I am not going to put my opinion on someone I have not cross hands with, but Knifefighter had illustrated a good point here.
Very often, students “worship” their teacher so much that they respond according to what they belief is supposed to happen. Even the teacher himself/herself may get delusions on the level of skills because he/she may actually be brainwashed by the students into thinking what he/she is more powerful than what is real.
In the two examples Knifefighter had given, the teacher can do his magic on the students because the students think it is real; and the teacher thinks he can really do his stuff because it worked on his students. If he did not think it was real, he would not have stepped into the match with the Karate dude trying to defeat him with his techniques.
It is therefore, important to cross-check with reality by crossing hands with different people and different schools, and not be fallen into the trap of self delusion.
[QUOTE=imperialtaichi;746180]I am not going to put my opinion on someone I have not cross hands with, but Knifefighter had illustrated a good point here.
Very often, students “worship” their teacher so much that they respond according to what they belief is supposed to happen. Even the teacher himself/herself may get delusions on the level of skills because he/she may actually be brainwashed by the students into thinking what he/she is more powerful than what is real.
In the two examples Knifefighter had given, the teacher can do his magic on the students because the students think it is real; and the teacher thinks he can really do his stuff because it worked on his students. If he did not think it was real, he would not have stepped into the match with the Karate dude trying to defeat him with his techniques.
It is therefore, important to cross-check with reality by crossing hands with different people and different schools, and not be fallen into the trap of self delusion.
I’m looking at what he’s doing with his hands before he throws his students, and in a lot of the throws Master Lin seems to be repositioning his hands so that thier hands are grabbing him in a way that is structurally unsound. This is something that would be easy to explain in person, but not so much in typing, but… when I studied Aikido I learned a similar technique where you cut under someone grabbing you’s hands and up in a circular motion like he’s doing. When you get under them they’re uprooted in way that when they push against you, they’re essentially knocking themselves down. The teacher would do similarly impressive throws. I tried it at a party against a friend who was a weight lifter and everyone was suitably impressed - which is silly because since you’re using the other guy’s strength against him the bigger they are the easier it is.
Which is only to say that it is a technique that I’ve seen work in the past. Although to his credit, he’s doing it a lot better than I’ve seen anyone else ever do.
Of course, without experiencing it for yourself, you really can’t say what’s going on at all.
It is therefore, important to cross-check with reality by crossing hands with different people and different schools, and not be fallen into the trap of self delusion.
[QUOTE=Justaguy;746225]I’m looking at what he’s doing with his hands before he throws his students, and in a lot of the throws Master Lin seems to be repositioning his hands so that thier hands are grabbing him in a way that is structurally unsound.[/QUOTE]
It has nothing to do with what the fake instructor is doing and everything to do with the students helping him out.
Although to his credit, he’s doing it a lot better than I’ve seen anyone else ever do.
[QUOTE=ramszman;745846]This was a video demonstration of how to test your ability to use fajin. I was there at the taping of this and it is very real. If you notice Master Lin maintains his structure to create maximum power when using fajin. The power is generated from the feet so there is very little movement in the body unless taking a step. The students that are flying backwards are not acting but are responding to the fajin. The first action in many of these exercises is to uproot your partner quickly and then to create the structure for them to rebound off of. So you will see the students go onto their heels because they are being uprooted. The students stand rather stiffly so that you can see the power generated and they do not get hurt. If they were to relax they would still be uprooted but instead of their arms taking the fajin their chest would. That would not be a practical exercise if you were to break your partner’s ribs on an exercise. I can tell you that I have studied internal martial arts for over 2 decades and with some very reputable masters and I have never seen/felt what Master Lin has demonstrated. While some of my former instructors could use fajin from certain postures or after preparing themselves, Master Lin can use fajin from any posture at any time. Not only that but he has a very systematic way of teaching how to use fajin in this manner. Videos can be deceiving. Especially in trying to determine how much power is generated and from where. In this case one needs to feel it to really believe it. Even after feeling it, it boggles the mind that it can be done with such ease.[/QUOTE]
Those are much more realistic and skilled demonstrations of setups, offbalancing, throwing and pushing.
.
I watched both clips. In the first, it looked like people with no resistance were letting the instructor show them some point. The instructor was talking throughout, not fighting with them. Not sure what you’re trying to point out… there was nothing wrong with it, but I’m not sure there was internal power being used, just some offbalancing and pushing. Of course any skilled instructor can do this. I didn’t see the whiplash-like effect I expected from what I’m used to from the first movement, but whatever.
In the second, it looked like many other push hands competitions I’ve seen.
I think what you’re missing is that the video only purports to show what comes before these steps. How do you develop internal power to begin with? Forget using something in a fight… if you don’t have it to begin with, what’s the point? You just end up compensating by other skills.
These clips are fine… they just don’t show the same thing.
[QUOTE=chrisfreel;746478]I watched both clips. In the first, it looked like people with no resistance were letting the instructor show them some point. [/QUOTE]
The difference is, they were not jumping back and assisting the instructor to give the illusion that they were flying through the air from his fajing. Additionally, this was a more realistic demonstration of how you set people up to throw or push them.
but I’m not sure there was internal power being used, just some offbalancing and pushing. Of course any skilled instructor can do this.
Offbalancing and setting up is exactly what happens when you throw someone, take them down or push then. “Internal power” is the B.S. that instructors use to brainwash their student into thinking there is another, “better” way to do this.
I didn’t see the whiplash-like effect I expected from what I’m used to from the first movement, but whatever.
The whiplash effect comes only from a good set-up… or from students who are helping the instructor.
Of course any skilled instructor can do this.
And skilled is the key word. Skill is setting up the opponent. Non-skilled hors3sh!1 is telling your students all they have to is develop internal power to do this.
You just end up compensating by other skills.
Those “other skills” are the only ones there are. Believing otherwise is why so many TMA practitioners end up with cr@p in terms of applicable skills
“Internal power” is the B.S. that instructors use to brainwash their student into thinking there is another, “better” way to do this.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, thats interesting. How do you define “Internal”?
When a Tennis coach tells his student to “imagine your arm extended all the way to the edge of the court”: is that external or internal? When a boxing coach tells the boxer to “imagine the glove exploding inside the target” what do you call it?
My point is, there are many “better” ways to do things; that’s the difference between a good teacher/coach and an ordinary one who only knows how to follow the rest of the crowd. The line between external and internal is often blurry. Sometimes the ways may look weird, but until one has experience with it, it may not be as B.S. as it looks.
[QUOTE=imperialtaichi;746505]Ah, thats interesting. How do you define “Internal”?[/QUOTE]
There is no differentiation between “internal” and “external”. Your mind works with your body. The opponent offering feedback and intent are also integral to this process.
When a Tennis coach tells his student to “imagine your arm extended all the way to the edge of the court”: is that external or internal? When a boxing coach tells the boxer to “imagine the glove exploding inside the target” what do you call it?
Those are ways to help a student learn basic movements. However, the high skill is developed in the doing of the actual activity against a real opponent who is also working to beat you. This is where the real skills of strategy, tactics, set-ups and finishes occur
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;746485]The difference is, they were not jumping back and assisting the instructor to give the illusion that they were flying through the air from his fajing. Additionally, this was a more realistic demonstration of how you set people up to throw or push them. [/QUOTE]
Setting people up is not difficult, especially if they are just standing there letting you demonstrate anything you want. Sound familiar? I think it’s the same criticism you had of the original video. The difference is, no one claimed there was resistance being overcome in the first one. It was a basic skills exercise.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;746485]Offbalancing and setting up is exactly what happens when you throw someone, take them down or push then. “Internal power” is the B.S. that instructors use to brainwash their student into thinking there is another, “better” way to do this.[/QUOTE]
I’m sorry, but you’re posting on an internal arts forum and you don’t think there’s such a thing as internal power? That’s, uh, interesting.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;746485]The whiplash effect comes only from a good set-up… or from students who are helping the instructor.[/QUOTE]
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;746485]And skilled is the key word. Skill is setting up the opponent. Non-skilled hors3sh!1 is telling your students all they have to is develop internal power to do this.[/QUOTE]
No one said that power generation is the whole story.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;746485]Those “other skills” are the only ones there are. Believing otherwise is why so many TMA practitioners end up with cr@p in terms of applicable skills[/QUOTE]
That’s one opinion. Another is that they don’t really train very hard, or their instruction sucks, etc. But you have bad examples in any art, so what? It doesn’t mean there aren’t methods to improve certain skills. How good was your punch the first time you hit a bag? Could better body mechanics improve it? Why is it so hard to believe that you might get further improvements from even better body mechanics?
[QUOTE=chrisfreel;746516]Setting people up is not difficult, especially if they are just standing there letting you demonstrate anything you want. Sound familiar? I think it’s the same criticism you had of the original video. The difference is, no one claimed there was resistance being overcome in the first one. It was a basic skills exercise. [/QUOTE]
Setting someone up is very difficult if they are skilled. It is the key to any high level fighting, both in terms of doing it and stopping in from a defensive standpoint.
You are right… the “opponents” are not resisting and actual resistance would definitely be more realistic in terms of showing the applications. However, this still shows a more realistic approach than not demonstrating any setups and having the students jumping back and exaggerating the pushes.
I’m sorry, but you’re posting on an internal arts forum and you don’t think there’s such a thing as internal power? That’s, uh, interesting.
I don’t differentiate between internal and external. As I said in the other post, you can’t separate one from the other in terms of application of technique.
Why is it so hard to believe that you might get further improvements from even better body mechanics?
You’ll get no argument from me there. Body mechanics can always be improved. Having people pretend that they are being forced back is no way to do this, however.
I would call it the same bullcr@p on a different video from someone elso who does’t actually spar his stuff against anyone who has a clue.
[/QUOTE]
You see, this is where you get things wrong. You cannot call something B.S. just because you are not familiar with it.
I try to cross hands with people as much as I can. And I always tell my students to test their skills against others too, so we can fine tune if what we are doing is working.
A big part of my training came from bruises. I don’t just cross hands with other Tai Chi guys, but also Wing Chun, Bagua, Karate, Bak Mei, Aikido, Shaolin, BJJ etc. just to name a few. One of my best student is a Karate black belt instructor who mixes what I teach him with his own techniques and he is a very accomplished fighter. So I would not call myself “someone else who does’t actually spar his stuff against anyone who has a clue.” Being medically trained and worked in Hospital emergencies, as well as involving myself in pub fights (in my foolish younger days) I have seen first hand the reality of fights and injuries so I would think I do have a clue
[QUOTE=chrisfreel;746516]
I’m sorry, but you’re posting on an internal arts forum and you don’t think there’s such a thing as internal power? That’s, uh, interesting.
[/QUOTE]
Well, how are you ever going to expand knowledge without listening to people with different viewpoints? I totally reject the superstitious notion of internal power as well. No wonder CMA is in such a state.
Well, how are you ever going to expand knowledge without listening to people with different viewpoints? I totally reject the superstitious notion of internal power as well. No wonder CMA is in such a state.
[/QUOTE]
Hello Water-quan,
You may find this weird… although I consider myself an internal guy, I am totally open to people who do not believe in internal power. I have one student who is a Western trained medical doctor who absolutely does not believe in the notion of Qi or internal power; yet he continues to train with us because he finds the training useful. Some of the things he can explain through western terms, some he cannot.
My perception of what is internal and what is external is getting blurry; as long as something works, who cares what you call it. But of course, just like everything else, test it, test it, and test it more.
We have all seen “Internal Dudes” who fail miserably when it comes to the crunch; We have also seen “External Techniques” that looks good in the gym yet would not stand a chance unless the opponent is cooperative. What works, and what doesn’t, really depends. The proof is in the pudding.
That’s cool John. I call what I do internal method training. For me, internal means proceeding via intuition, and external means copying the form of another.
Whoever came up with / progpageated the dichotemous terminology of internal / external in TCMA has done the arts a great disservice, as it has lead to much pointless discussion regarding what is one and what is the other;
my understanding is that Sun Lu Tang gives a good historical account in the foreward to his xing yi book, including the rationale for this (seems like the “internal” folk wanted to feel special about what they were doing; I think that it also allows for people who can’t fight their way out of a paper bag to couch their “internal” training as something “other” that is justifiable for its own sake, regardless of application to fighting; and it also allows for a greater degree of entrainment between students and instructors, as it is predicated on the notion of agreement - “ok, now don’t resist me while I do this or you will get hurt”)
anyway, the distinction, to me, sets one up for an “either / or” type of thinking which either remains as such or, for some who actually realize it, recombined later on at “higher” levels; I think that a much more productive way of working would be to qualify the various types of methods used to train in different styles in terms of where one places attention, how one coordinates movement, and what exactly the desired outcome is (either doing something to an opponent, or experiencing a certain type of sensation while one is moving); of course, this is already done, but to do it without the labels;
for example, one of the things that would be helpful is to appropriately describe those so-called “indescribeable” internal phennonmenon from a western perspective; many say it can’t be done: I not only disagree, I find it ludicrous, given that the current knowledge-state of human anatomical / physiological / biomechanical function is light-years ahead of what the “ancient” Chinese “knew”, and what they ultimately had to resort to describing using metaphorical terms (e.g. - it seems to me that “qi” is essentially a metaphorical description of all the functional interrelationships of diffferent body systems with each other and the surrounding environment that occur during the process of living; it’s not very esoteric or mystical, and so a lot less possible to use it to mystify one’s students or yo use a a catch-all when you run out of “western terms”, but it makes sense…); if you can’t describe it from a “western perspective”, don’t blame the equipment - go out and educate yourself a bit more about how the body works, including from a so-called “non-linear” perspective…it may not get it all yet, but it’s a lot more rigorous than defaulting to terms like “qi” and “internal” when you run out of things to say (this is especially for those of you have experienced stuff that you personally can’t understand - don’t presume to project this profound state of befuddlement onto anyone else…)
anyway, to sum up, and to paraphrase the Python boys “let’s not go to ‘internal / external’; it is a silly place”
if you can’t describe it from a “western perspective”, don’t blame the equipment - go out and educate yourself a bit more about how the body works, including from a so-called “non-linear” perspective…it may not get it all yet, but it’s a lot more rigorous than defaulting to terms like “qi” and “internal” when you run out of things to say (this is especially for those of you have experienced stuff that you personally can’t understand - don’t presume to project this profound state of befuddlement onto anyone else…)
[/QUOTE]
Hello Cjurakpt,
yeah, in medical terms, when there is something we do not know, we tell the patients it is “ideopathic” :). Most of them seems to be happy with the explanation.
I don’t think we hold all the answers in “western perspective” yet. People’s been brewing beers for hundreds of years before we fully understood how the sugar turns into alcohol.
So the next time we are stuck without a good scientific explanation, remember the “wisdom of Beer”
[QUOTE=imperialtaichi;746531]You see, this is where you get things wrong. You cannot call something B.S. just because you are not familiar with it.
I don’t just cross hands with other Tai Chi guys, but also Wing Chun, Bagua, Karate, Bak Mei, Aikido, Shaolin, BJJ etc. just to name a few.[/QUOTE]
Im surprised that someone who states that he regularly works with a variety of disciplines in fully resisting environments cannot see the difference between the B.S. videos and the more realistic ones.
That last video is B.S. To do some of what is being advocated there would be to violate the laws of physics. Ive been around the block enough times to know B.S. when I see it. If this isn’t evidence enough of horsehockey, all one has to do is browse though other videos from that guy to see he is doing the same old “opponents are helping him out” junk.
Don’t you find it strange that guys like this have a whole cataloge with clips of themsevles doing technques with their “opponents” not resisting and flying around, but don’t have a single clip of them sparring in more realistic environments? People who actually work against resisting opponents in realistic environments usually post clips of this type of stuff along with their technical clips. People who only do the “pretend” stuff only have this to demonstrate.
I am not necessarily calling it all B.S. Just the stuff that is. As I already stated, I thought the two clips I alluded to in previous posts had merit. There were huge differences between those two clips and the others. Most people with a significant background in working with realistic applications should be able to see this.
