Do you agree with his Taiji application?

[Wing Woo Gar]

Forms come from fighting experience. Understanding application first makes forms easier to understand.

Sure, but that’s not how he taught in the past. When I teach I first build the structure and basic foundation exercises until I see correct progression of balance, posture, coordination. If they don’t have those they can’t learn applications or forms. In my opinion, those basics are far more important and useful than forms or applications. Often I have come across people with vast experience and knowledge of forms and techniques that lack these fundamentals. In these cases, their knowledge is not as useful in application as it could be. Bad posture, poor coordination, unsteady balance or obvious injury are all the very first things I notice in people. I will always attack these weaknesses first in an opponent. Physical defects are very apparent to me because I have spent decades in a surgery theater repairing and replacing defective parts. For instance, in a hip arthroplasty part of my job is dislocating the hip, and then relocating the implant after the replacement. Doing this hundreds of times can give you a very intimate knowledge of how to best accomplish the task with the least effort. This type of experience can give some extra insight for certain types of techniques, how they work, and how to prevent them that I might not have otherwise. I have always felt that my job helped my understanding of my martial arts.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Forms come from fighting experience.

Something to always keep in mind when performing them.

Understanding application first makes forms easier to understand.

Agreed, but not necessarily easier to correctly do. When the application is known before the technique, there may be a tendency for the student to rush to the end result rather than focusing on the process of getting there. As a result, the subtleties of the technique that actually make the application work can be harder to grasp. I think a give and take approach can be more effective in the long run:

1. State the general purpose of the technique to give some context.
2. Teach and allow the student to practice and drill the movements.
3. Teach the application, allowing the student to see and experience how it generally works.
4. Return to the process to fine tune things like pivots, flow, coordination of the movements, etc.
5. Now practice the application, having the tools to execute effectively.

EDIT NOTE: Wing Woo Gar's post above expresses the same idea as mine but were composed simultaneously and independently. So, I think his post is excellent!

 

[Xue Sheng]

Will do. He has a great memory, he may well remember you.

Doubt it, it was 30 years ago, I was a face in the crowd. I was at his push hands seminar in Boston recently, I'm even in the group photo, but I had so little interaction with him, he would not know me.... over 30 years ago at his push hands seminar in Boston, when that was his main school, maybe.... but I doubt that too..... but I was the guy form a Tung Ying Chieh lineage that he was demonstrating push hands with, after one of his students told him I was doing it wrong. He told them I wasn't and showed them what to do by squeezing pressure points on my elbow and almost dropping me to my knees. But even then, I was only 1 of hundreds of people who went to his seminars

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

How often does it need to work? I mean, what’s the criteria? We all likely know a few “ low percentage” techniques that we may occasionally use in some specific situations. They work, maybe, sometimes.

Low percentage techniques usually mean the opportunity is hard to come by (or create). Also, if your opponent knows how to counter your technique, your technique may not work.

When you apply hip throw while in front of your opponent, your opponent can spin with you and guide you into the emptiness.



In the following clip, this was the only time that he made his overhead throw work (he passed away when he was young).

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Doubt it, it was 30 years ago, I was a face in the crowd. I was at his push hands seminar in Boston recently, I'm even in the group photo, but I had so little interaction with him, he would not know me.... over 30 years ago at his push hands seminar in Boston, when that was his main school, maybe.... but I doubt that too..... but I was the guy form a Tung Ying Chieh lineage that he was demonstrating push hands with, after one of his students told him I was doing it wrong. He told them I wasn't and showed them what to do by squeezing pressure points on my elbow and almost dropping me to my knees. But even then, I was only 1 of hundreds of people who went to his seminars

This is part of why I feel so lucky to go to his house and train 2-3 times a week with only 1-4 other people. Lots of times it’s just me and 1 training partner. I feel like I’m getting an awful lot from these sessions. He charges me 15 bucks.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Yes. You just don't need to experience it. You just need to record it accurately.

And we go back to the Richard dawkins dowsing experiment. He did not experience dowsing or learn to dowse he just tested it and recorded data.

Besides technique, there is ability too.

In jacket wrestling, if your opponent cannot break your grips, none of his throwing techniques will work on you. But it takes training to develop a monster grips.

 

[drop bear]

Besides technique, there is ability too.

In jacket wrestling, if your opponent cannot break your grips, none of his throwing techniques will work on you. But it takes training to develop a monster grips.

So strength is also a technique?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

So strength is also a technique?

Technique is only 50%. Ability (strength) is the other 50%.

You may have good punching technique that your punch can always land on your opponent. But if your punch has no knock down power, your punching technique won't be effective.

 

[isshinryuronin]

So strength is also a technique?

I'd call strength an "ability," based on muscular development. But to a significant degree, it is dependent on technique. Power is generated and delivered via technique (biomechanics) resulting in the maximum employment of strength.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I'd call strength an "ability," based on muscular development. But to a significant degree, it is dependent on technique. Power is generated and delivered via technique (biomechanics) resulting in the maximum employment of strength.

But grip strength has nothing to do with technique.

 

[isshinryuronin]

But grip strength has nothing to do with technique.

This is a specific type of strength, but I think there is still some part that technique contributes. IMO, elbow position and other upper body structure can influence it, as well as the type of grip (finger/thumb position).

 

[JowGaWolf]

When the application is known before the technique, there may be a tendency for the student to rush to the end result rather than focusing on the process of getting there.

Easy fix. Do both and teach your student patience. If he tires to rush to the end then don't go to the next technique.

Even students who don't train application will try to rush to the end

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Even students who don't train application will try to rush to the end

This is why I have concern with the BJJ approach that combine "develop" and "test" into 1 process. If a student doesn't even know how to do jab, cross, hook, front kick, side kick, his sparring experience won't have any meaning at all.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

This is why I have concern with the BJJ approach that combine "develop" and "test" into 1 process. If a student doesn't even know how to do jab, cross, hook, front kick, side kick, his sparring experience won't have any meaning at all.

But the BJJ approach turns out able martial artists regardless. Whether or not that translates into fully rounded I guess depends on the instructor and the student. I am an able martial artist, yet there are holes in my game that tell me I’m not fully rounded. Particularly in ground game.

 

[drop bear]

But grip strength has nothing to do with technique.

breaking the grip with the wrong technique though.

 

[windwalker099]

Other people say, ‘Look, I can learn this in a few days.’ But to try to perfect it, to make it become part of you – you are the Hop Gar, the Hop Gar is you – that’s not easy.
I always say ‘Whatever you do, I don’t want. Whatever I do and you don’t know – that’s how
we win.
David Chin / Hop gar/ master

A skilled fighter can adapt and make any method effective.

A proven method can provide an advantage to a less skilled fighter, offering them a chance to improve and succeed.

Throughout China's history, various fighting styles have evolved and diversified.
These styles have been developed and refined over time, resulting in the wide range of CMA we recognize today.

Many of these styles were formalized and standardized in China's rich martial arts history.

Unfortunately, modern day martial arts have also lost the check and balance of challenge matches. Unlike the traitorous students of days gone by, today’s thief seldom faces the wrath of a true kung fu master on a leitai.

Checks and balances ?

The OP's title "Do you agree with his Taiji application?"

Depends on one's purpose of practice.

What are called "Martial Arts" are not used in modern warfare.
The judgment for some is in the "ring"

For others it's the method and type of power used or the historical lineage and
practices used in preservation of the style / method.

One could look at what type of power was used, is the method reflective of the training.
is the method reflective of principles claimed by the method as practiced historically..

For myself, I look at what is trained, what is used, regardless of effectiveness or low or high percentage.
Whether I agree with it or not.
Method, Training, and usage

In CMA, often what is trained is not used as trained.
A common saying in the 70s /.

Should it be ?


Even with adaptations to the ring, one should still see the root of the training method.


Examples of historical training methods adapted to realities of the ring..

power training

Chin Shifu, coaching some of his fighters

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

A skilled fighter can adapt and make any method effective.

A proven method can provide an advantage to a less skilled fighter, offering them a chance to improve and succeed.

Throughout China's history, various fighting styles have evolved and diversified.
These styles have been developed and refined over time, resulting in the wide range of CMA we recognize today.

Many of these styles were formalized and standardized in China's rich martial arts history.



Checks and balances ?

The OP's title "Do you agree with his Taiji application?"

Depends on one's purpose of practice.

What are called "Martial Arts" are not used in modern warfare.
The judgment for some is in the "ring"

For others it's the method and type of power used or the historical lineage and
practices used in preservation of the style / method.

One could look at what type of power was used, is the method reflective of the training.
is the method reflective of principles claimed by the method as practiced historically..

For myself, I look at what is trained, what is used, regardless of effectiveness or low or high percentage.
Whether I agree with it or not.
Method, Training, and usage

In CMA, often what is trained is not used as trained.
A common saying in the 70s /.

Should it be ?


Even with adaptations to the ring, one should still see the root of the training method.


Examples of historical training methods adapted to realities of the ring..

power training

Chin Shifu, coaching some of his fighters

Many methods are out there, most are valid. At some point one must make it their own. My training brothers and I have trained together for 27 years. We all had the same Sifu, we all have similarities that show our training is the same. We all have our own way of expressing our martial art that have personal nuance, but if you watch us train together, we swim like a school of fish.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The OP's title "Do you agree with his Taiji application?"

If we come back to the original question for this thread, the arm movement of Taiji

1. ward off is forward.
2. Pull back is backward.
3. Press forward is forward.
4. Push is forward.

If we add leg skill into it as: backward leg skill with 1, 3, 4 and forward leg skill with 2, the 1, 2, 3, 4 can become perfect throwing skills.

The backward leg skill can be cut, sickle hook, inner hook, outer hook, ...

The forward leg skill can be sweep, spring, leg lift, leg block, ...

IMO, this is the most logic approach.

 

[windwalker099]

If we come back to the original question for this thread, the arm movement of Taiji

1. ward off is forward.
2. Pull back is backward.
3. Press forward is forward.
4. Push is forward.

If we add leg skill into it as: backward leg skill with 1, 3, 4 and forward leg skill with 2, the 1, 2, 3, 4 can become perfect throwing skills.

The backward leg skill can be cut, sickle hook, inner hook, outer hook, ...

The forward leg skill can be sweep, spring, leg lift, leg block, ...

IMO, this is the most logic approach.

Within the movements themselves, there is a lot of latitude as to what they can be used for, according to the nature of the person using them.

In the video, the usage reflects his nature, how and what he trains. For some, it might not reflect Taiji as they practice it. For others, it might be the way it should be practiced.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"If an application aligns with the principles of balance, harmony, and fluid movement inherent in Taiji, then it’s likely valid."

Strongly disagree with you on this statement.

You don't need application if you just want to achieve

- balance,
- harmony, and
- fluid,

Application needs to have effect to your opponent and not just have effect to yourself.

For example, the following also don't need application:

- health,
- self-cultivation,
- inner peace,
- culture study,
- philosophy,
- world peace (not sure about this),
- ...