• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Tai Chi Chuan: Useful or bogus?

Does it hurt you feewings whenever MMA competition is mentioned? Wanna wittle tissue to wipe away your tears?
First MMA uses more tha 1 art. Thai boxing is 1 art. Tai Chi is 1 art. Since both cover stand up fighting for the most part, I suggest taking up BJJ and Judo.

Second, no is claiming that tai chi has any correlation to MMA except for you.

Third I have no ides why idiots keeping bringing up MA versus MA. Its childish. You can go here www.martialartsplanet.com or here www.bullshido.com and talk tai chi versus thai kickboxing to your heart's delight.

There are no good styles, just good fighters.
 
Yet, Taiji doesn't do very well in MMA competition.

There are several possible reasons for this that have nothing to do with its quality as a martial art. In the first place, MMA hasn't really spread to China in any big way - that is to say, most Chinese who are interested in martial arts in China aren't that interested in MMA at the moment. Of course that could change.

Secondly, the few teachers of real Taiji who operate in the West are teaching mostly geeks, because it's through the geek channel, and the New Agey sort of channel, that Tajij has really become famous in the West, and because they earn a good living that way.

I don't know what the results would be like if Taiji competed in MMA settings, it would probably do well, but I don't imagine it would sweep the board necessarily. The level of training just isn't geared up to that at the moment, even in China, apparently. Platform competitions (of the kind that Taiji did well at in the 19th and 20th century, and which were much more no-holds-barred even than MMA) were outlawed by the Communists, so no doubt the standard has declined in some respects (i.e. people don't train for that kind of hardcore competition anymore, even if the art they are practicing is once an art that competed in that context in the past).
 
The Chen village being very close to locations where Shaolin was known to be practiced, as well as postures looking almost identical to Shaolin, hints that the Chen family created it from Shaolin.

This is only one way of looking at it. I don't want to go into this aspect of the history, which has lots of heated opinions on all sides, but briefly my opinion is that the Chen story is the most coherent and likely, and that what we know of as Chen style Taiji was created from combining some sort of traditional family internal skills, probably derived from the Xingyi-like MA of the part of China the Chen clan emigrated from, with the comprehensive "quintessence" of Chinese MA of the 17th century created by General Qi Jiguang, with whom Chen Wangting served.

There are vague similarities to "Shaolin", and to other arts too, but I think it's more likely that the similarity to other Chinese MA comes through the fact that the Qi Jiguang book was itself a deliberate compendium of Chinese MA at that time, including "Shaolin" styles. Plus most Chinese MA look a bit like "Shaolin" anyway :)
 
There's many martial arts not present in MMA sports/entertainment events.

Most of which don't view sports/entertainment as more valuable than practicing for real life self defense situations.
 
If you want to try Tai Chi or Quigong, look at Unitarian churches. Mine has it--this does not please me--and though it is good exercise, the instructors not only make it very clear they believe they are shoving around and re-chanelling the chi, they believe they have healing powers because of it. So, just as in yoga, if you can find an instructor who can focus on the benefits without laying on the woo, more power to yoo! After you've explored it, you could always try NIA or something similar for the benefits. Of course, NIA draws from yoga, Tai Chi, even marital arts. But the NIA class I took did not talk about chi and such.
 
First MMA uses more tha 1 art. Thai boxing is 1 art. Tai Chi is 1 art. Since both cover stand up fighting for the most part, I suggest taking up BJJ and Judo.

Thai boxing plays a large part in most MMA competitor's training, unlike Tai Chi.

Second, no is claiming that tai chi has any correlation to MMA except for you.

I'm not even claiming that. I'm just wondering why it seems to be absent in the training of MMA competitors.

Third I have no ides why idiots keeping bringing up MA versus MA.

Because some MA don't actually teach people how to fight.

There are no good styles, just good fighters.

Wrong, there are plenty of systems that have proven effectiveness and plenty that haven't. It takes more than just the person to be a good fighter, otherwise a person can do ballet and be a competitive fighter.
 
Thai boxing plays a large part in most MMA competitor's training, unlike Tai Chi..

This whole thread has gone over your head completly. THe whole point is that very few if anyone teaches the martial art aspects of tai chi. Hence your not going to see anyone with extensive experience in tai chi competing in MMA competitions.

Yes Thai boxing is good ma. No one has said differenty. You are stuck in ma versus ma. You must be 13. I mentioned the martial art forums.
 
Because some MA don't actually teach people how to fight.
.
Once again you missed the point of the thread. Tai Chi Chaun was originally and in some place still do teach fighting. For the most part tai chi has been hijacked by New Age bullshido which has no intention of teaching fighting. Tai Chi uses many of the same techniques other forms of kung fu use.

Many schools in the US have turned various martial arts from tai chi to thai kickboxing into just exercise.

aerobics + tae kwon do = tae bo
tai chi + yoga = new age center
dojo + injury insurance = no alive training

most tai chi schools focus on meditation
Aikido schools primarily focus on ki/spirituality
Ninjutsu focuses on...lineage
tae kwon do focuses on tkd competition
krav mag focuses on marketing

I have seen someplaces water down thai boxing, boxing and kickboxing into aerobic classes. Its depressing.
 
Most of the Tai Chi you see in the West is a gentle exercise developed through the 20th century, based on a hardcore martial art of several schools and lineages, all deriving ultimately (depending on who you believe) from either ancient Daoist cultivation, or the martial art of a specific farming community, the Chen clan, in China.

What's commonly seen is a more or less watered-down offspring of the Long Form (continuous, connected exercise) of the earliest "forms" of Taiji, which were sort of like compendia of all the techniques on the art, strung together in a way designed to develop the right kind of co-ordination through repetitive exercise.

As a martial art, it was widely recognised in the China of the late 19th century and early 20th, as one of the most effective martial arts of China, a sort of national treasure - this is through matches of competitive skill, not in theory - in those days the spectacle of a famous martial artist setting up a podium in a public place and challenging all comers was not uncommon.

The principles of Taijiquan (Taiji fist, Taiji being the famous Yin/Yang diagram) that make it (and a few other arts with similar principles) stand out from the majority of other martial arts are twofold: in terms of body development (how power is generated) and in terms of actual overall fighting strategy.

In terms of body development, power is generated by a way of using the body that's rather unusual and has to be trained for a while independently before any really serious martial application of it can be considered. It's a complex new type of co-ordination that requires training out of the normal habitual way of moving one has picked up, to a way of moving in which the body's frame is continuously controlled as a unit, any movement of any attacking or defending part of the body being at the same time a movement of the whole body, utilising clever leverage principles which take advantage of the solidity of the ground, and transmit it through efficiently aligned bones, using the minimum necessary muscular energy. This hyper-efficiency makes Taijiquan eminently suitable for combat in war, which requires tremendous endurance.

In terms of strategy, Taijiquan makes use, again, of a "soft" or "yielding" type of strategy. The idea is to get in contact with the opponent in a way such that the opponent can't feel your intent, but you can feel theirs, through their body, and through their body's connection to the ground. The Taiji fighter then breaks their opponents connection to the ground, rendering them without the ability to gain any leverage, and therefore helpless, and easily killable by a type of focussed, explosive use of force called "fajin". (The aim of most Chinese martial arts was originally to incapacitate or kill the opponent as quickly as possible. A Bagua practitioner of the old school recently said in an interview: "In Bagua, one wants to make the opponent spit blood".) A poetic description of this combination of "softness" and "hardness" is "like a needle in cotton". Some poetic ways of what it feels like to fight a Taiji fighter I've seen are: like trying to push a beach ball under the water directly from above; like fighting a boa constrictor.

There is another interesting aspect to Taiji power than clever leverage though, and that is the use of the body's connective tissue, the fascia, as an additive element to the force generated through leverage from the ground. Training in these aspects of the art involving the fascia produce feelings in the body which have led credence to the idea of "qi" being an external force. What's actually happening is that control of the fascia (which has recently been discovered to have some muscle fibers embedded, and other hitherto-unrealised interesting properties which might be responsible for some of the documented analgesic effects of acupuncture) is acquired through a control of aspects of the autonomic nervous system, requiring a certain type of mental state akin to hypnosis. (Hence the requirement for some meditative training in many of these types of "internal" arts.) In the course of this training, one sometimes feels one's body to be held or moved in a kind of "magnetic field". It's easy to see how people could think this a real thing, but the correct explanation is probably more along the lines I've given above: it's an odd brain trick that makes the body in some sense feel "alien".

Needless to say, you won't get this kind of stuff from your local mall, but it's the sort of training that people can get if they look for it: there are perhaps dozens of teachers of the "real thing" scattered throughout the world, and concentrated in a few places in China, and maybe a few thousand serious practitioners.

You have, in a very lengthy post, said nothing new. The Germans used a technique known as fehling, which was a method of meeting weakness with strength and strength with weakness from about the 12th-13th century. Most human being who fought know that efficient muscle movement wins fights. Every fighting technique that's worth a damn teaches you to use your body as the source of power, to only use the muscles you need, and to use your body's leverage to increase your power.

In the end, there is no superior style or form. There is what is effective and what is ineffective.
 
This whole thread has gone over your head completly. THe whole point is that very few if anyone teaches the martial art aspects of tai chi. Hence your not going to see anyone with extensive experience in tai chi competing in MMA competitions.

Yes Thai boxing is good ma. No one has said differenty. You are stuck in ma versus ma. You must be 13. I mentioned the martial art forums.

Could you, at least, try to form a logical argument? So far, all you've done is make irrelevant statements that have no basis in reality. If Tai Chi had some actual fighting value, that value would show up in competitions where any/all systems of martial arts are welcome to compete.
 
For the most part tai chi has been hijacked by New Age bullshido which has no intention of teaching fighting. Tai Chi uses many of the same techniques other forms of kung fu use.

Other forms of kung fu haven't done very well in MMA competition either. Did you have something relevant to post?

I have seen someplaces water down thai boxing, boxing and kickboxing into aerobic classes. Its depressing.

Yet thai boxing, boxing and kickboxing still has a very huge presence in MMA competition. That speaks volumes for the techniques, talent and training of those systems. Yes, a good system can be watered down, but some systems have water as the primary ingredient.
 
In the end, there is no superior style or form. There is what is effective and what is ineffective.

There are systems that contain more effectiveness than other systems. Sorry, but if styles/systems/forms didn't matter, then training in a martial art is simply an exercise in delusion. A ballet dancer could/would win the UFC if that were the case.
 
Could you, at least, try to form a logical argument? So far, all you've done is make irrelevant statements that have no basis in reality. If Tai Chi had some actual fighting value, that value would show up in competitions where any/all systems of martial arts are welcome to compete.
www.bullshido.com

MMA is fine for what it is but this isn't the forum for it.

The whole point that all martial arts have been watered down over time is bit complicated for you.
 
Last edited:
There are systems that contain more effectiveness than other systems. Sorry, but if styles/systems/forms didn't matter, then training in a martial art is simply an exercise in delusion. A ballet dancer could/would win the UFC if that were the case.


A ballet dancer doesn't train to FIGHT. False anology.

A Golden Gloves boxer could beat someone with MMA training. Both systems teach the same basic lessons, to a degree. How to use your body to create force, and how to manipulate your opponent.
That is how you win fights.

A ballet dancer who learned to fight may surprise you, BTW. :p
(I'd love to see it, though!)
 
A ballet dancer doesn't train to FIGHT. False anology.

My analogy is accurate simply because how and what a person trains to do directly effects how they will perform. To say that all martial-art systems is the same simply ignores that fact. Also, some martial arts do not train to fight, Tai Chi happens to be one of them.
 
My analogy is accurate simply because how and what a person trains to do directly effects how they will perform.
"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level of our training." I think Ken is saying that ballet dancers are incredibly fit so if what you practice wasn't an issue then being so fit they should fare well.
To say that all martial-art systems is the same simply ignores that fact.
The system or the training?
Also, some martial arts do not train to fight, Tai Chi happens to be one of them.
Same old crap. Look, if most of the thai boxing taught in the west was some kind of boxercise, would that be thai boxing's fault? Or the teacher's fault?
You've been told repeatedly of tai chi classes that teach people to fight. I've even mentioned one who competed vale tudo in the uk.
 
You have, in a very lengthy post, said nothing new.

I'd be rather surprised if I had, I was just laying out what I thought could be reasonably said about Taiji.

As to whether other styles have similar things: the "soft"/"hard" strategy distinction is not unique to Taiji at all, and I never said it was.

However, the use of body and particular methods of generating power is rare (shared only by some of the other "internal" Chinese martial arts), and in combination with that particular strategy, creates a unique art. Something similar may be found in ancient European martial arts, but in terms of other Chinese martial arts (and Japanese) this type of movement is usually held to be somewhat "secret", "advanced", etc.

Of course every system has a way of training the body, but the degree of retraining is quite great in "internal" arts. Most martial arts utilise natural kinds of movement and adjust them to conform to one of more ideal types of movement, leverage, etc. With Taiji (and the other "internals") the approach is quite different, and extensive re-training in one's natural way of moving is required first, before any "fighting" is taught - sometimes for several years. A typical kind of anecdote for "internal" arts is that famous teacher X taught famous teacher Y nothing but standing in the correct way for several years before the student was even able to pick up a weapon. While this kind of extensive preparatory training is probably not totally unknown in Europe, it's probably as rare in Europe as it is and was in China.

Most military training was required to take people to as high a degree of combat readiness in as short a time as possible. The approach of these persnickety "internal" styles which required intensive body retraining for a few years before martial practice, is more the province of clan styles, village styles, where people could be trained in this slow way from a young age.

I must emphasise that I say this not to try and prove "Taiji ROXXXORZZZ" !!11!!11one!!", it's to simply describe what it is (AFAIK, and FWIW, from my researches).
 
Also, some martial arts do not train to fight, Tai Chi happens to be one of them.

As people have pointed out, it's a question of degree: watered down New Age "Tai Chi" obviously doesn't train to fight.

People in Chen village (home of Chen style Taijiquan) in China (for example) do train to fight, but not to the level of MMA (it would be more a sort of Judo level fighting, kind of like sport fighting, but within traditional rules).

This is because (as I said above) "open platform" competitions (the Chinese equivalent of MMA) were banned in China by the Communists.

Most authentic "internal" Chinese martial artists will not even have heard of MMA, since they are mostly farming people in rural areas. (I believe the first MMA school opened in Beijing only a few years ago.) It's still early days even for a comparison of traditional "hard" Chinese styles in an MMA arena, far less the "internal" styles.

However, I should say that the few rare teachers of authentic Chinese MA styles who teach in the West are quite used to being unofficially "challenged" by sundry MA people in their classes (provided the legality of the situation is ok with their hosts). Any hardcore MMA person who feels Chen style Taiji (for example) is martial nonsense and wants to prove it could go to one of Chen Xiaowang's(, or Wang Haijun's, or Zhu Tian Cia's, or Wang Xian's) classes, for example, and formally challenge him to a polite "exchange of skills" (as several people have), or even try to surprise him (as several people have).
 

Back
Top Bottom