[K]

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.