Baji under Scientific Microscope by stanford.edu

By | September 20, 2015


??????????????. ??????????”??”.???????????????.??????”??” thank`s to taijiinchina

Download PDF

25 thoughts on “Baji under Scientific Microscope by stanford.edu

  1. alencarfilipe

    bajiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!

    yeaahhhhhh!!!!!

  2. afroradiohead

    I don’t think this is baji. Is it?

  3. coldlessons

    That is Chen Xiang of Hunyuan Taiji System created by Feng Zhiqiang.

    Yeah, looks a bit like Baji, all comes to be the same in some ways!
    Interesting, good luck.

  4. coldlessons

    Gah!!!
    Gives me brain strain to examine. To each their own taste… I’s rather taste than analyse.
    Anyway to examine explosive mechanics is a forgone conclusion if the person can feel it?.
    Within the ideal movement is expression of the individual’s nature when movement is first nature. Then that is art. But can that be measured ? or will measurement to a standard destroy art through restriction?
    It’s a serious question.

  5. Gringorn

    Hm. The ammount of force they are talking about here is next to nothing. A decent boxer can generate more than twice the power demonstrated in this vid. That kind of put me off. As a baji practitioner, I find that Highly dissapointing. But. They mention something about impulse. Could that be the key to baji power? (Cont. below)

  6. Gringorn

    A typical boxer’s punch would have a greater impact, but also be punching more through, putting the body weight behind it. This, on the other hand, seems to be more like an explosion. Any thoughts?

  7. Rblett

    It is not relevant because baji has copious amounts of internal elements to it. The best way to look at external/internal is where a martial art begins. Taiji training begins with focusing on internal power, and ends with using external. Hung gar begins with external training, and moves toward internal.

    Just looking at the demonstration above, one cannot say “that is external” or “that is internal”, because internal/external are entwined, especially with a master like in the clip.

  8. Rblett

    Your response was to my post, which had nothing to do with internal/external. You followed up your statement referencing my post with ‘why would internal use someone else’s power’. Phrased as a rhetorical question, it insinuates that there is an inconsistency with my post.

    The fact remains that taiji is more focused on using an opponent’s power and diverting it with their own, than breaking through them head-on (as in Baji). Internal vs external is not relevant.

  9. pumpSHO

    so whats so wrong saying taichi is internal?
    and why is that saying you made a claim

    thought taichi was internal so i didnt see the problem

  10. Rblett

    I never mentioned the term “internal” until YOU used it, demonstrating a lack of knowledge regarding the differences between internal and external in kungfu. All kungfu is both internal AND external. Baji is more external. This has nothing to do with my post. You added it in all by your pretty self.

    I was only illuminating the more than obvious differences between taiji and baji, using explosive stepping as well as head, shoulders, elbows, and hips to break an opponent’s guard. Taji does not.

  11. pumpSHO

    where did i said you claimed anything?
    but you did leave it out

    next time just be more clear and there wouldnt be a misunderstanding

  12. Rblett

    I am not angry, just confused at why you would ask a question, claiming that I said something I did not, when you didn’t even need to ask the question in the beginning. It suggests you are trying to provoke some sort of anger, like keyboard warrior trolls do, and I don’t have the patience to deal with such nonsense.

  13. HawaiiPB

    hey i just asked the question, dont get mad

  14. Rblett

    I never said that you didn’t use your own energy. If you dont’ have any energy, then there is no way to maneuver an opponent. In Taiji, your energy complement’s your opponent until the point where you can break their structure. However, I don’t really understand why you’re trying to start up this debate here. My definition was simplistic because it was directed at someone who doesn’t know a thing about martial arts. Go pick someone else to have this empty argument with.

  15. pumpSHO

    thats too limiting a definition of internal

    your own energy should be there even without an opponents energy

  16. Rblett

    Internal strength uses body mechanics and sensitivity to maneuver the opponent’s energy. External strength uses tension and muscle dynamics to force an opponent where you want them to be. It’s kungfu 101

  17. pumpSHO

    isnt taiji internal?
    why would an internal art use someone elses power?

  18. 16871607

    ???????????????
    ????
    ??????? ??????

  19. Mantisdude

    taiji? well…. it looks allot like xiao baji movements. even though it is not the shen fa of how we play it in the GM Liu Y. Q. (wutan, pachitanglang…) linage. But hwo is debating.. right?

  20. NinjatoSama

    I know for a fact that is not Li Shuwen lineage ..It doesn’t even look like the Baji I study.

  21. rekcufeht

    those students from stanford must have had a really lousy translator. haha

  22. rekcufeht

    while taiji and baji both sink into their moves, taiji uses a much more circular concept as apposed to baji which is more linear. but in the end its not the name of the art or the teacher. its whether you can achieve what you are striving for.

Comments are closed.