Yang Tai Chi guy in Sanda Event

Postby Bob Ashmore » Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:28 pm

Just to clear things up,
I am not now nor have I ever been offended by anything posted here.
Master Wu Kung Yi is not my Master, nor is he my family member that I would have any reason to take offense to people insulting his skill or commenting on his lack thereof.
I simply had nothing else to say on the subject and didn't feel it was conducive to this site to continue to say:
Me: He's showing great skill.
Others: No, he's not.
Me: Yes, he is.
Others: No, he's not.

Nothing constructive can come from continuing such an exchange. So why continue?
I have chosen not to.

My suggestion to take the discussion to a more appropriate forum, one where Wu stylists could answer the questions being put forth with more accuracy about their own art than I (who have only the slightest knowledge of it) ever could, was simply my desire to see that those who have questions about what they're seeing on this clip can get the best answers for them.
If that caused offense, then my apologies to all.

T,
My offer is real, has no bias one way or the other and still stands.
I can and will be glad to put you and/or your Sifu in direct e-mail contact with Eddie any time you wish.
That way your Sifu can advise him directly on how best to address the lack of skill your Sifu feels is being exhibited in the Wu families art nowadays.
I'm not the guy your Sifu's concerns about the usefulness of modern Wu style needs to be addressed with. Eddie, as the current Wu family lineage holder, most definitely is the right guy for that.
Since the issue seems to be pressing enough that your Sifu felt it necessary to comment on it publicly, then I felt he might welcome such an opportunity for discussion.
My e-mail address is in my bio. Feel free to contact me about that at any time.

Bob
Bob Ashmore
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:01 am
Location: Frankfort, KY, USA

Postby Louis Swaim » Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:56 pm

Bob,

I heard you twice the first time.

Louis
Louis Swaim
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
Location: Oakland, CA

Postby T » Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:25 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
T,
My offer is real, has no bias one way or the other and still stands.
I can and will be glad to put you and/or your Sifu in direct e-mail contact with Eddie any time you wish.
That way your Sifu can advise him directly on how best to address the lack of skill your Sifu feels is being exhibited in the Wu families art nowadays.
I'm not the guy your Sifu's concerns about the usefulness of modern Wu style needs to be addressed with. Eddie, as the current Wu family lineage holder, most definitely is the right guy for that.
Since the issue seems to be pressing enough that your Sifu felt it necessary to comment on it publicly, then I felt he might welcome such an opportunity for discussion.
My e-mail address is in my bio. Feel free to contact me about that at any time.

Bob[/B]</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Neither I nor my Sifu have any interest in discussing anything with Eddie Wu. If I want to contact him I can do that on my own. And since you did not read my previous response I already said I rather like Wu style. My Sifu does not and since he is old school taiji I seriously doubt he would contact Eddie Wu about anything, it is again a generational/respect thing. If he was asked he would tell him his opinion but he does not go around telling everyone that he does not like Wu style.

This is truly no big deal to me I truly do not care about what Wu is doing today, I do not train it. My Sifu, I imagine, couldn't care less about Wu today either. He does not go around telling people about Wu, he is a long time Yang guy. He told me because I showed him the exact same clip a few months back and that is how I know. The only one that seems to have an issue here is you and I feel that is because I do not share your opinion of the posted video.

You put up the clip, you touted it as a great example of Taiji as a martial art and it simply isn't. It could very likely be that Sifu Wu had great skill but just had a bad day based on the pressures of a rather large audience that he may not have been use to and it is just that the clip is not a good example of it.

And I need to ask how did this get from a response to the Wu style shown in the clip to Wu style today and Eddie Wu? There is about a 50 year difference there. I never even mentioned Eddie Wu or Wu style today, and from what I can see neither did anyone else.


[This message has been edited by T (edited 10-10-2007).]
T
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:01 am
Location: North American Tectonic Plate

Postby mls_72 » Mon Oct 29, 2007 9:16 pm

what is the proper translation of 'san da' ?

my guess is that 'san' is '3' and 'da' is 'attack'. does this mean 3 attacks? 1. hand- as is punching, 2. foot as in kicking and 3. as in throwing.

Taijiquan can be used for san da since it involves those things.
mls_72
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 7:01 am
Location: fairfax va, usa

Postby Louis Swaim » Mon Oct 29, 2007 9:34 pm

Greeting Matt,

Sanda means "random strikes" or "free fighting." It's similar to the term sanshou (random hands, or free sparring). From what I understand, sanda developed in the early 1900s at Whampoa and other military academies. Taijiquan was one of the traditional arts that it was based upon.

Take care,
Louis

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by mls_72:
<B>what is the proper translation of 'san da' ?

my guess is that 'san' is '3' and 'da' is 'attack'. does this mean 3 attacks? 1. hand- as is punching, 2. foot as in kicking and 3. as in throwing.

Taijiquan can be used for san da since it involves those things.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Louis Swaim
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
Location: Oakland, CA

Postby T » Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:37 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Louis Swaim:
<B>Greeting Matt,

Sanda means "random strikes" or "free fighting." It's similar to the term sanshou (random hands, or free sparring). From what I understand, sanda developed in the early 1900s at Whampoa and other military academies. Taijiquan was one of the traditional arts that it was based upon.

Take care,
Louis

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is correct.

Sanda is the old (original) name and Sanshou is the new name but it appears to be going back to being called Sanda.

There are at least 2 different versions, possibly 3 of Sanda

1) Military/Police
2) Sport (think "Cung Le")
3) Civilian?
T
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:01 am
Location: North American Tectonic Plate

Postby Audi » Thu Nov 01, 2007 12:46 am

Hi Matt,

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">There are similarities in the taiji classics and the theories these teachers show me. Taiji and boxing share the principles of 5 elements in taijiquan, that is in terms of movement left and right, back and forward, middle and balanced. The mechanics are the same in issuing power with proper structure. Competition is a chance to show how much quality a person has better over another- how much internal power, striking- hand and foot, throws and sweep, determination an athlete has.</font>


Thanks for your response.

My learning style is heavily geared toward patterns and theoretical structure. This is not better or worse than other learning styles, it is just one of many approaches. Because of my learning style, I have always wondered about Tai Chi concepts such as sinking the shoulders and suspending the head from above. These seem directly contrary to the normal boxing principles of shrugging the shoulders and protecting the neck and head. In my question, I was principally curious as to how you might have reconciled these opposite instructions in your mind.

Take care,
Audi
Audi
 
Posts: 1137
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 7:01 am
Location: New Jersey, USA

Postby mls_72 » Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:20 pm

Audi said: "My learning style is heavily geared toward patterns and theoretical structure. This is not better or worse than other learning styles, it is just one of many approaches. Because of my learning style, I have always wondered about Tai Chi concepts such as sinking the shoulders and suspending the head from above. These seem directly contrary to the normal boxing principles of shrugging the shoulders and protecting the neck and head. In my question, I was principally curious as to how you might have reconciled these opposite instructions in your mind."

I guess its how you interpret Yang Chen fu's 10 points, Western Boxing, and Muay thai. I want to mention that I went to boxing and muay thai classes becuase chinese kung fu and Taijiquan schools in my area did not offer much in terms of San Shou, San Da, and realistic self defense training. At the MMA school...in watching the Boxing and Muay thai classes I saw the hard work necessary be fit and well adjusted in martial arts. Boxing with conditioning and Muay Thai with added training in kicks, elbows, and knees. I noticed alot of similar stuff that a American Taijiquan teacher of mine taught, and my Chinese coach from Shanghai taught in terms of combat and both feel that boxing and taijiquan have much in common.

1. Raise the head as if suspended from above also known as raise the spirit.

If we think of being lifted from the 'bai hui' point at the top of skull we also must think of the pole going through the body in which we must turn. This axis is vital in many martial arts to get the most of force that is driven from the legs, through the waist and out the arms. In boxing and muay thai there is alot of balance and mechanics involved in both martial arts. Yes- in fighting... boxers will protect the chin and neck with shoulders which is counter to Taijiquan principles. The spirit still does not change. The principles are geared towards correct solo form and not fighting, however think of it in terms of 'zhong ding' central equalibrium- do not lean to far back, forward, left or right when fighting or solo form.

2. Correct position of chest and back-
this is same for both- you dont want to keep the chest open for an attack and you want to initiate the force from the waist.

3. Relaxation of waist- this is the same in taijiquan and boxing.

4. Solid and empty stance- this is the same. a boxer is constantly moving and shift weight between both legs. There is a saying boxing- "sitting in the punch" which is like sinking in the kua and initiate your strike. If i slip to my right my weight will be on my right so i am sitting on the punch in my right kua. A left punch would not have much substance than a right punch would.

5. sinking shoulders and elbows- sinking of elbows is common in our boxing style to protect the ribs from punches.

6. Use the mind instead of force- this is where I am constantly changing how to throw a punch. Its taken me 3 years of boxing and muay thai training to just start getting the idea of the relaxed 'whipping' of a punch. it might not happen while in an intense ring bout but I can do it during fight training. It takes less energy but lands very hard. I am still improving on basics.

7. Coordination of upper and lower parts- this is the same- like the kua 'sitting the punch" it has to use the 3 strengths of legs, waist/spine and arm.

8. Harmony of Internal and external- there is a differnece here in terms of breathing. Boxing will have you breathing heavy no doubt. In fighting this will happen even if your taiji pro. Boxing still has - 'open' 'close' 'solid' and 'empty' but it is not taught in the same language as chinese martial arts.

9. Continuity- there is a difference here. Boxing rythm changes up and is not continual. here is a form difference. Taiji wins in terms of continuity. However for fighting my coach says- "if your not moving your firing and if your not firing your moving."

10. Tranquility in Movement- during shadow boxing it is done fast but there still is some finesse. Taiji wins in this area in terms of not exhausting the breath and slower movements. Chen style tempo is not 100% tranquil since it contains stomps and jumps. I stil think boxing when performed soft and smooth can be tranquil in movement but that is my opinion since i am a taiji guy who adds boxing and muay thai to his training and can find the similar and differences.
mls_72
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 7:01 am
Location: fairfax va, usa

Previous

Return to Miscellaneous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron