Still on the subject of colds and flu, my son has been offered a swine flu vaccination and I’m trying to assess the pros and cons. Swine flu does not seem to have been particularly deadly since its original outbreak in Mexico, and in this case there was scant little information about any underlying condition that the victims might have had, such as tuberculosis. The other problem is that viruses mutate, which can make them immune to the vaccine.

When one also considers the fact that vaccines (and especially the rushed out variety) may not necessarily be risk free (for example there may be a link with Guillain-Barre Syndrome) I can’t help wondering if the recommendations to vaccinate are driven largely by thoughts of culpability. The logic is clear; by ‘doing something’ about the perceived and non-quantifyable ‘big risk’ (millions of people dying of ’swine flu’ = fear) you can deflect culpability for any unforseen side-effects. In fact there’s a vested interest in making the ‘big risk’ seem as scary as possible and then ‘doing something’ about it. At least if you want to look good in front of the crowd.

Of course none of this is helpful in making an informed choice as a parent. And the temptation is to side with the advising authorities because nobody can blame you if things work out badly.

I can’t say I’ve had too many colds of late and I’m tempted to date this back to the time I took up zhan zhuang. Having said that there’s been one that’s been trying to take hold for the last day or so.

As usual I instigated a battery of methods to fight back from when symptoms first appeared. These have include dosing up on vitamin C (a glass with 80% water, 20% orange juice plus one of those fizzy vitamin C tablets), attempting to  slaughter the germs early with a nasal spray plus antibacterial lozengers and using mixed effect remedies such as hot toddies (brandy, honey and lemon in water). I don’t know if it’s going to work this time but generally speaking it seems very effective. And there’s some evidence that every one of these approaches can help.

So why don’t more people use such methods and trumpet them from the roof tops?  Would it not increase the UK’s GDP massively if everyone were to adopt them?

Unfortunately it becomes clear why nobody wants to do such things when one considers incentives. Most people are employed and receive full pay when they get ill whilst drug companies won’t want people curing themselves for free. It’s only the loony fringe of self-employed folk who see getting a cold as a potential blow to their livelihood.

This in turn makes me wonder about something; could the number of colds and days taken off work be predictive of a nation’s success?

On the subject of Dan Docherty and ‘Wudang’ Tai Chi, here’s a nice video of his teacher, Chen Tin-Hung, in action. There’s also a nice article about him at Dan Docherty’s site.

As my martial arts training progresses I find myself comparing the journey to the one I’ve made in chess. One of the main differences is that chess players are involved in all-out combat whenever we play a game. Martial artists, on the other hand, are almost never called upon to demonstrate any skill except in some controlled and highly legislated way. So competition is not really a good guide and ratings based on results alone are not the way things are done. So how can someone distinguish the good from the bad, particularly with regard to martial arts schools and teachers?

I’ve been asking myself this question of late because I have an urge to extend my Zhan Zhuang practice beyond health applications and learn to actually defend myself. A conversation with my teacher indicated that if I learned Master Lam Kam Chuen’s Tai Chi form it could be used as the basis for some Tai Chi applications.

There are a couple of problems to be overcome here; firstly I’d have to learn the form from a book because my teacher hasn’t qualified in this as yet, though maybe this is not quite as problematic as it seems because to a large extent the Lam style connects the Zhan Zhuang postures. Then I need to acquire a knowledge of applications and maybe some combat practice.

Anyhow, these thoughts have led me to the idea of studying Tai Chi with a student of Dan Docherty, a controversial figure whose book (Complete Tai Chi Chuan) I’m currently reading. It seems that his ‘Wudang Style Tai Chi’ may be just what I need as he takes a broadminded approach to the form whilst applications are studied alongside from day one. They train people to fight (albeit in competition) and this all tallies more closely with my chess experience; book learning plus a bit of combat.

This week brought news that my long standing housing nightmare may soon be at an end. So now that demon called ‘hope’ has raised its ugly head. I find myself ‘hoping’ that things will work out OK despite long experience of knowing that it rarely does. Worse still, hope brings us to our most vulnerable mental state.

After thousands of chess games I came to realise that hope is one of the ultimate destroyers of objectivity, the urge to relax when battle is still joined.  So I’m doing my best to be cautious about my hopes, trying to think of things that can go wrong. The odds are that things will be OK, but nothing is over until the fat lady sings.

I’ve heard it said that teaching is far more effective when done by example rather than ‘lessons’, and today I had a powerful confirmation of this view. In the morning I was on the exercise bike for an hour whilst my son was watching a DVD. And then in the afternoon I won our weekly race in Staples for a change.

My son just couldn’t believe it because children are supposed to be faster than their parents. And when I ascribed my victory to all the training I’ve been doing his first reaction was to insist that I stop. His second idea was that he should start whilst I stop and finally he wanted me to teach him the ancient Chinese stuff. There followed some coaching in basic relaxation exercises (arm swings, knee circles etc) after which he wanted to race again. ‘Too soon’, I told him.

What was fascinating about this experience was how strongly motivated he became when confronting a real life problem (ie running faster than his father).  And this may be the hook for excellence in any field.

On the subject of martial arts, this vid has been circulating the internet in which a yob is seen attacking a certain Mr Smith. Unbeknownst to the yob, his portly victim was a gulf war veteran with black belts in karate and ju jitsu:

Coincidentally my reading today in Deng Ming Dao’s ‘365 Tao’ (OK, I’m not reading them according to the correct dates) was the following. And whilst like everyone else I’m cheering, it’s difficult to avoid noticing that Mr Smith is now highly visible:

Invisibility is the best advantage.
But if forced to a confrontation,
Come out with all your skill.

There was once a roadside vendor who sold rheumatism formulas to the passersby. He was a cheery old man who was faithfully at his spot for years. One day a young bully began to harass the vendor. The old man tried very hard to avoid the confrontation, but eventually the bully became convinced that he had a coward to abuse as he pleased. When the moment of attack came, the old man defeated him with superior boxing skills. Significantly, the old man was never seen again. He had manifested his superiority at a critical moment, but once he had exposed himself, he disappeared.

In this competitive world, it is best to be invisible. Go through life without showing off, attracting attention to yourself, or making flamboyant gestures. These will only attract the hostility of others. The wise accomplish all that they want without arousing the envy or scorn of others. They make achievements only for the sake of fulfilling their inner yearnings.

Yet it is inevitable that you will have to prove yourself at one time or another. When that is necessary, then you must marshal all your skills and do your very best. Prove yourself when it is demanded, and when you must prove yourself, be superior. At that moment, it is no time to talk of philosophy and humility. Act. Do. Then fade back into invisibility.

Here’s an interesting subject that was sparked by a post I found via the Wujimon blog. Mike Murphy suggests that Tai Chi requires physical conditioning in order to be ‘authentic’ because the original practitioners were very strong and fit (mainly due to farming).

This kind of historical context is often overlooked when claiming ‘authenticity’, any set of ideas will change if the backdrop changes. There are major examples of this with religious texts, which are both followed and criticised without any regard to context. Put aside modern scientific discoveries and many old ideas would appear pragmatic and sensible rather than mystical. And occasionally, just occasionally, they stand the test of time.

I have been thinking a lot about planning of late, especially with regard to its connection with intuition and minimalism. It will be difficult to describe my thoughts on this in such limited space, but I’ve become convinced that elaborate plans are, by their very nature, hopelessly flawed.

The more elaborate a plan, the more there is to go wrong at every stage of its realisation. And this is without considering the role of the opposition, whose goal is not just to refute various plans but to lie in wait for the obvious ones, constructing his game to meet them most effectively.

So should one actually have a ‘plan’ as such, or is the entire concept flawed? I’d say it needs some adjustment in that a ‘plan’ must have enough inherent flexibility to change at any moment. And what characterises the game of strong players is the way that their moves often seem ‘multi-purpose’, fulfilling a role in multiple potential plans.

Traders might find this concept useful too; rather than have a single ‘on-off’ switch to one’s trades it may be far more effective to make multiple adjustments in position size and instrument depending on an overall assessment of the market and the extent of an advantage.

Incredibly the CD from which this track comes is out of print; the least expensive one on Amazon costs over 48 quid. If ever there was a case for someone owning their own right to publish this must surely be it.