the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Bao wrote:Not everyone understands how to incorporate (Quoting Doc -ad) "Unbroken Circularity in the transitional movements between named and numbered postures in the form set sequence." But of course, this is the ideal. But then again, the form and frame must allow it.

(from https://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30234&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&sid=bd3dd7ef7504cdc24a0516fb3e41ef88#p519583)

All human beings are alive, therefore all human beings have qi, therefore any movement a human being makes can be harmonized with unbroken circular qi; any physical ('external') movement can be done in a manner which represents unbroken circularity. You cannot see this harmonization, which is the difficulty in copying your teacher's form. So, you have to start with a form which externally attempts to show unbroken circularity. And then, you will realize, that your physical body is not conforming to the unbroken circularity of your mind. Then you will suddenly realize your internals are not harmonized; you will become aware of them in the places they differ (this is the principle of differentiation which I will explain later). This is the start of internal development. If you just use a form which has broken and non-circular movements, you can not even pass the first stage.

This is to say, not all forms of internal development are the same. There is internal development, and there is internal development which is unbroken and circular.

Now, Bruce Lee said that the shortest line between points is a straight line -- not a circle. So perhaps we have been doing it wrong all this time. Thoughts?

Examples?

Also

Appledog wrote: There is internal development, and there is internal development which is unbroken and circular.

Now, Bruce Lee said that the shortest line between points is a straight line -- not a circle. So perhaps we have been doing it wrong all this time.

Thoughts?

For those posting, it would be better for "them" to show their work or others they feel represents it....

Find strange when whole "books" are written with no videos shown "21st Century " and all

When they are shown, most are invariably condemned as "fake, fraudulent"
by many, apparently accepting what was just written about them

All human beings are alive, therefore all human beings have qi, therefore any movement a human being makes can be harmonized with unbroken circular qi; any physical ('external') movement can be done in a manner which represents unbroken circularity. You cannot see this harmonization, which is the difficulty in copying your teacher's form. So, you have to start with a form which externally attempts to show unbroken circularity. And then, you will realize, that your physical body is not conforming to the unbroken circularity of your mind. Then you will suddenly realize your internals are not harmonized; you will become aware of them in the places they differ (this is the principle of differentiation which I will explain later). This is the start of internal development. If you just use a form which has broken and non-circular movements, you can not even pass the first stage.

care to post any clips showing the aforementioned

everything wrote:Examples?

Today, I only have time and patience for looking up a couple of examples....

Yang style:

Bad Yang long form - Overstretched and unbalanced. (An irony that this guy has written many books about "circulating qi". )
https://youtu.be/oGaoAMjEh8g

Good Yang form - Generous movements, yet rounded and with continuity throughout the changes between postures.
https://youtu.be/gVwZT-C15Jo

Sun Style:

Bad Sun style: Overstretched, jerky, stop & go.
https://youtu.be/iubmnOuJDMg

Good Sun style: Conservative, not overly stretched, continuous
https://youtu.be/3AuGupAIUds

Now, Bruce Lee said that the shortest line between points is a straight line -- not a circle. So perhaps we have been doing it wrong all this time. Thoughts?

This is said in Xingy Yi as well. There's no problem with linear, straight movements. Whatever you do, circular or straight, you still need to understand the "why" and "how".

Every movement of the body is circular, whether as a function of fulcrums and levers or, at a smaller scale, as a function of joint kinematics. Every movement is continuous, in that it has a beginning, middle, and end, yet is still connected via pauses and changes to the lifespan of the organism, which also has a beginning, middle and end in terms of it's discrete existence in relation to the universe. Presumably, chi is the same way, since chi is effectively the animus that illuminates the crude matter of our bodies. It is not useful to speak globally or generically of such vague terms.

An example of the kind of unbroken form I meant would be something like



As mentioned earlier you cannot see the internals so there is no point to make a video showing two movements side by side.

I don’t consider either of the Yang forms very good
As for the distance between two points that is the definition of a straight line from geometry
Bruce just used to justify why WC was superior to CLF and other circular arts

Boring answer

Appledog wrote: Bruce Lee said that the shortest line between points is a straight line -- not a circle. So perhaps we have been doing it wrong all this time. Thoughts?

Both straight line and circle are good for offense. But circle is also good for defense.

When your opponent throws a

- jab at you, you can use hook punch to deflect his jab.
- hook punch at you, you cannot use jab to deflect his hook punch.

Appledog wrote:

Bao wrote:Not everyone understands how to incorporate (Quoting Doc -ad) "unbroken circularity in the transitional movements between named and numbered postures in the form set sequence." But of course, this is the ideal. But then again, the form and frame must allow it.

All human beings are alive, therefore all human beings have qi, therefore any movement a human being makes can be harmonized with unbroken circular qi; any physical ('external') movement can be done in a manner which represents unbroken circularity. You cannot see this harmonization, which is the difficulty in copying your teacher's form. So, you have to start with a form which externally attempts to show unbroken circularity. And then, you will realize, that your physical body is not conforming to the unbroken circularity of your mind. Then you will suddenly realize your internals are not harmonized; you will become aware of them in the places they differ (this is the principle of differentiation which I will explain later).


This is the start of internal development. If you just use a form which has broken and non-circular movements, you can not even pass the first stage.

This is to say, not all forms of internal development are the same. There is internal development, and there is internal development which is unbroken and circular.

Now, Bruce Lee said that the shortest line between points is a straight line -- not a circle. So perhaps we have been doing it wrong all this time. Thoughts?

This teacher explained it very well, along with demonstrating usage. Force neutralization

Bao wrote:

everything wrote:Examples?

Today, I only have time and patience for looking up a couple of examples....

Yang style:

Bad Yang long form - Overstretched and unbalanced. (An irony that this guy has written many books about "circulating qi". )
https://youtu.be/oGaoAMjEh8g

Good Yang form - Generous movements, yet rounded and with continuity throughout the changes between postures.
https://youtu.be/gVwZT-C15Jo

This is said in Xingy Yi as well. There's no problem with linear, straight movements. Whatever you do, circular or straight, you still need to understand the "why" and "how".

Same on the limited time and patience... I just move on... "whatever"
Not a Taijiquan practioner, but I recall Li Ya Xuan being no joke too (I Put him in with Yang Sau Chung and Dong Yingjie )

Bad Xingyiquan
anything that looks like this ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewRscjstfh4
or this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5DBGtD2RQo

Good Xingyiquan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPS7nO6Nif0
and this ... Cheng Lianyou pushing 80 is the main demonstrator (take that into account)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3NKj_0KWBs

Master Wang Yanji stemming from my linage, is OK... (I'd put up myself doing something.. but calling it a good example would be a little over the top )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kxoLH4yeyM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zb0jtUxTy5s

Appledog wrote:you have to start with a form which externally attempts to show unbroken circularity

That's the "traditional way"; millions do it, the "outdoor" training in China, translated into similar type of training outside of China. You look at someone doing the form and mimick the external appearance of it as closely as possible. That's an awful, absolutely terrible way to learn (and teach), but it's a great way to keep gullible students (who don't know any better) going through the motions for years without ever accomplishing much, and it's incredibly easy for the "master" because there is minimal to no effort involved for them.

You don't have to start with that.

You can start with the broken-down elements of correct movement and focus on that, instead of empty choreography.

But I digress...

A good/simple test of (and a great way to train) one very important and fundamental aspect of what I would call "unbroken connection" ("circularity" doesn't seem like a very good term to me -- see also Bhassler's post) could be to try to walk, very slowly, across the room and have another person or two gently (at first) push, continuously, on various parts of your body at various angles. FWIW

Appledog wrote:

Bao wrote:Not everyone understands how to incorporate (Quoting Doc -ad) "unbroken circularity in the transitional movements between named and numbered postures in the form set sequence." But of course, this is the ideal. But then again, the form and frame must allow it.

@Appledog: Could you edit in the URL to this quote, so we can read in in context, please.

Appledog wrote:All human beings are alive, therefore all human beings have qi, therefore any movement a human being makes can be harmonized with unbroken circular qi; any physical ('external') movement can be done in a manner which represents unbroken circularity. You cannot see this harmonization, which is the difficulty in copying your teacher's form. So, you have to start with a form which externally attempts to show unbroken circularity. And then, you will realize, that your physical body is not conforming to the unbroken circularity of your mind. Then you will suddenly realize your internals are not harmonized; you will become aware of them in the places they differ (this is the principle of differentiation which I will explain later). This is the start of internal development. If you just use a form which has broken and non-circular movements, you can not even pass the first stage.

This is to say, not all forms of internal development are the same. There is internal development, and there is internal development which is unbroken and circular.

Now, Bruce Lee said that the shortest line between points is a straight line -- not a circle. So perhaps we have been doing it wrong all this time. Thoughts?

Don’t mix your Qi’s. The qi of life, Chinese medicine, internal alchemy, structural engineering, wave dynamics are all different things, These things are not the same as the qi of Taijiquan training. This is a common mistake.

Circularity is not the important characteristic. This is putting the cart in front of the horse. The key characteristic is rotation. Rotation has functional properties that circularity does not, and most of circularity’s functional properties come from its relationship to rotation.

twocircles13 wrote:Don’t mix your Qi’s. The qi of life, Chinese medicine, internal alchemy, structural engineering, wave dynamics are all different things, These things are not the same as the qi of Taijiquan training. This is a common mistake.

Could you explain then, what is the difference of the Qi in chinese medicine and the Qi of Taijiquan training? Thank you

twocircles13 wrote:

Appledog wrote:

Bao wrote:Not everyone understands how to incorporate (Quoting Doc -ad) "unbroken circularity in the transitional movements between named and numbered postures in the form set sequence." But of course, this is the ideal. But then again, the form and frame must allow it.

@Appledog: Could you edit in the URL to this quote, so we can read in in context, please.

Sure. I'll edit it in. For convenience, the original message is from Video Links, "Grandmaster Yang Ching Feng 1986", and url https://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30234&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&sid=bd3dd7ef7504cdc24a0516fb3e41ef88#p519583