Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2007 17:44:20 GMT
Agree to what the instructor is telling. To me, I think the results is based on your action. I mean if you practice Taijiquan simply for your own health then it is completely non-combative, but if you wish to kick some ass, then a simple kick in Taijiquan would do it... I mean, even soccer players can kick people to death... Nowadays people tend to think Martial Arts is a way of proving ones self to kick some one's ass. The real meaning behind Martial Arts (particularly in China, WUSHU) is a way of living and wisdom. Through practice of WUSHU you can really stop thinking about fighting or compete, and just be wise and healthy... I have to disagree. The real meaning behind Chinese martial arts was not only about being wise and healthy. A monk could simply read books, meditate and go for a jog everyday to stay wise and healthy. Why then martial arts? Why not a jog everyday? Taichi was not invented for health reasons. Taichi originates from the Chen village and an agricultural village gets more than enough exercise from daily chores. Obviously there was another reason. Most family's had their own styles of martial art to defend their villages. As I said earlier Martial Arts are about both aspects: the civil aspect and the martial aspect. Both are important...I'm sure the famous generals from China's history, who were both scholars and men of war, would agree with me...if they didn't China wouldn't have been around until now. I also don't understand why you would learn martial arts to stop thinking about fighting and to be wise and healthy. If you do that all movements lose their meaning and Yoga would actually be more effective in that regard. And becoming wiser...meeting many many people and listening to their experiences would make you a wiser person as well. Why martial arts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2007 18:16:20 GMT
I think it is fairly certain that Taichi originated out of a fighting system. However, from all the information I have gathered, it appears that as it is currently practiced, it is a meditation. If you make the necessary modifications to make it an effective fighting form, you will have something other then Taichi.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2007 1:48:50 GMT
I think it is fairly certain that Taichi originated out of a fighting system. However, from all the information I have gathered, it appears that as it is currently practiced, it is a meditation. If you make the necessary modifications to make it an effective fighting form, you will have something other then Taichi. Tsafa, you're right it is currently practised for health reasons. The funny thing is the form and movements haven't really changed. The martial applications are still there but you have to give meaning to them. The moves weren't changed to suit health applications...rather people's attitudes changed. The health taichi practised by the instructor you mentioned likely contains the same movements as the tai chi taught by Scott Rodell. The difference is how they teach it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2007 5:50:03 GMT
lol, we are so deep into this thread that I forgot about Scott Rondell. Do you know if he does any free sparring in his school?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2007 17:35:13 GMT
They do indeed. It's for students who have a little experince and have built the muscle memory in from doing the forms and push hands (limited sparring).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2007 23:14:20 GMT
about the martial implications of tai chi check this out furthermore after watching S. Rondell's movies a lot of the techniques are also implicated in wushu wich is merely a collective name for CMA i had a talk with my sifu last week and discussed about wushu and traditional wushu fighting styles, in modern wushu just like in tai chi you can still find every traditional aspect of it and just like tai chi with the health application kick in the martial spirit, the only thing with modern wushu is that the crude fighting moves are performed more elegant what makes it an art and a fighting system all in one. ofcourse it depends on your instructor what the limit's of their teaching is.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 5, 2007 23:26:42 GMT
I personally believe Tai Chi is next to useless as a fighting art in itself (at least as it is widely seen today). But when combined with other arts, I think it holds quite a bit of potential.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2007 3:43:20 GMT
I think you are wrong Ramm, it depends where you learn it and who teaches it. If it is taught as the traditional tai chi then it is a very formidable martial art. The thing about tai chi is to actually learn it as a combat form takes ten years, to master it takes a life time. Karate and tae kwon do and those kinds of martial arts (except possibly judo) were also formidable at one stage but with the removal of certain techniques that are deemed "too dangerous" the arts have been watered down and become sports. That is why i don't put much stock in so called "martial arts" these days. I would prefer to learn something practical like military combat techniques that i know i can put my faith in. I like techniques that don't require you to do 40 things to incapacitate an opponent. Unfortunately the true understanding of what traditional martial arts are, are dying out in favour of extreme martial arts and other gymnastic sport arts.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 6, 2007 3:46:07 GMT
So uh....
we're on the same page it seems like ;D
I said Tai Chi taught today, not traditional Tai Chi (which also seems rather useless to my untrained eye, but I've been in martial arts long enough to to judge something by outright appearance - my Muay Thai instructer was 65+ years old and barely over 5 feet tall....I'll let the imagination work up what he was able to do to us young'uns ;D)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2007 19:14:26 GMT
Seems there's always people judging the Chinese martial arts without personal experience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2007 3:19:00 GMT
So uh.... we're on the same page it seems like ;D I said Tai Chi taught today, not traditional Tai Chi (which also seems rather useless to my untrained eye, but I've been in martial arts long enough to to judge something by outright appearance - my Muay Thai instructer was 65+ years old and barely over 5 feet tall....I'll let the imagination work up what he was able to do to us young'uns ;D) That's quite a bold statement to criticize a martial art that has been used and finetuned for centuries up until now that is.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 7, 2007 3:23:55 GMT
I said it appears useless in my eye. I'm not going to lie to you. It may very well be a good fighting art, and I'm not qualified to say.
I'm just pointing out my initial impressions, take it as you will.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2007 3:36:58 GMT
oh sry maybe a miscommunication. I thought you said you were qualified because you were in martial arts long enough to judge by appearance.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 7, 2007 20:56:57 GMT
Just the opposite is what I meant ;D
I said my little bit of martial arts background tells me that things are often not what they seem - I used my old teacher as an example. 60 something years old and looked completely decrepit. Except he had some insane muscles that he hid beneath baggy clothes....
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 7, 2007 21:01:59 GMT
Seems there's always people judging the Chinese martial arts without personal experience. We see arts that are far more aggressive absolutely destroyed in REAL fighting. Tai Chi, IMHO, would stand no chance is something like, say, the UFC. (Not the best example, but it gets the point across). I'd pit Couture against anyone trained in Tai Chi, from my (as pointed out and I agree with) uneducated standpoint. Prove to me the effectiveness in real fighting. I'll believe it when evidence emerges. note: training in real fighting as well as Tai Chi is not the same as training solely in Tai Chi. I'm not arguing that Tai Chi is a poor ADDITION to a combat oriented martial art (which I believe it could be very helpful in that circumstance), but as an fighting style by itself against other styles of combat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2007 8:02:39 GMT
Just the opposite is what I meant ;D I said my little bit of martial arts background tells me that things are often not what they seem - I used my old teacher as an example. 60 something years old and looked completely decrepit. Except he had some insane muscles that he hid beneath baggy clothes.... ha ha oh my apologies then. about the UFC thing you're right. 99.9% of modern tai chi practitioners would get destroyed in the ring. but I don't think UFC is representative of combat. In fact UFC is inherently biased against Chinese martial arts in particular because CMA have a nasty habit of concentrating on vulnerable areas that aren't to be touched in UFC. To put things in a historical perspective. The founder of Yang style tai ji (the most widespread style) was retained by the imperial family in China to train their imperial elite guard in the 19th century. I doubt they would entrust their lives to an art that was completely useless.
|
|