitimate item or they're an "asshat." There's no gray, no color, no middle ground. It's very adversarial in that sense, and it seems that there's a real instinct to proclaim our own interpretations as the one and only true "way," while all others are mall ninjas and Clothing Sales Rangers.

So can we at least agree this guys an asshat?

Now go read all the comments and you'll see how easily an internet asshat gets a following.

YouTube - Elite Team Fighting

Mike Brewer · 04-30-2008, 12:40 AM

Yeah. The YouTube guy is a true and undeniable asshat.

Mike Brewer · 04-30-2008, 12:47 AM

In a completely unrelated sidebar, I did enjoy the demo of the AK47 being fired without the upper receiver cover.

YouTube - AK FIRING WITHOUT UPPER RECEIVER PLATE IN SLOW MOTION

l0rca · 04-30-2008, 04:15 AM

If I could add (hopefully I'm not just rehashing) a sort of Western philosophical explanation, at least on a meta-esque sort of level, maybe I could contribute some. I suggest that the physical action of the body for these techniques mostly supervenes on the theoreticals behind them; tacit procedures for these movements produce the effect we're looking for, but merely looking at the effect does not help us rationalize how one can perfom these movements -- that's why we're scratching our heads at how to "explain all this power".

That is to say, I think we can see a difference in outcome of power when anteceded by the mentality involved in the technique, even if the physical side of the technique does not necessarily designate a mental conviction behind it.

I think Mike is right to think that these techniques are just "incredibly well timed movements;" I'm not a practitioner, but I don't see any other rational explanation available, and I'm not buying into the idea that the true form of the technique is totally without some scientific explanation. I think the explanation for a witness to these techniques is one of timing -- but I think to arrive at the sort ability to execute what the witness sees takes a sort of mental trickery.

Even though the technique can be measured in a sense of timing, the brain can not access the movement needed for the technique by thinking this way; it needs that tacit, almost spiritual theoretical in mind in order to properly execute the movement. What we end up with is a practitioner which might imagine their body to be something much more 'elastic', whip-like than it actually is, in order to throw power and techniques on the extreme end of how 'elastic' their body actually is. It may be possible to envision these techniques with a more accurate portrayl of what the body is capable of, but I think the success of internal art's generation of power, and only the rarest exception in the external world, provide a strong case for the traditional methods of teaching.

(I quote elastic because even I don't think it's a very good word to use there, but I think the idea is evident enough.)

kingoftheforest · 04-30-2008, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by l0rca

If I could add (hopefully I'm not just rehashing) a sort of Western philosophical explanation, at least on a meta-esque sort of level, maybe I could contribute some. I suggest that the physical action of the body for these techniques mostly supervenes on the theoreticals behind them; tacit procedures for these movements produce the effect we're looking for, but merely looking at the effect does not help us rationalize how one can perfom these movements -- that's why we're scratching our heads at how to "explain all this power".

That is to say, I think we can see a difference in outcome of power when anteceded by the mentality involved in the technique, even if the physical side of the technique does not necessarily designate a mental conviction behind it.

I think Mike is right to think that these techniques are just "incredibly well timed movements;" I'm not a practitioner, but I don't see any other rational explanation available, and I'm not buying into the idea that the true form of the technique is totally without some scientific explanation. I think the explanation for a witness to these techniques is one of timing -- but I think to arrive at the sort ability to execute what the witness sees takes a sort of mental trickery.

Even though the technique can be measured in a sense of timing, the brain can not access the movement needed for the technique by thinking this way; it needs that tacit, almost spiritual theoretical in mind in order to properly execute the movement. What we end up with is a practitioner which might imagine their body to be something much more 'elastic', whip-like than it actually is, in order to throw power and techniques on the extreme end of how 'elastic' their body actually is. It may be possible to envision these techniques with a more accurate portrayl of what the body is capable of, but I think the success of internal art's generation of power, and only the rarest exception in the external world, provide a strong case for the traditional methods of teaching.

(I quote elastic because even I don't think it's a very good word to use there, but I think the idea is evident enough.)

Well I really don't think timing would effect the difference in feel. I have had the shit knocked out of me by a boxer. By a Muy Thai boxer. By a Judo practitioner. By a Karate instructor. By a mixed martial artists. And I have been repeatedly hit by a Tai Chi practitioner. At no time did anything feel or jar me like the last.

The closest thing was the guy who had practiced Judo for 20 some odd years but even that was different.

Most people try to rationalize things they don't understand because they don't want to feel left out. If you have never jumped out of a plane you can't tell someone what it's like. Even if you jumped off the high dive at Adventure Island the only similarity is the sinking in your stomach, it's not the same.

Trying to explain something you don't understand is impossible just watch one of the presidents speeches and see.

Some things can be interpreted many ways like the bible, sometimes though Mike there really is no ray area. If you take shooting a gun for example find the gray area that says it's safe to point the barrel at your own face and pull the trigger. I doubt there is one.

Mike Brewer · 04-30-2008, 02:40 PM

Quote:

If you take shooting a gun for example find the gray area that says it's safe to point the barrel at your own face and pull the trigger. I doubt there is one.

Take the gun apart to clean it. Remove the barrel. Hold the barrel in one hand, and the lower receiver in the other. Point the barrel at your own face. Point the lower recevier toward the floor and squeeze the trigger.

Perfectly safe.

Mike Brewer · 04-30-2008, 02:53 PM

I didn't post that last bit just to be a dick. I did it because things are open to a lot of interpretation, especially when written in flowery language and translated over centuries. For example:

Quote:

In motion the whole body should be light and agile,
with all parts of the body linked
as if threaded together.

This seems to leave plenty of room for "exemplary timing and coordination."

The ch'i [vital life energy] should be excited,
The shen [spirit of vitality] should be internally gathered.

For this to be explained to a non-expert (which is to say "all students") requires an understanding of both chi and shen that the context of time and science might have changed.

Quote:

The postures should be without defect,
without hollows or projections from the proper alignment;
in motion the Form should not become disconnected.

Who gets to decide what constitutes "perfect?" That is something that is taught, and is therefore a little subjective. Even if the ideas are incredibly close, the judgement of the instructor might vary slightly.

Quote:

The chin [intrinsic strength] should be
rooted in the feet,
generated from the legs,
controlled by the waist, and
manifested through the fingers.

Again, this is an idea - not a technique. The "how" is open to interpretation.

Quote:

If correct timing and position are not achieved,
the body will become disordered
and will not move as an integrated whole;
the correction for this defect
must be sought in the legs and waist.

This one seems to support the idea that it's very largely a matter of timing and coordination (or position moving integrated as a whole).

Quote:

All movements are motivated by I [mind-intention],
not external form.

Duh.

Quote:

If there is up, there is down;
when advancing, have regard for withdrawing;
when striking left, pay attention to the right.

Again, this alludes to a specifc coordination - not internal energy. Or at least it can be interpreted so.

Alternating the force of pulling and pushing
severs an opponent's root
so that he can be defeated
quickly and certainly.

Quote:

Insubstantial [empty; yin] and substantial [solid; yang]
should be clearly differentiated.
At any place where there is insubstantiality,
there must be substantiality;
Every place has both insubstantiality and substantiality.

You really trying to tell me that this is a cut and dry statement with no room for interpretation?

My point is just that there's some level of interpretation in ALL martial arts.

Some people are pure jackasses, that's true. All I'm saying is that we might be a little quick to apply the label in cases when it isn't justified.

Tant01 · 04-30-2008, 03:14 PM

Yin/yang...

With all due respect I think there is some entertainment value (haha) to watching the Master's students get all bent out of shape over a karateka's Tai Chi.

The gospel gets misconstrude... get over it.

Is there some way to BALANCE the lofty position of the great and mighty with those of us wallowing in the proverbial mud of ignorance?

Can you be less condescending and remain enlightening?

Just asking...

kingoftheforest · 04-30-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

Take the gun apart to clean it. Remove the barrel. Hold the barrel in one hand, and the lower receiver in the other. Point the barrel at your own face. Point the lower recevier toward the floor and squeeze the trigger.

Perfectly safe.

That's fine that's not a dick move.

But would the gun you are pointing at your face be as effective in combat as a gun that is put together? I'm gonna have to say no Sir.

This is what Karate did with the internal part of the style. While it may be the same thing in concept it does not follow the basic doctrine.

Your gun is still a gun it has all the parts a gun has but if you place a bullet in the chamber it won't get the same velocity as a gun that is strung together in the proper manner.

While Karate may have the same basic physical movements as Tai Chi they are not strung together in the proper manner. Thus while it has all the parts it doesn't fire the "bullet" in the same manner.

You can interpret the instructions for putting a table together however you want but if you screw the legs on the top it won't work as well even if you use all the parts.

kingoftheforest · 04-30-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tant01

Yin/yang...

With all due respect I think there is some entertainment value (haha) to watching the Master's students get all bent out of shape over a karateka's Tai Chi.

The gospel gets misconstrude... get over it.

Is there some way to BALANCE the lofty position of the great and mighty with those of us wallowing in the proverbial mud of ignorance?

Can you be less condescending and remain enlightening?

Just asking...

It's just we have been through his with ttruscott or TedTurner (same link same picks just a name change) in other places and he still spews the same rhetoric. Last time he got all mad and threw a fit then left in a huff. Plus there were more people trying to politely explain to him what the difference was and it just turned into the I'm right and you're wrong so I'm leaving bit.

Sorry Ted but Drunkenmonkey was there too

Nobody is really bent out of shape it's just really hard to explain it to people who have no experience in it. It's like explaining being American to a Somalian refugee. They just aren't going to get some concepts because it is completely foreign.

Tant01 · 04-30-2008, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingoftheforest

It's just we have been through his with ttruscott or TedTurner (same link same picks just a name change) in other places and he still spews the same rhetoric. Last time he got all mad and threw a fit then left in a huff. Plus there were more people trying to politely explain to him what the difference was and it just turned into the I'm right and you're wrong so I'm leaving bit.

Sorry Ted but Drunkenmonkey was there too

Nobody is really bent out of shape it's just really hard to explain it to people who have no experience in it. It's like explaining being American to a Somalian refugee. They just aren't going to get some concepts because it is completely foreign.

I see... carry on then (Or as you were so to type)

jubaji · 04-30-2008, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingoftheforest

Well I really don't think timing would effect the difference in feel. I have had the shit knocked out of me by a boxer. By a Muy Thai boxer. By a Judo practitioner. By a Karate instructor. By a mixed martial artists. And I have been repeatedly hit by a Tai Chi practitioner. At no time did anything feel or jar me like the last.

I've been hit by all such folks as well (and more) and depending on the person doing the hitting they all hurt, but NONE were magically delicious.

The most potent 'internal' power of all is the power of suggestion and 'feeling' what you really wanted to feel in the first place.

04-30-2008, 03:14 PM	#101 (permalink)
Tant01 Humble Moderator Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Northern Ca. USA Posts: 4,665	Yin/yang... With all due respect I think there is some entertainment value (haha) to watching the Master's students get all bent out of shape over a karateka's Tai Chi. The gospel gets misconstrude... get over it. Is there some way to BALANCE the lofty position of the great and mighty with those of us wallowing in the proverbial mud of ignorance? Can you be less condescending and remain enlightening? Just asking... __________________ "In all countries where personal freedom is valued, however much each individual may rely on legal redress, the right of each to carry arms - and these the best and the sharpest - for his own protection in case of extremity, is a right of nature indelible and irrepressible, and the more it is sought to be repressed the more it will recur." James Paterson

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Bagua Fighting - what do you think?	Eagleye	Chinese Martial Arts	11	05-02-2008 01:02 AM
Are most bagua styles the same?	Darthmaul	Chinese Martial Arts	0	09-16-2006 09:11 PM
Bagua clip	shaolin-warrior	Chinese Martial Arts	5	01-19-2006 08:11 PM
Chinese cops and Qigong	Broadsword2004	Chinese Martial Arts	9	07-09-2004 11:31 PM
Chi Kung And Qigong - Effective Or Con-Artists?	Mark-Masters	Chinese Martial Arts	3	06-23-2004 08:32 AM

04-29-2008, 11:51 PM	#93 (permalink)
Mike Brewer Moderate Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 8,165	I know where you're coming from, man. I do. And I'm not trying to instigate. All I'm saying is that the reaction I see in discussions like this is very, very black and white. Either someone's the legitimate item or they're an "asshat." There's no gray, no color, no middle ground. It's very adversarial in that sense, and it seems that there's a real instinct to proclaim our own interpretations as the one and only true "way," while all others are mall ninjas and Clothing Sales Rangers. I would simply suggest that we very often don't have all the answers we think we do. I've found myself throughout my life changing my mind on things I previously would have defended as God's Truth. New exposure, new experiences, and new information often change our interpretations. And given that process, I'd suggest that maybe what you're defending - what Ted is defending, and what any of the rest of us are defending - may not be the black and white truth we think it is. Interpretation is a tricky thing. Boar, as I recall is known to have said "If it was easy to explain, I'd be a rich man" or something to that effect, yes? Well, that means that the classics may not have explained them all that clearly either, and that your interpretations of obviously difficult ideas might be flawed or (dare I say it) incorrect, just as Ted's or mine or anyone else's might. Add to that a few thousand years of generational interpretation, new contexts, new translations, etc., and you come up with a lot of wiggle room. Like I said, I just find it funny that it doesn't matter whether people are talking about their martial arts or their religion - it always seems to turn into, "That guy's an nutbag and he doesn't know his ass from third base." I'm just glad it's not about Original JKD vs Concepts JKD this time.

04-30-2008, 12:40 AM	#95 (permalink)
Mike Brewer Moderate Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 8,165	Yeah. The YouTube guy is a true and undeniable asshat.

04-30-2008, 12:47 AM	#96 (permalink)
Mike Brewer Moderate Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 8,165	In a completely unrelated sidebar, I did enjoy the demo of the AK47 being fired without the upper receiver cover. YouTube - AK FIRING WITHOUT UPPER RECEIVER PLATE IN SLOW MOTION

04-30-2008, 04:15 AM	#97 (permalink)
l0rca Registered User Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 44	If I could add (hopefully I'm not just rehashing) a sort of Western philosophical explanation, at least on a meta-esque sort of level, maybe I could contribute some. I suggest that the physical action of the body for these techniques mostly supervenes on the theoreticals behind them; tacit procedures for these movements produce the effect we're looking for, but merely looking at the effect does not help us rationalize how one can perfom these movements -- that's why we're scratching our heads at how to "explain all this power". That is to say, I think we can see a difference in outcome of power when anteceded by the mentality involved in the technique, even if the physical side of the technique does not necessarily designate a mental conviction behind it. I think Mike is right to think that these techniques are just "incredibly well timed movements;" I'm not a practitioner, but I don't see any other rational explanation available, and I'm not buying into the idea that the true form of the technique is totally without some scientific explanation. I think the explanation for a witness to these techniques is one of timing -- but I think to arrive at the sort ability to execute what the witness sees takes a sort of mental trickery. Even though the technique can be measured in a sense of timing, the brain can not access the movement needed for the technique by thinking this way; it needs that tacit, almost spiritual theoretical in mind in order to properly execute the movement. What we end up with is a practitioner which might imagine their body to be something much more 'elastic', whip-like than it actually is, in order to throw power and techniques on the extreme end of how 'elastic' their body actually is. It may be possible to envision these techniques with a more accurate portrayl of what the body is capable of, but I think the success of internal art's generation of power, and only the rarest exception in the external world, provide a strong case for the traditional methods of teaching. (I quote elastic because even I don't think it's a very good word to use there, but I think the idea is evident enough.)

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)