Is Tai Chi any good for self defence?

Lockstep

Hey folks,

I was just wondering whether Tai Chi has any good defensive capabilities.

I'm not considering taking it up or anything, I just came across it when I was researching other martial arts.

I always had the concept it was just meditation and stretching, but it appears this is not the case.


THis is just a question out of curiosity.

Thanks

philip graham

as far as i can tell tai chi wouldnt have much use as far as defending yourself, as you said about meditation, i am sure that is the prime focus of many people who take it up.if you are looking for a martial art that is good for self defence look at more practical martial arts as in boxing, thai boxing, judo, wrestling and brazilian jiu jitsu.

Aiodhan7

I can't agree with you there ole philip. Tai chi has a reputation for its meditive qualities if that is what you want. But like many styles it's how you train it. I trained in Practical Tai Chi Chuan for a number of years and found it excellent for both conditioning and technique. But then who wins the fight the art or the one who applies it.

All the best

Aiodhan7

hideous ape

Hi,

I studied Yang Style Tai Chi for a couple of years and it is pretty lethal as a self defence. It takes a lot more focus and practise than some of the more crash, bang, wallop martial arts. Primarily because it is based on using fluid motions, your opponents balance and split second reactions to your opponents movements and balance. This type of martial art requires a lot of work and concentration from you but it is bloody well worth it.

I started out training in kickboxing and karate but outgrew both pretty quickly and found Tai Chi just clicked with me. Your average kickboxer will laugh at the idea of practising Qigong for 15 mins everyday but I personally never felt fitter, more focused, flexible, happy, etc than when I was practising Tai Chi.

Tai Chi is a fighting art but most places only do the health side of it. The slow movements are simply the blocks, grabs, locks and strikes placed into a fluid motion. These movements when used individually with speed are pretty painful...I have been on the recieving end of some wicked armlocks, takedowns and strikes. I have had to defend myself once so far using Tai Chi I was attacked by two lads probably aged 15 to 18, even though I had been drinking I was able to block and drag one lad face first onto the kerb followed by a swift kick to the kneecap of the other one....then I did what you should always do....RUN.

Here's a vid of what Tai Chi can do in terms of self defence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk68WsIoAGg

Regards,
hideous.ape

wudangclan

contact niall keane if you want to do tai chi for self defence.
website is www.freewebs.com/sanshou
although the website does'nt mention tai chi too much,for fear of attracting hippies or old women ,niall teaches wu style tai chi,for self defence and competition

meditraitor

Id like to try Tai Chi for the meditative qualities, can any tell me if there is a school or course close to Swords (Fingal).

Mark

BLITZ_Molloy

Anything that makes you fit enough to run really quickly is the best self defence. Our 4th Degree Tae Kwon Do instructor (also does alot of Tai Chi) was teaching us how to defend against knife attacks using pressure points and such. We were like "So.. does this actually work in a real life situation?" and he says "Of course not, you like hell!".

ryoishin

Maybe. It may or may not help to to get ready made for self defence, i ve never done tai chi so i wont comment on that aspect.

But when i used to do a lot of sword training it helped to give me a fighting mindset but did nt teach me to defend a punch. it may have some benifit to your over all game plan.

Dawei

Don't even mention fighting with Tai chi, unless you have trained it for 10 years daily, and learned it from a real master of Tai chi

Roper

OP you've started a lot of threads and asked a lot of questions. You just need to stop asking and ask people in person ie. go along to a club and train for a session, then another and another. There's nothing like doing!

saneape

NO

Not unless it makes you chilled out, so that you dont piss people off...

I think a better route for this type of discusion maybe in asking which training methods they use, Or dont as the case maybe.:eek:

Sorry if i appear smug.

smacl

saneape wrote: »

I think a better route for this type of discusion maybe in asking which training methods they use, Or dont as the case maybe.:eek:

It's a good point, and probably worth noting that training methods (and intensity) in Tai Chi possibly vary more than in most martial arts. I trained for about ten years of Practical Tai Chi Chuan, primarily under Paul Mitchell. When training for a competition we used to do two hour and three hour sessions consisting of conditioning (pad work, punching weights, rolls, etc...), pressure testing single and combined techniques (usually throws and counters), free wrestling in various formats (not jacket, jacket, etc..), and san shou (free sparring, full contact, with wrestling, throws etc..), followed by slow hand forms and weapon forms to wind down. In addition to the classes, the expectation was that we would do our own conditioning every day, which for me would include one or two of punching weights / kettle bells / running / tai chi nei kung on any given day. (for me, two half hour sessions was plenty, some of the lads like Niall Keane did quite a bit more).

If we were'nt training for a competition, the format would change, more techniques and weapons, less conditioning though always some. It would also vary based on whether we had beginners joining us.

My guess is that very little Tai Chi in Ireland is taught this way any longer, with Niall Keane being the only person that I am aware of that follows this type of format and rigour. IMHO, Tai Chi Chuan without proper conditioning and regular sparring is totally inadequate for serious physical conflict. Taught in a realistic manner it can be highly effective in many arenas, e.g. Paul Mitchell became the world Shuai Jiao (chinese jacket wrestling) champion without taking a single class, Niall Keane has fought and trains sucessful san shou fighters that compete at european level, Sami Berik is successful in the cage fighting / mma area. All Practical Tai Chi Chuan, as was the Wim Demeere video posted by the Yang Tai Chi practioner earlier in the thread.

So is Tai Chi any good for self defense. Honestly, I couldn't tell you. Like many of the posters here, I don't seem to find myself getting into street fights, nor have I any desire to. When I see something kicking off, walking away has always worked just fine for me. If good self defense is based on the number of fights you don't lose, rather than the number you win, I have a 100% record

Damo W

Check out http://www.taijiworld.com/, it suggests...

'Please take note however, that if you are looking for some kind of religion or some way to make you Superman because you have seen Great Grandmaster Hoo Flung-dung throwing someone from a distance, or controlling someone's energy in some way physically, or other circus tricks of physics, please look elsewhere. This site is a down to earth and realistic self defence method for the real world of both physical and pathogenic attack. However, along the way, you might just discover yourself.'

[Disclaimer, I know nothing of them/him only found the site!!, so don't shoot me:D]

Lockstep

Roper wrote: »

OP you've started a lot of threads and asked a lot of questions.

Ah now that's hardly fair.

AFAIK I posted this and the one about something to go with boxing.
I don't know anyone who does any Tai Chi for self defense, so I figured that I was better off posting in a forum where people would be knowledgable on the subject.
Also I did state at the start of this thread that I wasn't considering taking up Tai Chi. I was just curious as to whether it worked as a martial art.

Mark Hamill

kickoutthejams wrote: »

I was just curious as to whether it worked as a martial art.

Wikipedia wrote:

Tai chi's martial aspect relies on sensitivity to the opponent's movements and center of gravity dictating appropriate responses. Effectively affecting or "capturing" the opponent's center of gravity immediately upon contact is trained as the primary goal of the martial tai chi student. The sensitivity needed to capture the center is acquired over thousands of hours of first yin (slow, repetitive, meditative, low impact) and then later adding yang ("realistic," active, fast, high impact) martial training; forms, pushing hands and sparring.

Well, without even going into whether any of the techniques you can learn from Tai Chi are any good, the fact that you need to do "thousands of hours of yin" (the slow, low impact stuff) before you actually start the realistic training (the sparring) at least points to it as being incredibly inneficient as a martial art to learn for self defence.
Here's the link if anybodies interested.

Clive

I wouldn't believe everything you read on wikipedia.

Nothingcompares

or boards.ie

Niall Keane

http://www.putfile.com/sandaeire

Practical Tai Chi Ireland - training clips and san shou kickboxing

Niall Keane

Fighters make fights, not styles, but we can all learn from another’s hard earned experience, I’ve yet to find fault with the advice imparted by the Tai Chi Chuan Classics, a must read for any fighter.

Strategy:
http://www.taichichuan.co.uk/information/strategy_and_tactics.html



Classics: (not the most accurate translation but it presents the idea)

http://www.itcca.it/peterlim/classic1.htm


the reader should know that in 19th century Beijing Tai Chi Chuan was held with the same esteem that BJJ was in the mid / late 90’s, it had its champion Yang Lu Chan who like the Gracies defeated all before him. They say that a business lasts 3 generations, one builds it, one keeps it going and the 3rd squanders it. Likewise with many of the family styles of Tai Chi Chuan. After the fall of the Empire, the once revered masters began to teach it as a health exercise to the wealthy classes. This is easier and far more profitable. From my own experience as a teacher, I have found only a handful of students willing to undergo the actual training. And many of those couldn’t complete the training, having to leave the country etc. To teach someone to fight successfully with Tai Chi Chuan techniques can be accomplished in about 6 months, however to gain competence in the subtleties can take years, also Tai Chi Chuan is a complete system, i.e. it contains weapon as well as empty hand training. They say 100 days for the spear, 1,000 days for the sabre and 10,000 days for the sword. All of these weapons teach new strategies and deepen our understanding, feeding back into the empty hand methods, until there is no differenciation.
The goal in Tai Chi Chuan, indeed in all styles of Gung Fu is enlightenment, or a perfection of mind, technique and strategy. It was never meant to be a 6-week crash course racket, the idea was to develop an understanding of technique that could be carried through to old age, not a sport requiring the practitioner to be in the prime of life in order to defend himself. The styles techniques can, and have been successfully adapted for the likes of San Shou and MMA, as a previous poster has mentioned, but primarily, we do not wheel up the tank on front of the enemy and trade blows.
This evasive nature of confrontation, offering a target and then removing it while counterattacking has a direct translation into weapon usage. It would be fool hardy of a style to expect a practitioner to be able to utilise completely different strategies for different occasions. The same principles are trained and taught whether striking, grappling, locking, wrestling or using swords and spears. A sort of Less is More attitude is adapted, an essentialism, able to adapt to any circumstance. This is the real beauty of true Tai Chi Chuan, we do not really wave our hands in the clouds, in fact we hardly move them!

BLITZ_Molloy

Hear about that criminal in Dublin called the Viper in the papers yesterday? Got shot 8 times and got away. And this is the fourth attempt on his life. Just goes to prove what I was saying earlier that self defence is all about fitness. The guys 57 but he practically lives in the gym. If you get shot at or someones flailing about with a knife at you then I'd say arguing over the varying real world effectiveness of Muay Thai, Tae Kwon Do and Ju Jitsu is a bit irrelevant.

I'm doing Capoeira at the moment just because I find it enjoyable. I'm not particularly interested if it's any good in a street fight.

dunkamania

Dont forget he was shot 8 times coming out of the gym, if he was a little more lazy, he wouldnt have been shot at all......

BLITZ_Molloy

Hehehe, he got shot at in his house and loads of other places as well. Spry beggar always manages to get away though. Fair ****s to him.

Mark Hamill

Niall Keane wrote: »

This evasive nature of confrontation, offering a target and then removing it while counterattacking has a direct translation into weapon usage. It would be fool hardy of a style to expect a practitioner to be able to utilise completely different strategies for different occasions. The same principles are trained and taught whether striking, grappling, locking, wrestling or using swords and spears. A sort of Less is More attitude is adapted, an essentialism, able to adapt to any circumstance.

Is that "leaving something out in the open, allowing your opponent to attack, and then counterattacking" not a pretty dangerous way to fight. Besides the fact you let your opponent dictact the direction the fight takes, you are for all intensive purposes trying to guess every move your opponents going to make, because different moves are qoing to require different counterattacks, and when you train all the ranges of striking, wrestling, ground grappling and submissions (locking), thats a lot of counterattacks to remember (not to mention that in terms of wrestling and striking, you will have to counterattack immediately to be effective, while in ground grappling and submissions, you are going to be in bad positions when you need to counterattack most of the time).
Is it not better to be more agressive, ie. put your opponent on the back foot so they don't know what to expect and put YOU in control of the fight.

Niall Keane

Is that "leaving something out in the open, allowing your opponent to attack, and then counterattacking" not a pretty dangerous way to fight. Besides the fact you let your opponent dictact the direction the fight takes, you are for all intensive purposes trying to guess every move your opponents going to make, because different moves are qoing to require different counterattacks, and when you train all the ranges of striking, wrestling, ground grappling and submissions (locking), thats a lot of counterattacks to remember (not to mention that in terms of wrestling and striking, you will have to counterattack immediately to be effective, while in ground grappling and submissions, you are going to be in bad positions when you need to counterattack most of the time).
Is it not better to be more agressive, ie. put your opponent on the back foot so they don't know what to expect and put YOU in control of the fight.


Imagine you have 1000 men and your enemy has 2000, how do you beat him? Take him head on and at best you’ll achieve a pyrric victory. Now separate his forces fainting this way and that, and you can divide his force so all you will have to fight is 400-500 and you attack each contingent with all your 1000 men. After a few battles you will have won.
Now look at the small scale. We train to have a perfect guard, i.e. able to prevent any attack. If we keep this perfect form, the opponent will attack us all over looking for a weakness, but if we secure all areas except a very tasty target, we know before he attacks where he will attack, this is the meaning of entice the enemy with profit, he moves first but I arrive first.
Hence the importance of form in Tai Chi Chuan, the actual form which is practiced slowly to become further aware of transition between movements, but also the actual shape our bodies take during the offence and defence associated with combat, offensive moves will leave an area venerable, if you have studied where, you can have a pretty good idea where the voids are and where the next attack will arrive, and so can be prepared, or faint the attack to draw the response.
Not only will you be prepared for the attack, but also this seemingly clairvoyant sense will dishearten the opponent, break his intent and desire to fight, and this is how any victory is achieved.
The trick of course is subtlety, what is subtle, well for some a brick in the face, others a hair trigger. In wrestling, sometimes I’ve had to actually push quite hard in one direction before the opponent noticed, and reacted, I then changed directions of applied force, adding my force to his, spinning him to the ground. At higher levels, I’ve merely drummed my fingers on an opponents arm to illicit the same response.
The trick here is what is referred to as “Ting Jin” or listening ability, remaining soft, i.e. not tense, using correct structure and alignment to hold the opponent, rather than strength, and then releasing him into the void. The character for listening has eyes and ears, so when striking, we match the opponent, staying just outside his range, moving in only to counter or strike. Kinda like bull fighting.
Which brings up another point, we can control a bull by the ring in its nose, place the ring on his foot and another synario will unfold, so studying the mechanics of the body is fundamental for the Tai Chi man. But the science of leverage and pressure only makes one a technician.
To be an artist, here I’ll quote T.S. Elliot re. Poets, and the ability of the writer to engender an emotional response in the reader.
Likewise the martial artist can through the use of faints and draws, form and intent entice a specific and foreseen reaction in his opponent.
Keep moving, always changing the position of your centre of gravity, the opponent finds it difficult to strike, never mind combinations, now open the guard slightly, high or low, left or right, and in his urgency to manage to hit / throw you, he’ll take the bait.
Stand rock solid, and fully covered, and if he’s wise he’ll forget about the primary targets and just smash your arms and legs. Keep firing missiles in the hope of crowding him, and if he’s any good he’ll swing around such threats, discover the rhythm, and land his own bombs. This constant high-pace / one speed and direction method is the way of the journeyman. I’ve seen this again and again. Certainly I’ve seen exceptionally quick and powerful fighters win world titles this way, but they never retained them, luck of the young I guess.

FrostyJack

Someone was reading Sun Tzu art of War while smoking those funny cigarettes.......

Mark Hamill

Just some points on your analogies...

Niall Keane wrote: »

Imagine you have 1000 men and your enemy has 2000, how do you beat him? Take him head on and at best you’ll achieve a pyrric victory. Now separate his forces fainting this way and that, and you can divide his force so all you will have to fight is 400-500 and you attack each contingent with all your 1000 men.

What, and when your 1000 guys attacks these 500 guys, the other 1500 will just there and watch?

Niall Keane wrote: »

To be an artist, here I’ll quote T.S. Elliot re. Poets, and the ability of the writer to engender an emotional response in the reader.
Likewise the martial artist can through the use of faints and draws, form and intent entice a specific and foreseen reaction in his opponent.

This depends a lot on the individual though, in terms of poetry you can have people (eg me) who almost unconditionally hate all poetry and just avoid it all, and in terms of fighting (especially when you are doing all three ranges, striking, wrestling & ground), you can have people who will just avoid doing certain things just because they dont like those ranges. eg: if I was put into a fight with Floyd Mayweather, I don't care if he started with his hands behind his back, I wouldn't stay standing with him, I'd take him down to the ground where I was comfortable to fight.

My main problem with the "leaving targets out and then counterattacking" fight style is that you are always one step closer to losing a fight than you need to be. Think of it like this: (this is easier in terms of submissions, but I will talk in terms of striking) there are four steps (or stages or degrees, I don't know which word is better) in a fight: the attack (which hopefully causes the win), the counterattack (similar to attack, but worse as your opponent has control of the fight) , the defense (when you cant counterattack) and the loss (which is the end). Going from one part to the next (attack-counterattack-defense-loss) is a step down in how much control you have in the fight, and more importantly how close you are to losing. Why start closer to losing if you don't need to? Why rely on being faster (half of what you need to counterattack effectively, the other half is the skill obviously) than your opponent? Surely you should start attacking and then if that doesn't work then move on to the next step.

Niall Keane

the other 1500 will be on the other side of the country.

its not that you're constantly on the back foot, you're missing the point if you think this, if you protect every where, you have to watch out everywhere for every angle, if you conversly leave a tempting lure, you already know where he'll attack, and you can say in boxing meet his forward movement with your fist on his chin, twice the force, listen to some old Ali interviews, this is not reinventing the wheel here. The method has been proven to work in several formats. I'm not trying to convince anyone to do things this way, I'm just explaining the practical technique and strategies of Tai Chi Chuan. The O.P. asked if it was any good in self defense.
All arts have an emphasis, tai chi chuan emphasises avoiding using force against force, and prefers counter striking, i.e. a soft style art. This has been mistaken to mean being gentle and flacid, I guess I'm trying to brush away the many misconceptions in the west about it.

Clive

I suggest that anyone who doesn't understand what Niall is talking about should should peraps try hopping into a ring and trying out some type of full contact competition.

Revelation may be forthcoming.

Roper

I dig what Niall is saying and I'm not even near a funny cigarette.

Feinting, drawing, striking on the counter is all part of the striking game but to bring it to ground when you're evenly matched with another guy sometimes you have to fake an escape one way to get out another way. We had a wrestler train with us there for a while about a year back on his holidays and he showed me a great underhook to single leg fake up. All combat sports have what Niall is on about.

Not everything that comes from "traditional" martial arts is wrong just because it has a chinese name.:)

Mark Hamill

Roper wrote: »

but to bring it to ground when you're evenly matched with another guy sometimes you have to fake an escape one way to get out another way.

Yes, but would you try tempting a guy with an arm for an armbar in order to counter it to get a submission?

Roper wrote: »

All combat sports have what Niall is on about.

True, all combat sports have aspects of counterattacking, but my problem is that from what Niall says, Tai Chi is all about counterattacking, you never bring the fight to the opponent.

Look, I'm not saying it doesn't work, just look at how Chuck LIddell kept the light-heavy title for so long with his precision counterstriking, and look at Randy Coutures fight with Tim Sylvia where he countered almost every single one of Tims strikes, but for that to be your entire game plan (for every fight, and each stage of the fight) is pretty dangerous. You are relying on being faster and more accurate than you opponent when he strikes, which is great when you can do it (if you have the stamina or whatever) but if you get tired then your screwed. (look at the last round or two of Randy V Tim, I don't know anyone who could watch them without nearly crapping themselves because it was easy to see, the longer the fight went on the more tired Randy was getting and the easier it was for him to make that one mistake and get knockout).

To me relying on being to counterattack perfectly, is like relying on being faster or stronger than someone to win. Its all atribute based and you will still lose to someone who is more skilled than you.

Mark Hamill

Clive wrote: »

I suggest that anyone who doesn't understand what Niall is talking about should should peraps try hopping into a ring and trying out some type of full contact competition.

Revelation may be forthcoming.

Well, I do the MMA League, and I have been to a few full contact MMA comps and I haven't noticed any Tai Chi fighters competing. And while I have seen people win with a counterattack, I haven't seen too many people whith letting people attack and then countering as their entire gameplan.

Roper

Well I'd just finish this by saying that what you're saying is academic. And like or no, fighting is about 1% academic, 19% skill and 80% fitness.

Dragan

I just worry about anything that relies on "perfection"....it's not really a human quality....there are always flaws and half of any victory is working a game plan that reduces the impact of yours and increases the impact of your oponent...i would consider that to just be "clever" as oppossed to "perfect".

Just me though.

Roper

Dragan wrote: »

I just worry about anything that relies on "perfection"....it's not really a human quality....there are always flaws and half of any victory is working a game plan that reduces the impact of yours and increases the impact of your oponent...i would consider that to just be "clever" as oppossed to "perfect".

Just me though.

I don't think anyone means perfection in that way. But perfect timing? Fighters can have that. That's really what we're talking about here. Drawing a response from your opponent and having the perfect timing to use it.

Put two guys training 6 months in front of each other in Judo, boxing, MMA anything of the same size and skill level and they'll beat the tar out of each other and one will win by being stronger, fitter, more agressive or whatever. Put the same guys in after 3 or 4 years training and they'll both be smarter, draw their opponent on to their punches or throws and use their timing to hit or throw.

Mark Hammil,
The sky is blue..... dispute?:)

Dragan

Ah i see.....cheers Barry!

Roper

Dragan wrote: »

Ah i see.....cheers Barry!

well, thats the way I see it others might disagree! In fact, I predict that they will!

l
l
l
l
l
V

columok

Mark,

I've rolled with you plenty of times where you've used the possibility of a submission (for example a kimura in bottom half guard) to set up an escape.

Tut tut tut

Mark Hamill

columok wrote: »

Mark,

I've rolled with you plenty of times where you've used the possibility of a submission (for example a kimura in bottom half guard) to set up an escape.

Tut tut tut

I'm pretty sure I only do it with kimuras though, and even then I wouldn't do that with a brown or blackbelt, where I couldn't be sure that flexible shoulders would be enough to escape a submission. Besides since when has me doing something one way made it the right way to do something?

Again, I'm not saying counterattacking doesn't exist, or its never something you should you, but seeing as you have to be in a bad place in order to counterattack (especially on the ground), your relying on too many variables(strength, stamina, speed, reaction times) for it to be always the thing to do. At least if you are attacking and you make a mistake (and everyone does, all the time, otherwise the winner in fights would always be whoever had the most experience) you have time to recover because the opponent is still defending while you attack, but if make a mistake while counterattcking, then your opponents strike connects with that sweet spot you've convieniently left open for him, or you miss the escape and you get caught with an armbar.

Roper wrote:

Well I'd just finish this by saying that what you're saying is academic

What do you mean by acedemic?

Roper wrote:

I don't think anyone means perfection in that way.

Niall Keane wrote:

The goal in Tai Chi Chuan, indeed in all styles of Gung Fu is enlightenment, or a perfection of mind, technique and strategy.

Roper

Look, I'll say it because no one else will- You're talking sh1t.

Mark Hamill

Roper wrote: »

Look, I'll say it because no one else will- You're talking sh1t.

Wow, what a valid point you make:rolleyes:

Roper

Hey thanks! I thought you'd be annoyed!

Dawei

I agree with all of you, but seems to me that you guys are talking about different stuff, Niall is talking about self defence , bare hand combat, and rest of talking about ring arts.

SorGan

the answer to the op is generally "no" its just not trained that way, with some schools of exception.:)

Dylan Scally

Very funny that, tai gee or what ever it's called for self defense!!!!!!!