Yang Family Tai Chi Discussion Board

Hi all,

I have been practising Tai Chi now for over three years and therefore still very new. I have a lot of past experience in hard style martial arts and western boxing and therefore the concept of Tai Chi as a form of self-defence is still a very difficult pill for me to swallow.

I can accept that Tai Chi is a very valuable and effective training accompaniment but I cannot accept that it can be used to as a method to defend or neutralise a serious attack.

However, my school states that it can be used as an effective fighting style and moreover we should train with this in mind. Ie We must be soft but we must be effective and able to use Tai Chi for more than just the purpose of health.

As far as Im concerned this sentiment is great - however Ive yet to see any proof that it can be used effectively. And heres the thing; I want proof. Im tired of hearing the stories of people being blasted across the room or the 92 year old man fending off the would be attackers with just his pinky finger.

Recently at a seminar the ‘master’ (self-appointed master I might add) claimed that ‘because he knows it is effective – he doesn’t have to prove it’. He also stated that we must have faith when we practise and we will eventually understand.

These statements really concern me. Many decades ago I put my faith in something and came out the other end very wounded. I learnt from the experience and since then I have approached everything with a very critical mind. Its not to say that I don’t give things a real chance, I don’t just dismiss something as nonsense because I don’t understand straight away – but neither do I accept something out right without there being real evidence.

Im not here to start a thread where everyone jumps in with examples of evidence and more stories because, with all due respect, Im not going to believe – or disbelieve – you. As I say, I need to see it with my own eyes.

Problem is; no one ever seems willing to do just this; prove it.

Arts such as Kick Boxing, Boxing, Jujitsu and Judo all pressure test their art and prove it categorically. Tai Chi schools such as mine, state categorically it can be used – however refuse to prove it.

Im not saying Tai Chi practitioners should jump in the ring – but I am saying; if you can boldly state you KNOW it works, WHY NOT prove it?

Why should I have to have faith it can be proved? If you not going to prove it then what does that say?

Thoughts?

I can accept that Tai Chi is a very valuable and effective training accompaniment but I cannot accept that it can be used to as a method to defend or neutralise a serious attack.

To get the most out of such a question, I think you must be quite precise within your own thoughts and in communicating to others what you mean my "defend or neutralize" and what you mean by a "serious attack." When folks disagree about what these mean, a discussion tends to yield more heat than light on the subject.

For example, what martial arts have effective techniques against guns? Would the lack of such techniques make them ineffective? The answer depends on what you mean by effective and what you are looking for.

However, my school states that it can be used as an effective fighting style and moreover we should train with this in mind. Ie We must be soft but we must be effective and able to use Tai Chi for more than just the purpose of health.

Some teachers might say this because they are trying to hide a lack of skill, but others might say this to establish a particular orientation to your training without really making any promising of what level of skill you are likely to reach. One set of teachers has limited ethics, the other set of teachers may merely be imprecise in what they are communicating.

As far as Im concerned this sentiment is great - however Ive yet to see any proof that it can be used effectively. And heres the thing; I want proof. Im tired of hearing the stories of people being blasted across the room or the 92 year old man fending off the would be attackers with just his pinky finger.

What kind of proof are you looking for? There are many skilled practitioners who can "blast people across the room"; however, there are also many people teaching solid Tai Chi that can apply it only to a very limited extent. I think it is fair to prefer one set of teachers to the other; however, even being able to blast someone across the room is no guarantee of skills peculiar to Tai Chi.

Many MMA fights are stopped because of an inadvertent eye poke or groin strike. Does that mean the styles the fighters are using are ineffective against such techniques? Many people can throw a strong punch, execute a tackle, and choke someone with no training at all. Would that be proof of their skill? All this depends on what you want and what parameters you want to set.

Recently at a seminar the ‘master’ (self-appointed master I might add) claimed that ‘because he knows it is effective – he doesn’t have to prove it’. He also stated that we must have faith when we practise and we will eventually understand.

These statements really concern me. Many decades ago I put my faith in something and came out the other end very wounded. I learnt from the experience and since then I have approached everything with a very critical mind. Its not to say that I don’t give things a real chance, I don’t just dismiss something as nonsense because I don’t understand straight away – but neither do I accept something out right without there being real evidence.

I think I mostly agree with this sentiment. If you are in a school where you see nothing you are actually interested in, why stay on a mere promise? Even if they develop good skills, it would not be worthwhile if they are not the skills you want to learn.

Problem is; no one ever seems willing to do just this; prove it.

Arts such as Kick Boxing, Boxing, Jujitsu and Judo all pressure test their art and prove it categorically. Tai Chi schools such as mine, state categorically it can be used – however refuse to prove it.

This depends on what you mean by "prove it." There are practitioners that use Tai Chi in fighting competitions. There are Youtube videos of various people showing Tai Chi skills with a variety of input from partners. What is the nature of the proof you would like to see?

Although Tai Chi has its own methods, at the end of the story it has strikes, kicks, take-downs, and grabs like many other arts. What about the Tai Chi method of doing these things have you found to be especially unbelievable or demanding of proof?

Take care,
Audi

Since the use of guns became prominent, fewer people practice Taijiquan for fighting, so those that can do so are not common today. This appears to be true even in China, since the Boxer rebellion (~1900) showed that unarmed combat skills, that require long training, could not stand up against even a poorly trained enemy armed with a gun. Since then, the emphasis for Taijiquan switched to getting people healthy in order to strengthen the nation (a cure for the sick men of Asia insult).

Taijiquan is considered a high level skill that takes time to develop, changing the ways that typical people behave/move into something requiring different than normal skills. For example, people typically respond to attacks with the “fight or flight” response, with anger or fear, etc.; but Taijiquan teaches us to maintain a calm mind while not resisting but also not collapsing – which is a very fine line that must be practiced over a long period of time before becoming proficient. Typical punching and kicking can be done even by a child, and improving those skills is more a matter of degree than a matter of fundamental changes in how the person reacts.

While I emphasize interactive practices, I am not teaching fighting (no free sparring like one would do in a MMA school…), so I do not have the qualifications that you are looking for. A former classmate of mine used to work in public education teaching students who got suspended from their normal schools due to disruptive behaviors, often including violence because of behavioral problems, etc. He found his Taijiquan training to be ideal for this situation since he needed to protect himself and others while controlling the violent student, AND not seriously injuring that violent student! I have heard of other Taijiquan practitioners who worked as bouncers in rough neighborhoods that also found their Taijiquan training to work quite well in violent circumstances during their work.

I am less familiar with situations where someone may have used Taijiquan to seriously injure or kill an opponent. If that is what you are looking for, then I am not the person to comment. It is my understanding that if you want to be good at fighting, you can take the normal path and practice fighting, improving your abilities like punching and kicking, endurance, etc. Or you could take the gamble on training something different than normal, in the expectation of eventually gaining something that is different than typical, something that uses skills and strategies that others do not. Once those abilities are obtained, then one can include them while fighting, if desired.

For me, Taijiquan is fun, and the difficulty in achieving proficiency is what keeps things interesting. I am enjoying the journey, and value it even if I do not eventually become a competent fighter. For me, the journey is the value from practicing Taijiquan rather than the end point of becoming a superior fighter. If you are just looking to become a superior fighter, then the Taijiquan approach may not be the one for you.

Thanks DPasek and Audi for your responses, I appreciate you taking the time. A few comments from me and clarifications;


DPasek;
[quoteI am less familiar with situations where someone may have used Taijiquan to seriously injure or kill an opponent. If that is what you are looking for, then I am not the person to comment.][/quote]
Absolutely not - I would never consider sullying Tai Chi by bringing it down to such a low level. Dont get me wrong here; I respect Tai Chi, I respect the art and the depth of the art and would never approach it with the intent to learn how injure or hurt some.

If you are just looking to become a superior fighter, then the Taijiquan approach may not be the one for you.

I am looking to improve my martial skills (It is a martial art) but again Im not looking just to be a fighter. If wanted this then I would be better of heading down town on a saturday night and picking fights.

Or you could take the gamble on training something different than normal, in the expectation of eventually gaining something that is different than typical, something that uses skills and strategies that others do not. Once those abilities are obtained, then one can include them while fighting, if desired.

I love this. Thanks, this has given me pause for thought,

Taijiquan teaches us to maintain a calm mind while not resisting but also not collapsing – which is a very fine line that must be practiced over a long period of time before becoming proficient.

Again, love it. I will think on this further.

Audi;

This depends on what you mean by "prove it." There are practitioners that use Tai Chi in fighting competitions. There are Youtube videos of various people showing Tai Chi skills with a variety of input from partners. What is the nature of the proof you would like to see?

Ive seen the youtube vids and many of the are eveidence of compliant and worshipping students allowing themselves to be 'blased accross the room'. There are a few intereesting examples however where people do appear to be being generally manipulated but I cant help wonder if they would work in a real world scenario.

What kind of proof are you looking for?

Its quite simple. If you boldly state you can blast me accross the room, or defend yourself effectively in a real worl scenario - then do so. Show me. Dont tell me that you KNOW you can and because you KNOW you can you dont have to prove it. I dont know it - so I need to be shown, not just told to blindly follow based on a promise as you say.

As a general clarification; Im not looking to use Tai Chi to become a fighter. Martial Arts and fighting are different things in my opinion. All Im challenging is bold statements from people who then refuse to back these statements up with proof. And, as a new practioner who has seen no evidence to date (not real seen-with-my-own-eyes evidence) I am worries that I am pursuing a path that is based on faith and not fact. As Ive said, Ive done this before and I look back and see how deluded I was. I am a seeker of truth, a sincere person who just wants some degree of assurance that Im not pursuing a path, (or teacher) that is teaching something that is quite frankly false.

Siahn wrote: Im tired of hearing the stories of people being blasted across the room or the 92 year old man fending off the would be attackers with just his pinky finger.

Hi, Siahn
It seems to me that you are not satisfy with the given information on the internet. If you need real proof, perhaps, you need to take a trip to China and find a real Chinese Tai Chi master to demonstrate his Tai Chi skills to you.

Hi CD,

If you need real proof, perhaps, you need to take a trip to China and find a real Chinese Tai Chi master to demonstrate his Tai Chi skills to you.

And here I think you have hit the nail on the head. I think my issue is that Im concerned that I dont have a real Tai Chi master. I mentioned before that he is a self titled 'Grand Master'. Surely if a grand master states he can blast people across the room and/or use his Tai Chi effectivley as a martial art he should be able to demonstrate this to me. However, he has stated that he doesnt have to - because HE knows it works - so doesnt need to prove it.

Its this statement, and other examples like this at my school, that have me concerned.


Siahn

Hi Siahn,
Audi and DPasek have probably said enough on your query. I confess that I have never studied the hard martial arts such as karate. However, I have some experience and knowledge of judo, juijitsu, taijitsu and a couple of different Chinese martial arts, other than Bagua and Taiji. I have also never used any of these arts in anger. I was told many many years ago by my judo sensei, who was about a 7 dan rank, to never enter into a fight unless you are fully committed to do harm. Anything less and you had best just turn and walk away. Eating humble pie is better than either getting badly beaten due to hubris or committing homicide.
On the question of Taiji as a martial art, I can only say that in my practice every movement I do in the form is a potential attack or defence. Many of the movements, I find, I can relate to moves I have practiced in other martial art forms. So clearly it is a martial art. However, what makes Taiji unique and its approach to combat different, is its reactive nature in response to external forces. Taiji does not initiate, it responds. But it does not respond in kind, ie. force against force. In many ways, it probably makes it a very difficult martial form to become proficient in and to apply. You need to have the confidence that you have the skill and proficiency to absorb and deflect any attack, and to initiate a counter move depending on opportunity and circumstance, and without prescription. Tossing people across a room does not seem to be sensible or meaningful, in my humble opinion. The Taiji moves I practice are to disable and cause grevious bodily harm with the minimum of fuss, potentially (as I don't plan to use them hurtfully anytime soon or ever).
Sorry, I am beginning to ramble.
Take care,
Frank

Greetings!
There are three categories of people who practice Tai Chi uselessly.
1. Those who practice Tai Chi blindly.
2. Those who practice Tai Chi meaninglessly.
3. Those who practice Tai Chi until they die.

Category 1. Those who practice Tai Chi is because they were told Tai Chi is good for their health. So they practice it.
Category 2. Those who practice Tai Chi without knowing its purpose.
Category 3. Those who practice Tai Chi blindly and meaninglessly until they die.

Which category are you?

ChiDragon wrote:Greetings!
There are three categories of people who practice Tai Chi uselessly.
1. Those who practice Tai Chi blindly.
2. Those who practice Tai Chi meaninglessly.
3. Those who practice Tai Chi until they die.

Category 1. Those who practice Tai Chi is because they were told Tai Chi is good for their health. So they practice it.
Category 2. Those who practice Tai Chi without knowing its purpose.
Category 3. Those who practice Tai Chi blindly and meaninglessly until they die.

Which category are you?

Good Morning CD.
I do #1. Because...
1, I am "love at first sight" kind of guy
2,"love is blind"
3, When I did it all with love, there is "no work".

I'm so far so good, How about you?

Y.S.Lim (Your Sincerely Lim)

I honestly feel that I don't fall into any of those categories CD. I ask open and honest questions of myself and teacher constantly to ensure that my Tai Chi is neither blind or meaningless. I wouldn't be asking the questions I have on this post if I was content to practice Tai Chi in such a way.

Siahn wrote: I have been practising Tai Chi now for over three years and therefore still very new. I have a lot of past experience in hard style martial arts and western boxing and therefore the concept of Tai Chi as a form of self-defence is still a very difficult pill for me to swallow.

I can accept that Tai Chi is a very valuable and effective training accompaniment but I cannot accept that it can be used to as a method to defend or neutralise a serious attack.

.....I wouldn't be asking the questions I have on this post if I was content to practice Tai Chi in such a way.

Hi, Siahn

It seems that you have not found someone to give you proper guidance in the practice and clear your skeptics. Regarding to your notion about the martial portion of Tai Chi Quan, based on your OP, I know where you are coming from. Tai Chi is a form of martial arts from soft style to hard. However, in your experience, you were from hard style to soft. That is why it was difficult for you to accept the concept of Tai Chi as a form of self-defense.

Tai Chi has the concept of health before the concept of martial arts. The reason to say that is because a good fighter cannot fight without a strong healthy body. Unless, one's body was born with physical fitness. In your case, you had some hard style martial arts training which leads me to believe that you were born with prenatal physical fitness. However, for those who are not, they need to be conditioned to have a strong body to perform martial arts.

The slow motion in Tai Chi would make people think it cannot be used as martial arts. It was obvious that no one can fight with that kind of speed. Well, there are some hidden secret behind Tai Chi. In the practice of Tai Chi was twofold. One is to be familiarize with the movements of the basic form. Two is to transform most of the muscles to twitch muscles. The former has to be done slowly and repeatedly. The latter was accomplished by the repetition of the slow movements which will build up muscle tone and condition the muscles for faster reaction. Unfortunately, people do not know that; and they had never been told. Siahn, I think that is why you are skeptical at this point.

BTW It is easy to practice from soft style to hard. Needless to say, it is difficult for someone to convert from hard style to soft. Please come up with more question to keep this thread active and interesting. Thank you!

Many martial arts seek to increase their power. To do this, they practice punching, weight training, cardio so they can continue using this energy intensive strength longer; training ways to be stronger longer by using better mechanics, etc. This is increasing what they already have; the conventional approach to martial training.

Taijiquan, as I practice it, instead seeks to reduce errors. We strive for “no excess and no deficiency”. We will always have errors, but we seek to make them smaller and smaller (“reducing measures”). This takes a lot of time. Even if one could reduce the error in the wrist to only a hair’s width, if the elbow has several inches of error, then the result would be greatly decreased from what it would be if the elbow also only had a hair’s width of error. Compounded errors can be thought of as being the sum of nine “pearl bends”, referring to the nine major joints of the body (as I understand them, the ankles, knees, hips, shoulders, elbows, wrists, and the lumbar, thoracic and cervical curves of the spine). When we reduce the errors of excess or deficiency in all nine “pearls”, then the result is increased power. Increased power is the end result, but it is a byproduct, rather than the goal, of my training. But reducing errors takes much longer, and is more difficult, than simply building more and more strength (although there are also limits to strength building).

Additionally, we train to be aware of, and maintain, our stability (our “central equilibrium”), first in forms and later against various pressures during push-hands. When we have the awareness of our own balance, under pressure, then we also seek to control and disrupt the opponent’s stability. Here we also need to use strategies that allow us to be sensitive to both ourselves and our opponents. We must train to avoid excess (resistance, or force vs. force) as well as deficiency (collapsing under pressure, or separating/running away). When we can do this, then we can understand them while they have difficulty understanding us. When we can maintain our stability while disrupting that of our opponent, then we have an advantage that can be used either for simple control, or to make an opponent vulnerable to attacks (strikes, throws, breaks…). But this training is a long process and does not show quick results (unlike strength building which can show improvements in strength in a relatively short time). As I stated in my previous post – I enjoy the Taijiquan journey!

Thanks DP. But can you PROVE your approach works? Because if you refer back to my OP, that's all I'm looking for. So far, everyone Ive met says something similar to you but no one has been able to show me such an approach works in a realistic scenario.

Perhaps “Global Village Idiot” will respond to your post, since he is (was?) military and has tried some of the Taijiquan approach vs. his military group in some of their training. If not, then you may at least want to look at some of his past posts since they sometimes relate his experiences using Taijiquan principles in more serious formats against people using the conventional military training approach to hand to hand interactions.

For me, I only had to use it one time (in a biker bar where I was attending a friend’s band performance), where it worked well at least that one time (against a single, drunk, opponent). But I do not have enough experiences to make any valid claims, so no, I personally cannot prove that the approach works.

Hi, Siahn
Why are you so persistent to have someone to prove that Tai Chi works as martial arts. I know it is a waste of effort for everyone to convince you why and how it works. You know it may be impossible to fulfill your wish outside the native origin of Tai Chi Quan. Don't you think you are better off to investigate the principle which make the moves become effective?

As far as I am concern, just by learning the movements of the Tai Chi form will not making them effective as martial arts. The gestures are just instrumental techniques. They will not be effective until one has attained to have a Tai Chi body to execute them. So to speak. A Tai Chi body is a practitioner who has practiced Tai Chi for a long time and developed enough internal strength which is called jin.

A Tai Chi body has the yin yang characteristic which was acquired from the diligent practice. It is all about how one issue the internal strength like fajin. With the ability to fajin, then one may apply each move as martial technique effectively. Of course, during the practice of the basic form, abdominal breathing must be incorporated in the moves. Otherwise, one will be practicing Tai Chi meaninglessly and blindly. If one has noticed that there were some physiological and biological changes took place in the body, then one will know that was done properly.