Mike Brewer

This is mostly for KOTF, TTE, and our more combat-oriented Chinese Martial Arts practitioners. I'm aware that, coming from me, this is apt to get taken the wrong way, so I'm going to post the initial question and then do my best to step away and let the discussion roll. I'll also say at the front end that I do not in any way mean to insinuate anything negative here.

Several people here can be routinely depended upon to post very negatively in reference to MMA, BJJ, etc. in terms of their use in slef-defense training. In fact, those discussions have been going on here for years. They could be set side by side and compared, and we'd see the same treadmill discussion time and again. As a result, I DO NOT want to get into an argument about what is or is not valid for self-defense. I'm personally a big believer in the idea that the firstest with the mostest is the bestest, no matter what the style. I personally believe that anyone, trained or not, with the will, intent, and ability to surprise a potential attacker with audacity and violence of action is going to do really well in a fight. Further, I think that if you take that attitude and add virtually ANY training to it, that person will get better and more capable. Long story short, I really do believe that it's the person, not the style, and I believe that the style is just a matter of preference. I mention this so that my position is clear from the outset; so that everybody understands that I think tae kwon do, praying mantis, boxing, or any other martial art has the potential to be very effective. With that said:

Can anyone give some examples of what makes things like Tai Chi, Bagua, Qigong, etc. effective for fighting? We hear all kinds of talk about training to fight, and I've read I don't know how many posts about how the sport attitude will get you killed. So what - SPECIFICALLY - is the difference? I'm looking for comparisons in five primary areas, so if we could look at these and try to stick to them, it would be helpful:

1. What specific sorts of techniques make these arts effective and efficient for self-protection?
2. What training methods do you use to make them realistic and appropriate for real-life?
3. How do you incorporate resistance and opposition into the training?
4. To what degree is physical conditioning stressed?
5. And finally, is training this way enough all by itself to address modern reality?

Thanks guys. Again, I'm not trying to make this a flame war, and I don't want to hear a bunch of shit about MMA or other sports. I want to hear specifics about the CMAs listed and others that apply. Most of these discussions seem to revolve around theory and philosophy, and I'd really like to see us hang some substance on those tired old bones.

jubaji

I think with taijiquan ('cause I've seen it go down this way) if you are looking at some wild-eyed nut who is violent and willing but really hasn't much of a clue and is just going to lunge at you, then the off-balancing stuff gives an advantage for some throws, trips, and strikes of varying type.

__________________
Optional signature you may use to appear at bottom of your posts.

FoolsTP

i think i'm doing some baguazhang and we mostly do circle walking. it seems effective cause you are flanking and getting around the person to a much more desired position (behind them or at their flank). quigong is more the energy that you are running through your strikes and lines through the target. that's where the intent comes in and you are able to do internal damage by manipulating this energy. i could be way off and my sifu knows way more than i do about this but this is what i get from it so far.

__________________
hi

cheech

It all ultimately depends on the specific school/instructor. Generally speaking though, the "hard" styles will be useful sooner than the "soft/internal" styles, assuming the student has no prior background. Soft/internal styles usually focus on body manipulation of the practitioner and the opponent/partner. Focus is on the more subtle aspects, absorbing, deflection, etc. Pretty much the same type of things you'll eventually learn w/ "hard" styles w/ a good teacher. Again, generally speaking, soft styles teach skills "backwards" compared to hard styles, and place greater emphasis on the more subtle aspects of moving, and moving w/ a partner.

IMO the internal techniques are much harder to acquire than the external techniques. Hence, the early focus on the "internal" techniques w/ soft styles. Additionally, a lot of "soft" styles don't teach self defense at all. A lot of schools will teach internal styles more for self improvement, discipline, and focus. Kind of a moving meditation.

Often a good combination is to learn an external style first, then learn the internal stuff. Conditioning is usually not a big factor w/ internal styles. However, conservation of energy, and efficiency of motion usually is, which can be significant in increasing the effectiveness of physical conditioning.

Mike Brewer

The last posts have been deleted in the interest of keeping this educational. No sense arguing. This wasn't intended to be an argumentative discussion. Either contribute something educational or sit this one out.

cheech

Qigong. There are aspects that are useful from a combat viewpoint, but generally speaking not useful unless practiced in conjunction w/ combat skills. Muscle control, breath control and focus are useful products. Qigong is usually part of iron shirt/golden bell training. Learning proper breath control when exerting force helps to conserve energy. Muscle control helps to "shield" from injury when hit. Learning focus under stress helps keep mental stability in a stressful situation. Also helps to develop conscious control of what I think of as "fast time", a mental/physiological condition when time seems to slow down. Neigong, similar, but mostly an internal manifestation, whereas qigong is the harder form usually practiced by the "strongmen".

Proper practice and expression of qigong should assist w/ generating and delivering force to a target. It should also assist in developing breath and muscle control to assist in protecting from strikes. Iron shirt training usually comes in at least two levels. The first relies mainly on muscle control and reduction in sensitivity to pain. The next level adds absorbing and slipping, and automatic activation of the proper response to a received strike. At one point I'd actually developed the basic skills to the point where I could properly shield against a strike w/o anticipation. The first touch was enough of a stimulus to elicit the proper muscle control w/o having to consciously prepare to absorb the impact.

Qigong/neigong can develop some very useful skills as regards combat training, but on it's own it's more useful as a healthy exercise.

cheech

Bagua, Pakua etc. Out of the 3 internal styles usually lumped under Chinese soft styles, it's probably the hardest to interpret the motions as martial techniques. Hsing I being the "hardest" and easiest to interpret. Bagua is very useful for learning to slip attacks and avoid directly meeting power directed by an opponent. IMO Tai Chi and Bagua are very good for learning techniques and methodologies for close range actions. Slipping, redirecting and absorbing are very useful for infighting. W/ the proper practice enough "feel" should be developed to not have to rely on what you can see only. At close range feeling the pressures exerted helps considerably in controlling your opponents movements and balance.

All of the more subtle aspects are much more difficult to learn to the point of being useful, IMO. Unless the individual has a talent or prior experience, it can take years to develop useful skills when training in internal styles. However, the skills learned will often be more useful in later years when age sets in and strength, speed, and endurance decreases.

Mike Brewer

It was my original intent not to reply on this thread at all, but obviously some clarification is in order. After this, I'll step back out and allow the discussion to continue without me.

The whole reason I wasn't going to participate in this is because I didn't want people thinking I was trying to start a conflict. I'm not. I'm genuinely interested in knowing more about this. You don't have to believe that if you don't want to, but please allow me to point out two pieces of information I believe are relevant:

It was TTEscrima and KOTF's comments about what is or isn't functional that inspired me to look, so naturally I asked them first.
TT, I agree that one needs to research the topic and find things out, and that's precisely and exactly what this was meant to do. With input from the two people who make the most and loudest criticisms, I figured I might have a better sense of which direction to take my research in. But I have to have a starting point and an azimuth, as it were, in order to do that.

Without some core input, I'd likely end up finding videos of the guy who did his "Tai Chi" in front of the Mortal Kombat background. I'm telling you very plainly that I do not know enough about what you do to be able to tell the difference between the garbage and the good stuff. That's where your input comes in. Without some input, I'd no doubt spend all that time "researching" only to come back and hear people say things like, "That's not the right stuff. That's not what I'm tlaking about at all." Working smarter rather than harder, I thought it best to begin with a direction rather than just wandering all over the place hoping the dice don't come up craps.

If you'd like to provide some insights or some input, then please feel free. I am going to moderate and police this thread heavily, though, and I intend to delete any and everything that's not on topic. And again - so that nobody feels like mean old Mike is trying to cause any conflict, I'll bow out and allow the discussion to continue without me in it. To those who've shared, I thank you. To those who haven't? Enjoy the reading, and either contribute or don't contribute. But either way, please take me at my word that I wanted and wat this to be an educational thread - not an argument. There are no ulterior motives here, regardless of what anyone's live in professor is telling them.

ttruscott

I wasn't going to reply here either but I will respect the sincerity.

I did empty form tai chi and bagua for many years. By this I mean that I learned the form and applications for the techniques but I had no instruction on internal methods nor how it was different from karate.

In fact, we were doing karate (we didn't know anything else), just using a new form done slowly.

I was told that bagua power came from the back (karate power comes from the stomach) but got no instruction when I asked how I should use my back.

Then I met Master Joseph Chen who taught us Hong's Practical Method.

He would do an ordinary arm bar which I was well used to from 25 years of karate and let me resist back into his push. Then he'd say he would now do it with Chen principles and with a movement so small it was hard to see, I'd pop or fly out 4 or 5 feet or it felt like my elbow would break. This was when I knew he had something new.

He also taught me how to access, open and use my back in a totally new way.

He is fond of saying that if you can see what he is doing in application, it is not Chen. All his power comes from inside his body where it is hard to figure out.

That is why it looks silly when he hardly moves yet his students fly out across the room. Yet if you could feel what the student felt, you'd pop out too.

He likes to pretend it is chi power (magic) but then tells us it is all superior alignment and use of the joints, purely mechanical.

And the apps are joint breaks or bone breaks or balance upsets. Done slowly and in control and uke must launch or be broken. Done fast and strong properly against a hard hitter and something will break...

But you cannot see what it is all about in a video or during a practise. You must learn what to watch for and your teacher must let you feel his body so you can understand how he is using his muscles so differently. Trying to understand it intellectually without knowing how the muscles and joints are being worked is futile. And all the Chinese sayings are poetic pointers, not practical descriptions.

Joseph Chen is known as a fighter not a "tea drinking" health nut but not all his disciples are fighters. So, if you get a chance, attend one of his seminars or find one of his regional reps and touch hands.

There is no other way to answer your question from the perspective of the Practical Method.

For the need for proper alignment see YouTube - Push Hands Theory and Practice DVD

I know Ronnie and I know he is trying to upset Joseph but I know Joseph too and he is just playing with Ronnie for the demo:
YouTube - Chen Zhonghua and Ronnie Yee at Zitongshan

His uke here is my teacher, Gordon Muir. He gives away these small "how to's" of apps here in public:
YouTube - Power Out In Circles

__________________
"Fear, not compassion, restrains the wicked."

TTEscrima

Can you explain how this is trained? What kind of Tai Chi do you practice?

TTEscrima

What style of Baqua? What type of stepping pattern are you practicing? What stepping style is used during your circle walking?

TTEscrima

What breathing do you use for Iron Shirt training? Isn't the breathing used by these skills different from the ones used to issue force? How do the two tie into combative applications?

TTEscrima

There are only 3 internal styles? What decides if a style is internal or not? Does Baqua have any linear forms to teach combative applications before circle walking is taught?

TTEscrima

Baqua gains it's power from your back? Thats completely different than any style of Baqua ever cataloged. I'm intrigued tell me more.

Chen style Baqua? What lineage is this from? There are no records of a Chen style Baqua. Does this style use Animal forms? What type of stepping is used? What type of circle is the beginner taught?

cheech

Generally, slow, deep breathing promotes a calming, focused state, and a rapid explosive exhalation is used to stiffen the frame while issuing force. IMO, aside from the specific muscle groups used, I don't see any difference in the breathing used to issue force or in preparation in shielding.

Traditional teachers will often give an explanation in terms of "chi" movement, but I think of the effects in terms of simple physiological reactions. Apologies to those that believe in chi in the traditional sense.

The slow breathing aids in stimulating a relaxed, but focused state, as well as promoting what's often considered a healthier method of breathing. The deep breathing from the belly..abdominal breathing improves the gas exchange.

The explosive exhalations are similar to issuing a kiai. Some studies years ago showed an increase in expressed power when using a kiai. I don't remember the numbers, but 5-10% comes to mind. Most people seem to want to hold their breath when issuing power. Which is probably OK if the breath isn't held for a long period, or too often, but IMO you're better off learning to breath instead.

How do they tie into combat applications? IMO, only peripherally. An individual can be entirely effective w/o formal qigong training. However, qigong training, or the equivalent can improve the efficiency of gas exchange, improve mental focus, and the 5-10% increase in power can make the difference between a successfully implemented technique, and one that almost works.