Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

thanks for the input. the game is just now getting _close_ to the point of where stuff like that might start to be added *uuhhgg*

things like this will be subsystems of the game. this makes them modular. there is a base skill system which is basically just a framework of values attached to keys. most subsystems, including combat, specialized weapon training systems, and even magic, will need to reference this framework. this allows the abstract skill framework to just be value holders, and each subsystem can use it as necessary, but without requiring special integration.

the skill framework is hierarchical, but doesn't enforce a specific depth of hiearchy. skills can give others a bonus if they are related in the hierarchy. this formula checks each skill a player possess and compares it to all their other possessed skills:

first, if a skill equals itself, then it can't give itself a bonus :D

basically, this formula checks to see what 'family' each skill is in and looks for all other skills that share part or all of its family, the more the family is shared the bigger the bonus (that's the dictmatchcount function, it looks at the two families and returns the number of matches). lastly, the bonus is divided by 6 plus the base value of the skill. the 6 is just to lessen the amount of bonus, and the basevalue actually means that a skill that has a real high base value is relatively unaffected by 'family association bonus'.

an outcome of this formula is that deeper hierarchies get bigger bonuses ultimately, but will never apply more bonus to things with shorter hierarchies that share some piece of their family. also, i think i could add something to the code handling adding to baseskill counts that make skills with deeper hierarchies more expensive to increase, finding something that would balance out exactly the effect of getting a bigger bonus from other skills that share its entire family. EDIT: actually, i just realized there is probably a way to make that constant '6' be a variable that varies by hierarchy depth of the base skill, this could be used to cancel out the depth bonus problem.

anyway...

basically everything will be subsystems that reference the values of this tree. each subsystem can specify what values it references and how they effect the action. even combat will be a subsystem that references the weapon skill values and whatever else (armor skill values maybe? tactics skills? who knows). at first it will pretty simple so that I can get a broad range of necessary subsystems in place. once this is done the entirely modular nature allows combat to be revamped without too much trouble.

it seems to me then that these specialized fighting styles and stuff can either be added as their own subsystems, or made as an addition to the combat subsystem. i'll handle that part when i get there :D

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I first started studying martial arts at the age of five. I am now fifty years old and have never really stopped, though the degree of my commitment has waxed and waned variably over the years. My first public martial arts performance was at the age of fourteen in front of an audience of 3000 martial artists doing a combat demonstration of bo stick versus nunchaku. (My youthful nervousness was such that I forgot the practiced routine and had to spar full contact for three minutes! Ouch!) In addition to numerous forms of empty hand ranging from Muay Thai to Tai Chi, I have studied a number of weapons forms and applied some of that to seven years of full contact weapon combat in the SCA.

In addition to this, I have been a hobby wargammer for most of my life, primarily interested in highly detailed simulation gaming. I professionally managed a game store for ten years and under my management that store rose to having one of the highest sales volumes of any game store in the world. This was accomplished through a number of techniques, but not least among them was an insistence that our staff, most especially myself, be intimately familiar with the game mechanics of as many games as possible.

Most RPGs for me while being very colorful with their game 'settings' have greatly suffered from the point of view of mechanics. This was understandable to some degree as playing a truly detailed simulation game inevitably meant that a melee combat would take an entire game session to resolve. That's what I liked the most, that sort of combat simulation, while unfortunately for myself, most other gamers preferred a combat simulation that did 'not' take all night to finish so they could get on with the role playing part of the game.

With the advent of computers, I anticipated with relish the coming of role playing games with highly sophisticated and detailed combat resolution systems, as the computers could easily handle the details that bogged down human players working with pencil and paper. Alas, I was in for a huge disappointment, as game developers realized that they could market graphics easily and mechanics not at all. Virtually all computer games contain game mechanics less sophisticated than basic D&D.

The best of the pen and paper games out there with regard to combat simulation, fun and flexibility is in my opinion the Hero Games System. The latest incarnation of the martial arts simulations in that system actually describes the techniques used by that particular martial art and defines game modifiers for each technique. The player at their discretion chooses which techniques to use in whichever appropriate circumstance.

To learn a martial art in the game, the player must make an investment in character points at the onset to purchase 'knowledge skills' which represent a theoretical background, but do not yet confer any actual combat enhancing benefit. As the player gains experience (character points) they may purchase extra techniques within that martial art and then start actually using those techniques in combat. Progressing in skill involves purchasing extra techniques or purchasing 'skill levels' which can be applied during combat in numerous ways (typically conferring offensive, defensive or damage bonuses). This manner of training in the game is not particularly 'realistic' as in real training one tends to learn all techniques very slowly, hoping that one could apply any of them if a fight ever happened.

The problem with this approach in a game such as Dominions is that the game does not, cannot stop for a player to make such decisions. Ultimately the degree of 'realism' that can be applied to a game depends largely on the degree of complexity of the individual combat simulation. Dominions as it concentrates on mass battles, cannot afford to make these individual combats more involved than the calculation of a few very basic statistics.

As for the relative differences between Eastern and Western systems, they are rather moot in my opinion. What counts far more than stylistic differences is the degree of talent, commitment and training of the combatant. A student of Miyamoto Musashi who does not take his training seriously would loose to a street fighter with no formal training but who has the practical experience of having been in fights.

All other things being equal, a western knight with a lifetime of combat experience would handily defeat a samurai who has lived at peace. Comparing two veterans however gets sticky as they live in entirely different worlds. It's almost like asking, who would win in a fight, Luke Skywalker versus Gandalf? If you could magically teleport two armies, a veteran medieval western army versus a veteran Japanese samurai army, the victory would more likely than not be a question of relative equipment and combat experience than one of style. (Most wargame systems would actually give the advantage to the samurai army due to their preponderance of 'two hand cut and thrust' weapons.)

In individual combat, size and strength matter far more than training, until at least one has achieved a very high level of skill (your typical bouncer with no formal training will handily defeat most martial artists). Psychological factors are even more important. An enormously dangerous fighter who is not mentally prepared for a fight can be easily defeated by a resolute attacker engaging from surprise. And in a lethal combat, the combatant least afraid of death is by far the most dangerous opponent.

The 'techniques' that are taught in martial arts and simulated in game systems actually are rarely applied by martial artists in an actual fight. What most martial artists fail to realize (especially the new ones) is that the techniques being taught are not taught with the intention that "in case A, you do B". Rather techniques are taught so as to practice 'principles' that can most easily be learned by practicing techniques. For instance one cannot land an effective punch if one is not stable on the ground. This is true regardless of one's 'style' and regardless of the technique one studies, a good teacher will be on the lookout for problems in basic principles made manifest by practicing techniques.

All this to say really that while a detailed combat system matching up martial arts with their techniques makes for a fun game, it really has little to do with reality. For a simulation game, factoring in size, strength, weapons, armor, training, and combat experience is likely sufficient for realism's sake. Training in martial arts, regardless of style, would simply factor into general training level, better schools simply training faster.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Wow, that's a great post. It also sounds like it's been fun being you.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I'll say

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Heh. And you don't know the most of it. If you ever catch me complaining, beat me with a stick. ;-)

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I don't have nearly panpiper's experience, but I just wanted to chime in and say pretty much everything he said rings true to me. I've done martial arts as well, and fought with a number of different weapons and in different styles and his post matches up with everything I've experienced and read about fighting fairly well.

Thanks panpiper for a great post, I'd love to fight you in virtual reality some day ;)

Omni: From what I can understand of what you've posted I do like the way you're handling the mechanics of 4th age, great work so far.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I really wish I had been given the chance to do Martial Arts growing up. But alas there where none and not till High School was there a Tae Kwon Do teacher in the area.

But that doesn't mean I don't have some skills that could be applied during such a period. Growing up I wrestled with friends at the beach, others in the area prefering fisticuff. Making bows and arrows (stone tipped or just none) or using sticks for sword and homemade shield or staffs for sparing contests. Going up the hills and in the woods for teamed war games.

Plus being a Maori you need to learn Kapa Haka. If you have ever seen any sport with a New Zealand team then you've seen a Haka. But part of Kapa Haka is also learning to use Patu and Taiaha. Which in war time are basicly a Club and Spear. Which I guess is New Zealand Martial Arts now in the form on song and dance only.


The thing is I'm sure everyone has at somepoint in there life learnt some sort of Martial Art, be it self trained from playing games or convention ones learnt from teachers.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Capoeira is a recognized legitimate and respected martial art that for generations was studied uniquely as a dance form. Brazilian slaves practiced it as a dance because this way their masters would not recognize it as being dangerous. But you do not want to cross a well practiced capoeira dancer, trust me. ;-)

Your Kapa Haka is much more of a martial art than you realize. The dance is highly stylized, the techniques in it don't have much use. But performed properly, you are practicing all those principles I mentioned and as I also mentioned, the techniques don't normally get actually used in combat, but the principles always do. Plus, combat is three times the mental as it is to the physical (to paraphrase a French general). The ritual side of Kapa Haka is extremely martial and if studied taking the ritual side very seriously, could easily hone a true warrior spirit.

Do not sell your culture short, you have a great heritage there. My advice would be to go back and thank the teachers who taught you Kapa Haka and ask them if there is anything more you might learn.

(By the way, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that your most skilled teachers will tell you that the dance starts in your belly. Listen to them, this is a very important martial 'secret'.)

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I'll post this link in here, since we're already straying away from Fourth Age discussion. This video shows 'principles' that are then broken down and extrapolated from. I can't even really imagine how much time it would take to be able to do something like this "on the fly". The same group has a collection of great videos in Youtube, everything I've seen from them is great.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDP0r...eature=channel

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Hooray for MMA putting an end to the stupid "which would win in a 'real' fight" arguments.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

By the way Lavaere, just a short addendum to what I said in my above post to you. I just looked up the exact nomenclature of Kapa Haka and I should amend to what I said. It is the Haka that is martial, not the Kapa. That said, it is performing the Haka in the Kapa that probably makes the learning of it more fun, so definitely take both seriously.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

May only say that, with a caveat of my own practice being much more limited, what Panpiper had said is true both from a practice and historician perspectives.
About New Zealand martial arts I've heard it highly recommended from a researcher in such things, too.
And to summarize a question on technics, as a master of my aquintance said: "All men have two arms and two legs. And nobody is able to bend knees backwards. So there are only a limited number of effective technics, used by most schools". (with a caveat of different things being stressed, of course - and weapons produced in local tradition can influence technics to a degree. Still, technics of a Chinese *dao* broadsword can be actually quite similar to those of a Scottish one :) )

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

But that isn't true. Haven't you ever seen the film 'The Crippled Masters'? Have you never heard of Nick the BJJ legend that used to train with Billy Rush? He had no legs and tapped blackbelts all the time.

Here's a random story about him tapping Joe Riggs. 3 times. And Joe Riggs has excellent grappling.

http://www.cagepotato.com/2008/02/27...n-back-injury/

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Nick is impressive, no doubt about that, and it was nice to learn about him.

The point of the part you quoted wasn't the existence of legs, though, but to point out there are only so many ways to lock an arm, and most of those appear in many different styles of martial arts.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Yeah Kapa Haka is the whole think, where as the Haka is basicly the war chant/battle cry I guess. Of which some Haka Tane(Male) use Patu or Taiaha.

As for thanking teachers, that is so hard to do. Kapa Haka is very much a cultural thing here and everyone basicly learns some during there school years. And those schools that don't teach it will atleast make sure the one performed by sports teams is atleast known.
So you have school teachers, community elders, family elders, kapahaka groups I've been in. So many different instructors over the year.


Come to think of it I just remember one time when I was around 10. We were to perform a Haka with Taiaha. So the elder that was teaching us the song and action also went though action killing blows with the weapon. I remember him telling us.
Hit them with the shaft end and knock them to the ground. Then the other end which natually was a carved face, the protruding tongue be the spear part and go for soft parts boys. Eyes, Armpits, Groin, Belly and the such.
Now that there down take your Patu, not those wooden ones you have but you Jade Stone Patu and you can crack open there head. And being a Maori you go get yourself a good feed of brains and take there knowledge.

To bad when the English came to colonize New Zealand they gave us guns. So that we could shoot from afar instead of close combat.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Oh I don't know. Why not shoot someone from a distance?

I read "A History of Warfare" by John Keegan. It's quite interesting from the viewpoint that war in more primitive cultures was principally ritualised often with ranged weaponry, where both sides tended to try to avoid casualties even to the point where they might barely inflict any. Eventually one side would give up and go home. The suggestion he made was that was the original "natural" state, and where possible and without social conditioning or training humans want to revert to it.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

John Keegan has a lot of respect from the circles I keep. And he is right, warfare aught by natural law be a matter of ritual posturing rather than coming to blows. It is a fact that it is extremely rare to 'win' a war. All one can really hope for is to loose less than the other side (and call that victory). The Allies 'won' world war two, but at what cost? Virtually the whole planet was war ravaged by the end.

Animals in nature will rarely fight (unless it is a carnivore killing prey, but that is rarely a fight). Two males squaring off competing for mates and status will posture and make noise attempting to intimidate the rival into backing down. Rarely will it come to blows, this because there is too much risk of injury. Even if one animal wins, it is likely to be wounded in the confrontation, which would severely impair it's ability to compete with any other male. Primitive human societies mimic this behavior for perfectly good reasons. It is our 'civilized' society that tends to habitually devolve into orgies of mutual murder.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Just to drop a line here:

The only difference between martial arts is the situations where they are designed to be good.

For example, kendo takes place in open ground along two axis and so is straight up superior to rapier fencing in an open field or something.

By contrast, rapier fencing was designed so that people could fight duels in alleys on one axis and it is flat out superior to kendo fencing in that situation.

My opinion for why Eastern arts are exoticized is because in the East orders of fighting monks and nobles trained from the age of 6. By the time they were adult they had enough skill that horribly inefficient but nice looking moves were possible with a young adult body and decades of training. Think gymnastics for a Western comparison.

The West never developed the same kinds of arts because of the simple "gun/bow > fists/sword". Heck, the history of the crossbow is fascinating because it was outlawed for hundreds of years because peasants could learn it with little or no training and kill armored knights.

So in a RPG, every martial art should have a situation bonus. Pirate Cutlass fighting should be better on ships and english military academy fighting should be better in closed circles and eastern wakizashi fighting should be better in house-to-house fighting.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

The eastern martial arts weren't and aren't "horribly inefficient with nice looking moves". I can only speak for tai chi, because it's the only one I've tried myself, and it can be brutally effective, if the practitioner is taught to use it that way. In the week I had to learn it, I spent about as much time learning applications as I did learning the form.

In the west we had knights who were trained from childhood not only to fight, but to improve and keep up an impressive physical ability. Among other things, they practiced getting on and off a horse. Speaking of gymnastics...

And finally, even if the papal ban was made, it didn't get enforced, and it certainly didn't last for hundreds of years.


I agree with your post otherwise: different martial arts mostly differ in the time and place they were developed. Styles' effectiveness should be situational. Unless it's hard to implement, in which case gameplay triumphs over theoretical realism.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

In agreement with K's post (and I suppose a little implicit disagreement with a bit of Endo's) a lot of Wu Shu martial arts stuff (maybe its specific to Wu Shu though) is just 'show'.

I have a hard time believing that a guy hopping on his butt while swinging a nine-link whip around underneath it has any practical application in an actual confrontation (unless its a break-dancing confrontation).

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

While all I have is my personal experience, I can tell you that after several years of Tai Chi that a lot of it is not practical. You honestly can learn all the "moves" of an entire martial art in about three months. The rest is just physical conditioning like speed and strength training and learning to react both instinctively and intelligently with the correct move.

I also studied Karate under a streetfighter ex-Marine and I can tell you that the stripped-down version looks nothing like the moves you see on TV. He basically said "I'll teach you to fight first, then I'll teach the impressive stuff if you still want to learn it." I watched the Capoiera club at my school for weeks before deciding that presenting my butt to an enemy is just not practical in any form. Saber fencing and Tai Chi saber fencing also can be mastered in any practical way in a few weeks (I fenced with an Olympic saber fencer and could beat him 1 out of 4 times and I was nowhere near the athlete and half-blind to boot).

There's a great mini-documentary on the Batman Begins DVD that shows the progression of a modern martial art called KC. It's a good example of showing how martial arts are designed toward a particular focus (in that case, fighting several enemies at once).

Mostly, I think martial arts get great marketing and religious stuff added to it so that teachers can get students. Learning to fight well is simply a matter of practice so that even the best trained warrior can be beaten by a street-fighter who has cobbled together a style from kung-fu movies and a little formal training (see Bruce Lee).

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

It sounds like you're basing your argument (regarding whether studying martial arts is practical) on Tai Chi and Fencing. That's pretty funny! I've yet to see anyone in MMA whose martial arts style is "Tai Chi". If there was anyone, probably he didn't make it very far.

My personal experience is with Aikido, which may also be impractical in a street fight (or MMA), but it's great for keeping the wife and kids in line (see my wife and kids).

Aikido does have some lame mystical elements, but horrible marketing, so they probably added a bunch of extra moves so it would take longer than three months to learn, thus retaining their core student base.

P.S. Batman Begins was horrible.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

isn't Tai Chi that _real slow_ martial art. the kind that old men do?

my friend practices that. he says it isn't a 'fighting' martial art but is purely a sort of mind-body-soul thing.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Yeah, that's the one. Old ladies too.

But there was some book or movie a while ago where the hero studied Tai Chi for years and years, or 3 months, or something, and he was such a Tai Chi god that he could rip out people's hearts through their eye sockets. I think it was sponsored by the American Federation of Tai Chi Clubs Financial Committee.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

The "mystical" elements are quite important, for true mastery of mind, body, and environment.

Understandably, they are easy to downplay, because developing oneself spiritually, conflicts with putting oneself on public display - thus the martial artists (or "fighters") that you see in movies and documentaries, tend towards the practical, rather than the intangible.

I won't claim any exclusivity for any particular methods, but I was under the impression that it was common knowledge that honing the mind and the spirit is rather important to self-perfection. You don't have to be a good person to be spiritual, and you don't have to be spiritual to be dangerous. In fact, the more dangerous "fighters" are those who have developed the weapon, without developing the warrior.

I'm sure this post is going to open a hell of a can of worms (judging by the few posts just before it!), so have fun. :p

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

mmmmmm... worms. :)

I will follow this thread with interest (adding nothing besides this useless post of course).

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Spiritualism doesn't conflict with public display in Japan. The top spiritualists get their own TV shows and rake in the big bucks. Here's one of the most successful guys at the moment:

http://www.el-aura.com/english/img/t...over/vol19.jpg

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

In Japan almost anything goes thanks to western culture.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Maybe I'm way off, but that picture just makes him look like a Japanese Jim Baker. :p I wonder when Jim and Tammy Faye stopped being touted as "top spiritualists". ;) Granted, I've no idea what this man is all about, it's just a superficial observation.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I have no idea what Aikido looks like, but I have now the mental image of vfb throwing his family members around the house stuck in my brain.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

I've heard that there are people who teach Tai Chi as a martial art rather than as a method of exercise and that it can actually be quite dangerous. But I would say that pretty much any martial art can be powerful if practiced by a sufficiently gifted student, so long as it's not something silly like martial arts tea ceremony.

I don't know what aikido looks like either, but I suspect it looks a little like judo. My brother used to do judo... and of course he would always practice on me.

To my understanding, Aikido is basically a grappling art, like judo or jujutsu. Looking up the acronym MMA, I seem to get a hit relating to UFC, which I am vaguely aware of and heard somewhat to the effect that it was dominated for a while by practitioners of gracie jiu jutsu in particular. So apparently it would probably not be impractical for that, though personally I am not that convinced of grappling arts superiority. Then again, a lot does depend on the student.

And K, interesting that you dueled an olympic fencer. Olympic fencing kind of bugs me though... usually, the two people just lunge at each other and whichever hits first wins, so it seems mostly determined by who has the best reflexes. In my book that's not winning, that's mutually agreeing to die :P I tried fencing once... I was at a renaissance faire, and they had a few guys there offering fencing lessons. I had a bit of bad reflexes for it being used to somewhat different sword arts, so I would keep trying to do things I wasn't supposed to and had to restrain myself. Anyway, I ended up going 2 to 3 with my instructor, with a rather furious battle on that last point, neither one of us wanted to lose :) Relevance? Well, I guess what I'm trying to say is that with martial arts, it's not necessarily so much learning the moves as perfecting the technique and acquiring the reflexes required for it. Being properly fit for the school helps too.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Ha! Challenge! To arms and argument! :D


The slow thing that is done in tai chi is called a form.

Yes, the form is often practiced real slow, and yes, many old men do it. Once you are good you can also perform the form fast (if you want to), and some of the old people can do more than just the form:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUf1llA3HXg

Also, moving slow isn't easy. Does your friend sweat during the form? I didn't, until I slowed down. I had been doing it too fast for several months! :doh: That's what you get for not having a teacher.

Many tai chi teachers don't even know that tai chi is a martial art, and of course anything they teach won't be a martial art either. It doesn't mean that your friend can't practice his meditative tai chi, or that other people can't practice just-for-show modern Wushu. I, however, am not interested in learning just the form, or in learning gymnastics. I want to learn the martial art, which has forms and (some) show, but also lots of fun stuff you won't get from the other two.


I bolded the parts that tai chi teaches. :D

I speak about "tricks" instead of "moves", because sometimes similar movement can be done in slightly different ways. It's still a single "move", but at the same time, several "tricks". Learning all the tricks isn't what martial arts are about, because in a real fight you don't know what tricks are allowed and what the other guy is going to do.

A form can have a hundred movements, and the flowery names are a great help for learning all the tricks. I was taught to use "grasping bird's tail" to parry a straight punch while blocking the attacker's other hand, like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2co2w288Tho

In addition, the form helps with posture, footwork and balance, doing the posture very slow and very low will strengthen your legs, and practicing daily will help you learn to perform it more precisely. There are other ways to practice the same stuff, of course.


It looks like you have practiced more martial arts than I, and I'm impressed with your fencing merits.
Regardless, I disagree. The movements "that work" are simplifications. "Boxing is about punching" is a simplification, because a good punch relies on good footwork and balance and bluffing.
You can learn lots of useful tricks very fast. These tricks can be stripped-down street-versions, or applications based on tai chi form, or aikido wrist locks. They can be useful and save your life, but they're only one part of the story.

The tricks you use don't matter as much as the other stuff: your balance and speed and reflexes, your attitude, your ability to think fast and outsmart others, if you noticed you're in danger ot not, etc. I think it's the same thing you're saying in here:

(What do you mean about Bruce Lee, btw? Was he beaten up by some fan or something?)

In the short time I practiced tai chi (about a week) I didn't learn much about balance, but I've been practicing what little form I learned and it has helped a little. I did go through nice two-person drills where you have to react to your partner's movement, follow him when he steps backwards and change direction when he changes direction, and I'd love to do them again. They are very fun to do, and challenging, and teach reflexes and footwork.
Here is a great video about pushing hands practice. It starts with basics, and then moves to showing applications.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkyq9FljlG8


Now, before I go any further, I have to say I can't fight with tai chi. Not yet, at least. However, in a week of tai chi I learned more than in the ~2 years I practiced a Korean kicking art. In there, I only learned tricks: kicks, punches, counters to different kicks, parries to straight punches, etc.
In tai chi, I learned lots of new tricks, but also the fact that tricks alone won't be enough.

I have seen one (1) MMA match which a tai chi- bagua-sanshou fighter won. I think it was his first MMA match. I'm trying to find it, but I haven't had any luck. It didn't look like tai chi, of course, because he wasn't doing a form.

I've been learning aikido for about half a year now. Aikido as I've been taught is nowhere near as brutal or direct as the tai chi I was taught, even though it shares some similar ideas. The practice has been too static, for one thing. We almost always practice a spesific counter-move to a spesific attack. The tricks are good, but we always practice from the same, static pose. I'd love to have this kind of practice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FK7w1j-zRCQ

That's from a martial arts school in Rome, but that kind of practice could work in ANY martial art. Wonderful stuff.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

A tea ceremony master was walking through the town market one day when he accidentally jostled a samurai. The samurai took great offense, but because the samurai and the tea ceremony master were of the same social caste, the samurai could not simply lop off the tea ceremony master's head. So the samurai challenged the tea ceremony master to a duel the following dawn.

Now the tea ceremony master knew nothing of sword fighting, but was bound by honor to show up for this duel. Not wanting to embarrass himself, he went to the town sword master and asked the sword master if he could be taught to use a sword. The sword master was rather flustered, not really being able to teach much in the space of one evening. He showed how to hold a sword, how to do a basic sword stroke, and then said this;.

"I can teach you nothing about how to fight this evening. But I will tell you this; Go to the bridge in the morning, hold the sword thusly over your head. Think of the tea ceremony. When your opponent approaches, strike with all your might."

The next morning at dawn the sword master stood at one end of the bridge and the samurai arrived at the other. The tea ceremony master held up his sword as he had been shown and thought of the tea ceremony. The samurai watched the tea ceremony master for a good while. Finally he bowed, turned, and walked away.

Here endeth the lesson. ;-)


I could write a LOT about the martial side of tai-chi, but Endoperez did a pretty good job of defending it.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

That was supposed to be an obscure joke, but thanks for the story :)

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Well, Endo basically made the same points that I would, so I'll just clarify a few points:

1. I've studied the martial form of Tai chi, as well as martial form of Tai chi saber fencing, European fencing with saber and epee, and karate, and I've picked up a few moves from various people I've sparred with that range from Kung Fu to Aikido to Capoeira and escrima(sp?). That's a pretty diverse set of martial skills, but it is not even uncommon for any serious martial artist to try several forms for several years to cover perceived holes in technique (or just to keep interest since once you are conditioned for one form learning another is child's play).

2. At the end of the day, being a good fighter is about being really physically fit and training yourself in enough situations to have an appropriate response that comes instinctively. Breaking someone's nose with the flat of your hand is no different from grabbing a bar glass and smashing it across their face: both with take the fight right out of anyone who is not a professional fighter or soldier.

And that's the essence of the martial arts: having an answer to a situation. Tai chi is about keeping your balance and redirecting an enemy while KC is about locking up an opponent and tossing them into another guy and Aikido is about being able to take a fall while tossing your opponent. Each has a solution to the same situations and some are better in some situations. KC is great if you are bigger than your enemy, Tai chi for being smaller, and aikido if you are about the same size....however, each will do the job in a pinch.

But I doubt I'll convince anyone. The marketing behind all martial or fighting arts has been that there is a "secret" to fighting that only comes from a teacher and that teacher's special forms of initiations. The lie is told by Navy SEALs and wizened Asian masters alike and it's the same techniques of marketing used to sell potato chips and luxury cars.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

No, actually that made perfect sense to me. Maybe I just didn't need enough convincing.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Two thumbs for Endoperez and K!
One small comment on mentioned Bruce Lee: Tai Chi was the first MA he studied. :) Actually, it can be seen as he often preferred relatively low "half-horse" stance to the high frontal one which he learned later in win-cnun (sp?).

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Wing chun?

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Coming from you, that's a compliment. Especially as I thought I was arguing against you!

I'll borrow the idea of your last post into another forum. In a computer game, it'd be interesting to have a good/evil axis represented by the character having a different answer/reaction to the same situation.

Re: OT: Western v. Eastern martial arts
 

Quite probably. I don't have English books on subject on hand.
By the way, a practical application of tai chi was shown in the film Shootfighter with Bolo Yeung for those interested.