From: doug@eng.umd.edu (Douglas N. Cohen)
Subject: Re: Tai Chi, final
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 14:41:31 GMT
Organization: hah! we don't need no stinkin' organization!
Summary: 	-=-=-< why do you persist? >-=-=-
Followup-To: 	figure it out for yourself
Keywords: 	-=-=-< try again >-=-=-
Cc: stnahc@gpu.utcs.utoronto

	contrary to what peter capel suggested, i was not attempting to
'lambast' you for your previous post.
	this one, however is meant to be that way.  you seem to persist 
in your misconceptions and percetions, as well as your generalizations.
they are wrong.  in error.  allow me to (once again) clear this point up!
	-=-=-> NOW!  PAY ATTENTION!

In article <BtnpC8.ItK@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> stnahc@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (L. Chan) writes:

>
>
>To clarify some of the points I have made previously
>regarding Tai Chi teachers, the art, etc., here are my
>points to made.
>
>1. "throw" technique in Tai Chi means, when some person B
>    hit person A, person A can bounce B away up in the air for 5 feet or more
>    WITHOUT noticable body motion/movement. This technique looks
>    very similar to Bruce Lee's 3 inch punch (which is a modified
>    form of Yen Yee's "throw" method) but the way of releasing
>    the power is totally different.
>

	i have seen thisin this country, more than once....
	Sifu Y.C. Wong, (T'ai Chi Ch'uan, Hung Gar, Pa Kwa, Pek Qua etc.,)
of san francisco, in the 1991 NACMAF seminar at the NACMAF tournament in
baltimore did this very thing.
	Dr. Tim Lee (an instructor in T'ai Chi Ch'uan, and Hung Fut Kung Fu)
was playing push hands with Sifu Wong during the demonstration, and after a
minute of 'feeling' each other, Sifu Wong *LIGHTLY* (*EVER SO SUBTLY) touched
Tim's chest with his index and middle finger, sending Tim flying up about 2
feet and backwards, towards the wall.  (Tim's feet were *WELL* off the ground!)
without even breaking his stance or the flow of movement, Sifu Wong reached 
up at the peak of Tim's arc, and grabbed his jacket front, yanking him down
back into his same position (from which he was launched) and 're-set' his
push hands motion, continuing as if nothing had happened!  
	-=-=-< please note >-=-=->  *I SAW THIS!*
	in another seminar, one of our top full contact fighters and instructors
(kung fu) Linh Tai, seeing the same demonstration, wanted to try his luck
against this 60+ year old master, and came in grossly and roughly.  Sifu
Wong was less gracious as instead of catching him and bringing him back to
the push hands position, he let him hit the wall (about 4' away) and slide
down to land on his .....ehr... pride.
	-=-=-< please note >-=-=->  *I SAW THIS!* 
	i attended the seminar that peter capel put togetherin pittsburgh,
a couple of years ago.  i have the tape.  his teacher was everything he
claims!  i worked out with him and his teacher.  someone else from this
group was there also (wasn't that you michael robinson?  sorry; i can't
remember) he made the pa qua circle seen so simple, while i, (thing to be
in great shape and adaptable) was struggling to remember the simplest
movements.  his blocks and throws, while not as flashy, were smooth and
seamless, and seemingly effortless, while *my* breathing was ragged!
	i have seen and participated in many seminars and demonstrations,
(including the Shaolin Monks - twice - when there were here) and have seen
amazing things.  all those who *i* saw, were more than willing to teach
what they knew to any who wish to take the training.  there was no 'holding
back' 'secrets'.  Dr. Tim Lee, whenever Sifu Wong comes to town (which is
6 times a year, as a friend of our Sifu and school) for seminars, learns a 
lot, and spreads the teaching to our classes.  Tim is learning these same 
techniques.  you cannot learn them in one seminar, nor even one year.  it
is developed over time.  i have seen the developement in Tim.  i can't see
it in me, yet, but i have seen it affect my kung fu.  other's have said it
*has* helped me.

>  -> no one can do this technique any more if the person is ONLY
>     practicing Tai Chi TODAY. Reason is point # 2.
>
>2. Today's approach to Tai Chi practice is,

	this may apply to some schools.  or some teachers.  again, i point
out to you that perhaps it is your personal experience(s) that are colouring
your opinion(s).
	to that point, where do/have you studied?  under whom do/did you 
study?  what is his/her lineage?  how much have you dedicated yourself to
practice?  perhaps the 'shortcoming' is in *you*.  perhaps the teacher isn't
teaching you, because you have the very attitude you have.
	i don't know..... perhaps you could clarify *those* points for us in
your *next* 'clarification post'......

>
>    A. the forms
>    B. push hands
>    C. da lu
>    D. single form
>    E. sword and/or other weapons
>
>  -> original approach is,
>
>    A. the forms, and the spear (I don't know in English what that really is),
>           and endurance training by doing fixed posture of the forms
>    B. single form with speed and power
>    C. 2 forms at a time, then 3 forms at a time
>    D. sword, plus other weapons
>    E. push hands
>    F. da lu (optional)
>    G. 2 person fighting forms
>
>    Notice pt. B of the original approach is similar to what you do in karate
>    session !! pt. C is similar to Bruce Lee's theory of complex combination
>    of simple attacks/defences. pt. G is similar to all Chinese martial arts'
>    2 person training.
>
>    Without these extra parts in the training, Tai Chi practitioners will
>    not be able to fight. Although, they may be good at push hand.

	not all T'ai Chi schools and instructors teach T'ai Chi Ch'uan.  not
all teachers, teaching, know more than a little.  others do.  it is always
good to check out the teacher and his/her lineage and skill.  it is folly
to do otherwise.

>
>3. The "real" masters I refer to are those who know where and what in the
>    body could be hit such that the opponent would be hurt most. All 

	you don't need to be a master to be able to do that!  

>    "internal" style martial arts emphasize on this topic of how to win
>    a fight by better knowledge of how the human body works. Each
>    internal style of martial arts has its own discovery and that's why
>    they are different styles. A simple example could serve illustrating 
>    this point well - a lot of Tai Chi movement
>    waves the hand and step forward, this is not what it should be when
>    one is in a fight. The waving of hand is used for distracting the
>    opponent to look at your hands, at that very same time, you have 
>    already step very hard on his foot or kick at his lower leg. 
>    A very simple human reflex was used in the example - when someone
>    seems to hit you by his hand, you will concentrate on what he will
>    do next with his hand and thus, miss some other possible things.
>    This concept of utilizing human reflex is used by Bruce Lee in JKD
>    and generalized this as faking.

	you may be interested to know that bruce lee was *never* a "master"
of *ANYTHING* in the martial-arts.  he never completed training in any style
or under any master.  he studied a little here and a little there, had some
natural talent, declared himself a master and created his 'jheet kuen do'
and made movies.  to cite him as an authority in any area outside of the
movie industry merely shows your ignorance.
	further, your example is a poor one.  there are many people who
understand the concept of distraction and it isn't all that mysterious a 
concept.  take for example the fakirs (snake charmers of india,) or the
matadors of spain and mexico, who are not martial artists.  they seem to have
grasped the obvious principles of distraction.

>
>   The type of skill/knowledge I mentioned is so deadly, will you
>    teach it to everyone you know?

	all knowledge is potentially dangerous.  the catholic church recognized
this very early in western history and attempted to outlaw knowledge and 
learning.  for some 1400 years or so, they were quite successful.  are you
saying that we should outlaw knowledge?
	there is an old saying.  'a little knowledge is dangerous'  (and
you seem to have as little as anyone ....)  this is a fact.  that is why
training can be long and hard.  it takes time to develope the skills and 
conditioning, and the proper attitude.  but, it is also a way for the teacher
to evaluate the student.  not only his/her physical skills and development,
but his mental and emotional makeup and development.
	any specialized knowledge can be potentially dangerous.  you don't
give a child a loaded gun to play with (unless you have made certain that
that child is thoroughly trained and understands the gun is not a play thing
and is potentially deadly) just as a teacher has a responsibilitly to make
sure that the student isn't going to mis-use the knowledge and skills he
learns.  there is no perfect way for a teacher to be certain that a student
isn't going to 'stray' from that responsibility.  does that mean that all
knowledge should die out due to that paranoia?  how absurd and silly of you!

>
>4. A lot of people after practiced Tai Chi for a long time will be capable
>    of "dissolving" an opponent's attack easily and will be able to 
>    do a weaker form of "throw". This is called "strong in strength" in Tai
>    Chi. This will not help you in a real fight though. This level is most
>    Tai Chi practitioners can do up to. If they want to do more then that,

	it is obvious to me that you have a rather limited understanding of
martial arts and especially T'ai Chi Ch'uan.  i have always been taught to
understand that in T'ai Chi Ch'uan, we seek *not* to contend.  again, i
ask you to address the questions i have asked, concerning your style, teacher,
lineage, and dedication.  then.... look inside yourself, and try to determine
your motivations and goals.

>    most people today head for another internal style or, train themselves
>    with weights, etc. But that is NOT Tai Chi.
>
>For any thing regarding this message, email me.
>-- 
>+---------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Lawrence Chan                     stnahc@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca |
>+---------------------------------------------------------------+

	another opinion, worth what you paid for it!
	and, as always, i am/at:

	     doug:  <doug@eng.umd.edu> : <doug@lpf.umd.edu>

	-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-< a ghost in the machine >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

	"presidential elections are planned distractions
	 to divert attention from the actions behind the scenes....
	 like a game of chess when the house is a mess, or
	 a petty money squabble when your marriage is in trouble,
	 or a football game when there's rioting in the street!

	 it's just another movie.....  another song and dance.....
	 another poor sucker who never had a chance!
	 it's just another captain goin' down with his ship.....
	 it's just another jerk, taking pride in his work!

				       greetings from timbuck three!

Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts