Tai Chi practitioner vs MMA fighter

[DiP]

This event has enraged many in the tai chi community. Jet Li reacted and even went out to call out every tai chi practitioner to challenge this MMA guy again: http://hktopten.blogspot.se/2017/05/20170503-jet-li-calls-for-martial-art.html

 

 

[andy338]

I don't understand why the Tai Chi community would be enraged by this, Tai Chi isn't and never has been a fighting system and so for a guy who trains in it to volunteer to fight a full contact match is ridiculous, he's clearly deluded as to what it is he's actually learnt. Bruce Lee was correct all those years ago when he described many of the arts as a classical mess when it comes to actually defending yourself, don't get me wrong Tai Chi training does have many benefits it's just that fighting isn't one of them.

This actually reminded me of an interview with MMA legend Bas Rutten when he explained that quite simply if you don't hit people and get hit as part of your training then you're not a trained fighter period. He says he's met loads of guys that have claimed to be ninjas, Dim Mak (death touch) masters and other mystical arts and the result is always the same....they get choked out in seconds! 

[laagi]

I've stumbled upon this article by chance...

http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1000150/after-embarrassing-loss%2C-fighter-says-tai-chi-still-relevant

It's a very sensitive topic to say the least. I've had many discussions with different masters and had my own share of experience with the state of martial arts in China as of today.

(video in the article features the actual "fight")

[Yakuza954]

He's not even a half-decent MMA fighter, but it doesn't take much to beat traditional martial arts 'masters' with no grappling/striking that's practical in a real fight.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Yakuza954

[Yakuza954]

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/wushu-watch-dojo-storming-for-a-better-tomorrow

" Xu Xiaodong [the MMA fighter] wasn't born a better fighter than Wei Lei [the Tai Chi master] or any other Chinese martial arts master. He became a better fighter by fighting, and that is the part that so many traditional martial arts purists struggle to deal with. A blacksmith learns to make horseshoes by making a thousand rubbish horseshoes. An artist learns to draw by trying his best a thousand times and producing nothing but fractionally improving garbage. Why would fighting be any different? You don't have to take professional fights to get better at fighting, but you do have to struggle against the will of other people regularly. This so called 'aliveness' in training is what makes people better and prepares people for the worst. But Wei Lei had a set idea of what he was going to do coming in and so did the famous kiai-jutsu master who was easily drubbed in a challenge match a few years back: "

 

Edited May 14, 2017 by Yakuza954

[laagi]

Sorry for the double-post. Where to start... First of all I'd like to salute Xu Xiadong for having the courage to call out these frauds. He pretty much stirred up a hornets nest!

A lot of these so-called masters are so deluded by their own skill, it was high time somebody put them in their place. It's really a sad state for Martial Arts in China today. I can only imagine how frustrated Xu Xiadong must feel with all these phonies around, selling their "combat skill" without even having thrown a single punch in their entire life.

I don't mean any disrespect towards their traditions. I've had my own share of experience in China. Seeing what Martial Arts really means nowadays. Not a lot anymore that's for sure!

However, the good news is that there are still schools out there upholding their combat roots. But you won't find them in Shaolin or Wudang. It's all show in there, cashing in on the whole Kung Fu hype from the West. Hiding behind "mythical" excuses on why they can't or won't fight.

[andy338]

I actually think it's better to know no martial arts than to train in many of these systems and actually believe that you can fight when you can't. If you've never trained I think you're more likely to avoid confrontation which is always the best thing to do.  The Tai Chi guy didn't even have a decent guard up & could have been taken out easily with just about any strike, I saw the interview with him afterwards and he said he was proud to have at least tried but I think he was foolish and the false confidence that he had from his "training" could get him hurt in a real situation.  I used to work with a guy that studied Aikido and he was supremely confident he could easily disarm a guy with a knife so I picked up a marker pen and asked him if he could take it from me without me marking him (obviously a mark would signify a slash/stab wound that could be fatal), I marked him several times on his wrists and hands without even trying and he gave up when he realised that "the weapon" meant I could strike him at range and any attempt to close the gap resulted in another hard to wash off pen stain. I'm guessing that in training he was used to compliant opponents moving in fixed positions that allowed him to do his thing.  Bruce Lee recognised this and used to say that it was like learning to swim on dry land!

[CT KID]

That looked more like a mugging than a competitive fight. The Tai Chi man was totally unprepared for the reality of combat, but at least now he is enlightened on the effectiveness of his techniques.....

[sym8]

I think from the off you could tell the tai chi guy could not fight,I've had many discussions with people who claim this style works or this style doesn't but at the end of the day it's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog,it doesn't matter if you kick faster or punch harder it's knowing how to and wanting too actually do these things with the intention to hurt somebody that counts.I think the tai chi guy was stuck in the past.

[GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG]

andy338

I quate:

"I don't understand why the Tai Chi community would be enraged by this, Tai Chi isn't and never has been a fighting system."

 

Dear andy338,

You could not be more wrong in your assessment of  Tai Chi.

First the name of this martial art:

TAI CHI CHUAN

Translation:

SUPREME ULTIMATE FIST.

There are well over 300 styles and counting of Chinese martial arts through out history.

If your kung fu schools name says Supreme Ultimate Fist you had better be able to back IT up.

Anyone who knows the history of Tai Chi will agree with me.

In the 1930's you had this individual in Peking:

Yang Cheng Fu

 Nickname:

Yang the Unsurpassed. 

 

Yang Cheng Fu was 'NEVER' defeated period!

End of story!

Please do the proper research before you define one of the greatest martial arts style 'EVER' created by man.

Here is some reading on Yang Stile Tai Chi Chuan:

 http://www.egreenway.com/taichichuan/longyang.htm#Chron

GD Y-Y

P.S. Many have read my story on the great Tai Chi Master Chan from Boston in the 1980's.

Twice I saw Master Chan at the Navy Statue in Boston Common dislodge a handful of bark from an Oak tree as if he was taking candy from a baby.

The MMA star in question would NEVER touch such a master. 

The fight would be over before it began.

Have no doubt my friends.

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2017 by GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG

[Drunken Monk]

1 hour ago, GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG said:

Twice I saw Master Chan at the Navy Statue in Boston Common dislodge a handful of bark from an Oak tree as if he was taking candy from a baby.

The MMA star in question would NEVER touch such a master. 

The fight would be over before it began.

Have no doubt my friends.

 

 

 

But again, it's things like this that can be heavily debated. I've seen Wushu practitioners smash bricks and Wushu has nothing to do with real-life fighting at all. Just because someone can dislodge bark from a tree doesn't make them a good fighter. Gimmicks are jut that...gimmicks. They don't apply to the real world of combat. They're closer to magic tricks than they are proof of being a real fighter.

[laagi]

16 minutes ago, Drunken Monk said:

But again, it's things like this that can be heavily debated. I've seen Wushu practitioners smash bricks and Wushu has nothing to do with real-life fighting at all. Just because someone can dislodge bark from a tree doesn't make them a good fighter. Gimmicks are jut that...gimmicks. They don't apply to the real world of combat. They're closer to magic tricks than they are proof of being a real fighter.

True, true indeed. Nonetheless I think @GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG raised a valid point here. It's undeniable that all Martial Arts have their roots in combat. That is true with Tai Chi as much as it is with MMA.

The problem is that many traditional martial arts have become diluted over the past few decades. The reasons for this are as versatile as the art itself.

[Drunken Monk]

32 minutes ago, laagi said:

True, true indeed. Nonetheless I think @GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG raised a valid point here. It's undeniable that all Martial Arts have their roots in combat. That is true with Tai Chi as much as it is with MMA.

The problem is that many traditional martial arts have become diluted over the past few decades. The reasons for this are as versatile as the art itself.

I think there's a difference between "combat" and "protection". Take Wing Chun, for example. I don't think it was designed as a fighting art but, rather, an art for self-defense. It's not built to go blow for blow with someone who's a trained fighter. It's built to neutralize the attack of someone who, perhaps, isn't well versed in fighting but is trying to start something anyway.
Same with Hapkido and other such styles. They're designed to take down an attacker rather than get into a professional fight with someone. I'm not all that knowledgeable on Tai Chi but maybe it's the same. A self-defense art rather than a "this person wants to trade punches" art.

[laagi]

@Drunken Monk But aren't combat and self-defence just facets of the same thing; which is fighting. Whether you're on the giving or the receiving end. All of them are meant to do some serious if not deadly damage to a opponent or enemy.

I think a lot of the traditional martial arts were developed during age of war. Trained by the military to kill in armed and unarmed combat. This is especially evident when you look at the various weapons of chinese martial art, as well as the combat application of the various forms (incl. Tai Chi). 

Maybe the real issue is they never evolved or adapted to new circumstances. Also many of the arts were outlawed and you were severly punished for practicing or teaching. My master once told me that even his grandfather who thaught him, had to do so in secret.

In conclusion it is various aspects of history who shaped the state chinese martial art is in today. Also let's not forget the fact Kung Fu is a huge industry with too much money and interest involved. I witnessed this myself several times, martial art which looks pretty sells way better than martial art which is effective.

Also many chinese have little to know interest or knowledge on their own art. But as I mentioned earlier there are still does who try to educate the public and practice the real deal.

 

[Drunken Monk]

46 minutes ago, laagi said:

@Drunken Monk But aren't combat and self-defence just facets of the same thing; which is fighting. Whether you're on the giving or the receiving end. All of them are meant to do some serious if not deadly damage to a opponent or enemy.

I think there's a difference between fighting and competitive fighting. I don't think many styles of martial arts were fashioned with competition in mind. Sure, they help the practitioner out in a street scuffle but, unlike MMA, they didn't have professional combat in mind.

[andy338]

Sorry Golden Dragon but we will have to agree to disagree on this. I do understand the history of Tai Chi and trained with many excellent practitioners in Beijing where I studied Ditan Quan (tumbling boxing) back in 2002, I have nothing but respect for the art and realise the benefits of Tai Chi training, to see it performed well is truly breathtaking. However in my opinion training solely in Tai Chi (as opposed to using it to supplement a more practical aggressive form of fighting) could in no way prepare an athlete mentally (Sym8 touched upon the actual intent that a fighter requires) or physically in terms of conditioning, durability (getting hit) and developing fast, powerful strikes that would take out an opponent intent on doing real damage. I'm a huge Kung Fu fan and love the stories of old masters with almost superhuman abilities too but the reality is not a single one has managed any kind of success in a full contact no holds barred match and certainly amongst MMA fighters such masters are considered frauds. Also the best way to stay undefeated is not to fight at all and I suspect many of these legends who were never beaten did just that.

[GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG]

Very good conversation.

Tai Chi Chuan was invented by Chan San-Feng. He was born around 1247 CE.

He arrived at Wudang Temple in his later life. He was already a Shaolin Master of the highest order. After witnessing a fight between a bird and a snake he had a vision and then created Tai Chi Chuan.

 

Tai Chi was one of the very few martial arts where the soft over powers the hard. Because the movements of Tai Chi showed no force other martial artist thought Tai Chi was too sissified to be a valid martial art. But when one mastered the art to the highest level in the day before guns, you were predominately:

Invincible,

adjective

1.

incapable of being conquered, defeated, orsubdued.

2.

insuperable; insurmountable:

 

 

Below is a link to the legends of this of this great martial arts innovator.

http://www.egreenway.com/taichichuan/chang1.htm

We have to realize that few in this day and age become full-blown kung fu masters of any style.

So people who think they have reached the mountain come up lacking against a rough and ready MMA personality.

BTW, as you have seen. many of these MMA matches end up on the floor in grappling fests, where like the TV wrestlers, one finds the slight advantage to defeat your opponent. In TRUE kung fu a master of worth would never or rarely find themselves in such desperate circumstance. 

When Mao clamped down on the martial arts in the 50's many of the great masters went to Taiwan. Wudang mountain and the Taoist enclaves were also repressed so a loss took place to a greater or lesser degree in the quality of teachings and attainments. 

Wudang has seen a rise in popularity over the last 30 years. many from around the world go to the mountain to refine or learn the skill passed down through the century's from Master Chan San-Feng.

GD Y-Y

 

Edited May 18, 2017 by GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG

[GOLDEN DRAGON YIN-YANG]

20 minutes ago, andy338 said:

Sorry Golden Dragon but we will have to agree to disagree on this. I do understand the history of Tai Chi and trained with many excellent practitioners in Beijing where I studied Ditan Quan (tumbling boxing) back in 2002, I have nothing but respect for the art and realise the benefits of Tai Chi training, to see it performed well is truly breathtaking. However in my opinion training solely in Tai Chi (as opposed to using it to supplement a more practical aggressive form of fighting) could in no way prepare an athlete mentally (Sym8 touched upon the actual intent that a fighter requires) or physically in terms of conditioning, durability (getting hit) and developing fast, powerful strikes that would take out an opponent intent on doing real damage. I'm a huge Kung Fu fan and love the stories of old masters with almost superhuman abilities too but the reality is not a single one has managed any kind of success in a full contact no holds barred match and certainly amongst MMA fighters such masters are considered frauds. Also the best way to stay undefeated is not to fight at all and I suspect many of these legends who were never beaten did just that.

Thanks Andy338.

I do appreciate your views and understand where you are coming from. I disagree only to the point that very few in this world have attained the quality or the highest order of the art. With this in mind how RARE would it be to see such a master.....very rare.

So I stand on a belief in the knowledge that such results can be achieved as rare as they may be.  

My beloved Master Chan was such a one. 

He was beyond style and form.

Chen Man-Ching said of this state;

(paraphrasing) 

A person has then reached the profound, in chi and kung fu application bar-none who enter there realm.

 

GD Y-Y

 

 

[andy338]

Training in Chinese martial arts actually teaches much more than just fighting anyway it's more a lifestyle which is why I think students are keen to defend the traditions, and it's great that they do (but just not in combat) otherwise over time these arts would disappear and that would be a real tragedy. GD Y-Y, I look forward to reading more of your posts about the fascinating history of our beloved kung fu. Peace brother.

[CT KID]

I think a lot of times it depends on the practicioner, you can find effective and ineffective fighters in any style including mma. But really the best way to get good at fighting is to actually fight.

Edited May 18, 2017 by CT KID

[DrNgor]

Are there any documented bouts in which a master of a Japanese or Chinese art--or more or less pure kung fu, karate, wushu, etc.--defeated an MMA (or jiu-jitsu) stylist?

[shaolin swords]

there are many different styles of tai chi some are internal and some are external some are just ment to build your inner strength  and some are ment for fighting to me any true shaolin martial artists would not be fighting in one of these fights they dont train for fame or a championship belt or number 1 ranking the reason why they train is much deeper i never studied martial arts this is just my opinion you take it how you want but if traditional kung fu did not work or was not effective then it would not be around when these styles where put to use and peoples where using it was to fight for there lifes they all would have been dead if it did not work and tai chi and shaolin kung fu would not even be taught never would have existed  they where not fighting in a ring for a price they where fighting for there life so it tells you right there it was very effective and these peoples like joe rogan and other ma fighters bad mouthing chinese martial arts to me is funny when the origin of kung fu martial arts comes from shaolin this is just my opinion tho  

Edited July 2, 2022 by shaolin swords

[laagi]

19 hours ago, shaolin swords said:

there are many different styles of tai chi some are internal and some are external some are just ment to build your inner strength  and some are ment for fighting to me any true shaolin martial artists would not be fighting in one of these fights they dont train for fame or a championship belt or number 1 ranking the reason why they train is much deeper i never studied martial arts this is just my opinion you take it how you want but if traditional kung fu did not work or was not effective then it would not be around when these styles where put to use and peoples where using it was to fight for there lifes they all would have been dead if it did not work and tai chi and shaolin kung fu would not even be taught never would have existed  they where not fighting in a ring for a price they where fighting for there life so it tells you right there it was very effective and these peoples like joe rogan and other ma fighters bad mouthing chinese martial arts to me is funny when the origin of kung fu martial arts comes from shaolin this is just my opinion tho  

Yes and No. Clearly I'm not an expert in the field myself but people seem to forget that a lot of martial arts especially in China did not originate in combat. But rather were used as a base of physical exercise. Also the origin of Martial Arts is more likely India than China. Again lots of different facts and probably more fiction than anything else.

Also having spoken to Martial Arts masters in China. Most if not all combative Arts were outlawed and any physical evidence such as books were destroyed during the cultural revolution. The little that remained as far as knowledge goes had to be either watered down (as to make it looks harmless) or be thaught in secret with the risk of prosecution.

I think a lot of Martial Arts has suffered a similar faith. Also don't forget that most combative arts were forged during a time of war. So I'm not surprised they're no longer being taught let alone would have any effective measures in today's society. 

To me and it kind of hurts to say it the most effective you got nowadays in a mere combat aspect is MMA. If you wanna learn how to fight and hurt someone it's the one to choose. Now if you look for a deeper metaphysical level you may find more in a traditional art hence less focused on actual combat but more physical and mental excersice.

I've said before I have the utmost respect for anyone dedicating their lives to a traditional art. However spreading BS lies that they could fight with their Qi or what not. IMHO they deserve all the punishment they can get. At least be honest to what you believe in and stand for. If not for yourself you owe it to your students. Before they get their brainwashed ass kicked by a guy who studied a months worth of MMA. Just my two cents.

[shaolin swords]

5 hours ago, laagi said:

Yes and No. Clearly I'm not an expert in the field myself but people seem to forget that a lot of martial arts especially in China did not originate in combat. But rather were used as a base of physical exercise. Also the origin of Martial Arts is more likely India than China. Again lots of different facts and probably more fiction than anything else.

Also having spoken to Martial Arts masters in China. Most if not all combative Arts were outlawed and any physical evidence such as books were destroyed during the cultural revolution. The little that remained as far as knowledge goes had to be either watered down (as to make it looks harmless) or be thaught in secret with the risk of prosecution.

I think a lot of Martial Arts has suffered a similar faith. Also don't forget that most combative arts were forged during a time of war. So I'm not surprised they're no longer being taught let alone would have any effective measures in today's society. 

To me and it kind of hurts to say it the most effective you got nowadays in a mere combat aspect is MMA. If you wanna learn how to fight and hurt someone it's the one to choose. Now if you look for a deeper metaphysical level you may find more in a traditional art hence less focused on actual combat but more physical and mental excersice.

I've said before I have the utmost respect for anyone dedicating their lives to a traditional art. However spreading BS lies that they could fight with their Qi or what not. IMHO they deserve all the punishment they can get. At least be honest to what you believe in and stand for. If not for yourself you owe it to your students. Before they get their brainwashed ass kicked by a guy who studied a months worth of MMA. Just my two cents.

i feel you on this but to me it dont make no sense if chinese traditional kung fu ant effective in a fight they say shaolin kung fu is very complexed if the technique you are using does not work it means you are doing it wrong and your not applying the technique right its just i know peoples will not listen to me because i never studied any style of martial marts is just i have faith that it is very effective every thing cant be a lie that would be one very big lie i still believe in pressure point technique that you can hit some one in certain points of the body and it will take any one down those to me are the most deadlies styles and the real peoples who got those skills will never ever be found in a mma fighting tournament because me and you know they train for a deeper reason then just making money and winning a championship belt its a way of life for them 

[Gaijin84]

One problem is that unless you are practicing your techniques against a non-compliant opponent, you’ll never know if it’s effective or not. And other than full contact sparring, which many TMAs do not train, the only way to test techniques are in competition or actually fighting in the streets. I do believe that before the cultural revolution there were a lot of martial arts schools in mainland China and they probably did have rivalries and competitions, but that time is long past. I doubt there was a focus on grappling as well, similar to muay thai. If people are not interested in watching grappling, no one is going to teach it, no matter how effective it may be in a one-on-fight.

This topic can be broken down ad nauseam and there is probably no way to know for sure who is right or wrong. I have seen probably over a thousand MMA fights and have never seen a strict TMA be effective.