223862 Bullies, 3760 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 41 to 50 of 259
Page 5 of 26 FirstFirst 12345 678915 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Rivington is offline
    Rivington's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    East Bay, CA
    Posts
    4,733

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 6:51pm

    supporting member
     Style: Taijiquan/Shuai-Chiao/BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    Not really.
    Yes, really. You keep punting, I'll keep responding in kind.

    Have you watched the first two videos in this thread? That was the initial point. In those videos, points were clearly awarded for non-taiji "applications".
    Like?

    I have competed in the competition with american rules and have seen use of "appropriate force". That does not mean "limited" force.
    And I've not competed under American rules as I'd be disqualified after several seconds thanks to the ridiculous ruleset under which the competitions are held.

    So, the conversation at the beginning was if the Chinese competitions are superior to the american. My answer is still no.
    Despite the fact that you have already demonstrated you cannot tell the difference between a competition and a worked demonstration within a Chinese competition.

    The reason I feel the US standards are better is because they at least eliminate actions that are not in alignment with taijiquan principles.
    You know very little of taiji, if that is the case.

    In all honesty, I don't believe that push hands is the appropriate exercise for competition, it is a learning environment.
    I don't disagree with this. However, of the two sets of standards, the Asian competitions are clearly better for the development of one's taiji.
  2. taijirichm is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    72

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 6:55pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    occult in english

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivington View Post
    You don't know what "occult" means.
    I thought we were both speaking english.

    1: not revealed : secret2: not easily apprehended or understood : abstruse , mysterious3: hidden from view : concealed4: of or relating to the occult5: not manifest or detectable by clinical methods alone <occult carcinoma> ; also : not

    I don't claim to be smarter than others, I have been able to understand them. Took some work, ie. reading and learning, but it wasn't equivalent to physiccs or calculus. There are plenty of books in english with explanations, so I would say they were not written in occult language now.
  3. Rivington is offline
    Rivington's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    East Bay, CA
    Posts
    4,733

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 7:06pm

    supporting member
     Style: Taijiquan/Shuai-Chiao/BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    I thought we were both speaking english.

    1: not revealed : secret2: not easily apprehended or understood : abstruse , mysterious3: hidden from view : concealed4: of or relating to the occult5: not manifest or detectable by clinical methods alone <occult carcinoma> ; also : not.
    Yes, I am right and you are wrong, I know. You are just one of the many many people on the Internet who cannot ever say, "I was wrong about X." It's a common character flaw amongst dopes and dupes both. (So, which are you?)

    All the material you posted has a number of layers of meaning, depends on figurative language, and is not easily apprehended or understood. One cannot read that one's Yi should be privileged over one's li and understand that without some in-depth practice and guidance. By itself, that statement of principle means nothing.

    Indeed, even the basics are hidden, as can be shown by the differences in the translation: one mentions peng, et al by (translated) name, the other does not. Further, why is left associated with water and right with fire? That is essentially an occult question, one that is answered via the process of initiation.

    Physics and calculus, incidentally, may be difficult, but they are not occulted. If anything, the language of mathematics is very direct--so direct in fact that a couple of symbols would take paragraphs of written words to explain.


    PS: I seriously doubt you understand taiji principles as well as you think you do.
  4. taijirichm is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    72

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 7:16pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivington View Post
    Physics and calculus, incidentally, may be difficult, but they are not occulted. If anything, the language of mathematics is very direct--so direct in fact that a couple of symbols would take paragraphs of written words to explain.


    PS: I seriously doubt you understand taiji principles as well as you think you do.
    From my standpoint, seems like dope or dupe could be applied to you.

    What you say about mathmatics is interesting. Sounds like the translations of the principles. Most of the difficulty is in translation. That happens from all languages. Mathmatic, chinese, etc. Even in english. Obviously you consider what I wrote as occult (opinion). I would not. I would see it as the dificulty of writing an explanation for a physical concept.

    Interestingly enough, taoism is very closely related to physics and quantum physics. Nothing in the taiji principles that isn't expainable using physics...or exercise science.

    All martial arts at the mastery level have these same principles, though may not express them as such.
  5. Rivington is offline
    Rivington's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    East Bay, CA
    Posts
    4,733

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 7:18pm

    supporting member
     Style: Taijiquan/Shuai-Chiao/BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    From my standpoint, seems like dope or dupe could be applied to you.
    And yet, we have some actual evidence of you being a dope:

    Interestingly enough, taoism is very closely related to physics and quantum physics.

    Thanks for providing it.
  6. Jack Rusher is online now
    Jack Rusher's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,135

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 8:10pm


     Style: ti da shuai na

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivington View Post
    If we're talking taiji, making some general comment about what martial arts are supposed to be for or looking up dictionary definitions of the term "martial arts" isn't going to get us anywhere.
    ++. The guy's not wrong about athletics being used to cultivate the self and/or build character in pretty much every culture. Kintanon is also right that it's a natural outgrowth of maturely facing the adversity that is a natural part of training. There's really no argument here, just guys throwing rocks at each other -- drop it, please, both of you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivington View Post
    Let's stick with the Chinese push-hands competitions and what "principles" might be defied in them.
    Absolutely.

    TaijiRich: Rivington is asking you to post a few timecodes in the original video with annotations of which principles you think are being broken in each place. If you do this, we'll have something specific to talk about. My guess is that you will point to places where I'll say, "it wasn't great taiji, but he got the job done," and you'll say "it wasn't great taiji" -- i.e. it doesn't follow the principles as well as one might hope -- "so he shouldn't score." This is, at least, something about which we can disagree in a productive way.
    “Most people do not do, but take refuge in theory and talk, thinking that they will become good in this way” -- Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, II.4
  7. Tom Kagan is offline
    Tom Kagan's Avatar

    Dark Overlord of the Bullshido Underworld

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New York, NY USA
    Posts
    5,602

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 8:17pm

    supporting member
     Style: Taai Si Ji Kung Fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    So, this post hasn't gone very far...hmmmmm, wonder why?
    We were waiting for the LARPer to show up.

    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    Hmmm, wonder why none of them use your definition, guess "you are smarter" than everyone else.
    You're joking right? Those definitions come closer to "smashing people" than your thoughts.

    To suggest that the purpose of martial arts is about "self development" is no different than suggesting that the purpose of eating is to produce a pile of ****. Such byproducts should be a private matter and not flung at people.

    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    In the mis-quoted conversation, I was pointing out that in a competetive environment the point system should be designed to reward "good" behavior as defined by the "art" that it is a competition for.

    Knowing about taiji, I don't feel that the chinese system encourages good taiji, it rewards actions that are clearly in violation of the parameters defining taijiquan. These parameters are the principles.
    The criteria has to be objective. Take your comment regarding the other vdieo Jack Rusher put up: an objective definition of "balance" is you did not fall. Are you on your back and the other guy is still standing? YOU SUCK. Is the other guy off balance, even a little? Put him on his back. If you can't and get thrown, YOU SUCK. Maybe your opponent sucks too, but YOU SUCK MORE.

    No, if, ands, or buts - no debate as to whether the guy standing managed to roll too far past a meridian point on the ball of his foot while imposing his will upon his opponent.

    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    Mr. Kagan could not/would not even discuss the defining principles, rather simply asking for video. The funny thing is he in the discussion provided video links that did the same thing, he just did not understand what he was looking at.
    You are either delusional, drunk, high, or naturally a bad reader. I did not ask for video. I asked you for OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE to provide some credibility to your words. Instead, I got more words which you expect others to take on FAITH. You would not/could not even establish whether you had any credentials to make such an appeal to your own "vainman" authority anything other than another logical fallacy. As such, any discussion of Tai Chi "principles" was merely red herring chum you were tossing. I was not willing to take the bait. The result? You subsequently refused to argue the substance of the discussion points (objective evidence, your credentials) and instead launched into an ad-hominem by stating I need to know Tai Chi when discussing points which ultimately are universal to any martial sport competition whatsoever.

    Spoiler:
    Oh, and did you know accusing someone of not knowing what "ad-hominem means when it is clear you are arguing ad-hominen is, in and of itself, ad-hominem?
    Spoiler:


    I know exactly what I am looking at: someone who attempts to establish subjective and vague interpretations of principle over objective evidence. It's a COMPETITION, not a lecture/demo/training camp.



    You entire argument comes down to you whining like a crybaby that Tai Chi push hands shouldn't be the basis of a competition and remain a training tool. You want to be an asshole over that? Fine, but don't demand others not to notice that **** you are flinging IS ****. Subjective interpretation IS ****.

    Nevertheless, notwithstanding such a philosophical argument (one you already lost), why is it that just about any Japanese martial art has no problem understanding the difference between practice (randori) and competition (shiai)? Is there something so mystical in that 10,000 line wall of vague Tai Chi "principles" which prevents an objective measurement of skill in a level playing field? Try not to make such preposterous implications. While still interesting, Tai Chi's incantation of push hands - somewhat unique to the style's training methodology - is ultimately nothing special.
    Last edited by Tom Kagan; 4/07/2009 8:29pm at .
    Calm down, it's only ones and zeros.

    "Your calm and professional manner of response is really draining all the fun out of this. Can you reply more like Dr. Fagbot or something? Call me some names, mention some sand in my vagina or something of the sort. You can't expect me to come up with reasonable arguments man!" -- MaverickZ

    "Tom Kagan spins in his grave and the fucking guy isn't even dead yet." -- Snake Plissken

    My Bullshido fan club threads:
    Tom Kagan's a big hairy...
    Tom Kagan can lick my BALLS
    Tom Kagan teaches _ing __un and bigotry?
    Tom Kagan: Serious discussion here
    Lamokio asks the burning question is Tom Kagan a ***** or just cruising for some
    I'm Dave the gay Kickboxer from Manchester and I have the hots for Tom Kagan
    TOM KAGAN, OPEN ME, THE MKT ARE COMING FOR YOU ! ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO MEET ?
    ATTN TOM KAGAN
    World Dominator 'Kagan' in plot to lie about real Kung Fu and Martial Arts
    Tom Kagan just gave me my third negative rep in a day
    I am infatuated with Tom Kagan
    Tom Kagan is a fat balding white guy.
  8. Kintanon is offline
    Kintanon's Avatar

    Yes, I am smarter than you are.

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Athens, Ga
    Posts
    5,683

    Posted On:
    4/07/2009 8:43pm

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: TKD, BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    Why don't we just call it learning to fight then, or fighting styles?
    Final response to this to avoid a massive derail, but Learning Martial Arts means "Learning The Skills of Fighting". So we do call it learning to fight.

    Sorry Riv, Taiji guys. No more derail. You guys can have this one.
  9. taijirichm is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    72

    Posted On:
    4/08/2009 10:01am


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Rusher View Post
    ++. The guy's not wrong about athletics being used to cultivate the self and/or build character in pretty much every culture. Kintanon is also right that it's a natural outgrowth of maturely facing the adversity that is a natural part of training. There's really no argument here, just guys throwing rocks at each other -- drop it, please, both of you.
    Not to throw a rock, I still don't completely agree. I don't think it is a natural, rather a purposeful outgrowth. Warrior codes are a different thing than sportsmanship, there are similarities. Think Bushido here. A similar code existed/exists in all advanced warrior cultures. (There is a strong argument that this is missing here in the US now, but that certainly is another discussion altogether.) I certainly think that this is an integral part of the Martial "Art" of which we are speaking here. True, too many (bad)teachers hide behind it, or make it mystical, it isn't, it is just a codefied way of interacting with society once you are trained to kill.

    Yes, I used the word kill specifically, because that is what warriors throughout the ages have been trained to do, kill when neccesary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Rusher View Post
    ++.TaijiRich: Rivington is asking you to post a few timecodes in the original video with annotations of which principles you think are being broken in each place. If you do this, we'll have something specific to talk about. My guess is that you will point to places where I'll say, "it wasn't great taiji, but he got the job done," and you'll say "it wasn't great taiji" -- i.e. it doesn't follow the principles as well as one might hope -- "so he shouldn't score." This is, at least, something about which we can disagree in a productive way.
    I don't think timecodes will be neccesary. I am sure you are spot on about how the conversation would go. So, it seems the conversation here should be about taiji competetively.

    It is my understanding that "sport" competitions are used to better and develop a martial art. However, the effect of a ruleset on the art can be clearly seen by what has happened to Judo over the years (this can be looked up in quite a few locations historically and even on this site). (Don't accuse me of punting because I don't waste my time linking to, or quoting a bunch of stuff here that you probably wouldn't read. I did that with the principles already. If you are too lazy to do some research on your own, you probably shouldn't follow this thread.)

    The question is which ruleset betters taijiquan, and why? That was my disagreement from the very start.

    So, to explain my assertion, first the definition of Taijiquan. Taijiquan is simply defined as a martial art that follows the stated taiji principles. There are five main styles of Taiji, Chen, Yang, Wu(Hao), Wu and Sun. Second, the objective of push hands. According to The Essence and Applications of Taijiquan by Yang Chenfu as translated by Louis Swaim,

    "Taijiquan uses the practice of push hands to convey the meaning of its applications. Studying push hands, then is learning how to sense energy!"
    Ok, there should be no disagreeing here. If there is, then we are not talking about taiji, but another art.

    So, using these two parameters we have a disagreement on which ruleset is better for the art. I assert that the US ruleset is better because it encourages the use of taiji principles. Here is where the Bullshido Brigade comes charging in asserting that the US ruleset does not allow for competition that is vigorous enough. Nothing in the US ruleset dissallows vigorous competition. The lack of skill of the practitioners is the problem. People have a hard time learning new patterns of movement, even if they are more efficient/better. If the ruleset rewards this, let's say force on force, it is doing the practitioner a disservice.

    Ahhhh, but what about the video of Chen Manching. Clearly that was force on force. No, that was a demonstration of his ability to maintain his structure and absorb force. You can't acheive that force on force. You can to a point if you are a strong guy. What he was demonstrating was sinking the chi (establishing a low center of gravity) and transfering the force to the ground. He was able to do this because he followed the principles(technique and body mechanics not mysticism).

    I am so passionate about this because I see this as similar to the Judo sport thing. I just don't want to see Taijiquan become another external form of CMA, nor do I want to see it emasculated and relegated to the Holy Tofu set.

    I am certainly open to intelligent discussions and debate. Please note, not a statement attacks an individual (no ad hominem) nor is it off subject (red herring). My arguments and complaints are conceptual about the specific topic, competition as it related to taijiquan(see definition).
  10. Tom Kagan is offline
    Tom Kagan's Avatar

    Dark Overlord of the Bullshido Underworld

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New York, NY USA
    Posts
    5,602

    Posted On:
    4/08/2009 10:40am

    supporting member
     Style: Taai Si Ji Kung Fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivington View Post
    However, of the two sets of standards, the Asian competitions are clearly better for the development of one's taiji.
    Quote Originally Posted by taijirichm View Post
    The question is which ruleset betters taijiquan, and why? That was my disagreement from the very start.
    If the purpose of a martial art is to learn to fight better, which ruleset is better to the development of a practitioner can be proven or disproven objectively: It would be a simple matter to examine each group under a less restrictive ruleset (Sanda/SanShou/Kuoshu, et. al.).

    But if the purpose of a martial art is something as nebulous as "self awareness", where is the objective measurement? What do you do - try and determine which group is more serene?
    Last edited by Tom Kagan; 4/08/2009 10:44am at .
    Calm down, it's only ones and zeros.

    "Your calm and professional manner of response is really draining all the fun out of this. Can you reply more like Dr. Fagbot or something? Call me some names, mention some sand in my vagina or something of the sort. You can't expect me to come up with reasonable arguments man!" -- MaverickZ

    "Tom Kagan spins in his grave and the fucking guy isn't even dead yet." -- Snake Plissken

    My Bullshido fan club threads:
    Tom Kagan's a big hairy...
    Tom Kagan can lick my BALLS
    Tom Kagan teaches _ing __un and bigotry?
    Tom Kagan: Serious discussion here
    Lamokio asks the burning question is Tom Kagan a ***** or just cruising for some
    I'm Dave the gay Kickboxer from Manchester and I have the hots for Tom Kagan
    TOM KAGAN, OPEN ME, THE MKT ARE COMING FOR YOU ! ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO MEET ?
    ATTN TOM KAGAN
    World Dominator 'Kagan' in plot to lie about real Kung Fu and Martial Arts
    Tom Kagan just gave me my third negative rep in a day
    I am infatuated with Tom Kagan
    Tom Kagan is a fat balding white guy.
Page 5 of 26 FirstFirst 12345 678915 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.