Utility and application of the cross-alignment principle?

[taiwandeutscher]

[quote="Bodywork
How would you -not- have ground force as you call it in any arm or body part? Its always there. Insubstantial and leading / absorbing use it.
The "passive" as you call it- is not shut -off. Empty doesn't imply that it. Were you to have someone grab your arms, one can be empty or allowing them to fall in a hole and leading maybe up or down, while other is full. I think of it as being supported in opposites at all times, and clearly displayed in our fine old gent in the video.
And they're not theories to be discarded -as in strict structure that no longer need be adhered to. Rather these things are powerful ways to fight with the body that are iniversal-screw forms and arts. You just move and hit, absorb, turn, drop, rise hit some more resist a throw through change or throw-its all supported.[/quote]

All acceptable, but not exclusivly.

[Bodywork]

All acceptable, but not exclusivly.

How about bringing some examples to the table?
I am far more interested in someone's physical understanding-for the simple reason that I have been hilariously surpised by really well written descriptions-in detail-by folks who turned out to have nothing by way of a physical understanding, but a written description at least gets the ball rolling.

[ppscat]

Thanks a lot, Omar. That's pretty much what I thought he was getting at, but it is so damn subtle and my Chinese is still pre-school, not too mention his accent. What an adorable old man, though.

This is a concept I have been working with just this past month, actually. It started in my taiji form and I am grafting it to my xingyi. My current understanding is that the intent can only really be focused in one place, so in terms of the 2 hands, one is full and expanding and the other is truly empty and as relaxed as if almost forgotten. But the empty arm has the support of the entire body because it yields to the larger structure 'behind' it. So for now, when I do my Chen form the empty hand is subservient to the body's general motion. When I want to send my hand out, I have to empty it first, then let the body start moving in that direction while the other hand gets the focus. Once the body has started moving I can then let the intention and power flow through the back and out of the empty arm. It works for cross-body type moves, single ship type moves, even moves where the hands do the same thing, in which case they both empty and the lower body becomes full and the upper empties in preparation for the power/intent to flow out. As for attack and defense, the soft, empty hand is in stealth mode. It is so soft that it doesn't really trigger any alarms. The full hand will draw the opponent's attention, however, and when it becomes empty it can be like a trap-door. But I haven't really worked it out in tui shou yet so at this point this is all just theory and experimental. It's not really complicated, really. But the skill is in being able to truly empty out a part of the body, to where it is almost not even a part of my body, at the speed of thought.

Does any of this fall in line with what you've been taught or what you've figured out?

Hi Kreese, that's just how I have figured it out. My speculation: it is easier done in Chen because of the wider stances and perhaps more emphasis in horizontal dantien rotation, compared to Yang where sinking in relatively higher narrower stances makes both of your arms fuller ("hydraulic pressure") and so I found to have a residue of fullness in the ought to be empty arm. I have to use my intention to empty it 100%, still working on it... for the next 10 years. The opening-closing of the chest works best for charging the empty arm, more than emptying the full one, but as I told before I'm still working on it.

Pablo

[WILLIE]

Say a jab is issued rear leg to front hand (across), any punch from the rear hand would be same side then. so would that mean you only ever strike with your front hand ?

No, you wind or issue from either side but because of the way the weight is carried you can touch, press, strike or throw and the floor is felt in your hands. It is sharp, painful, and requires no windup to deliver. so retraction and external winding up is not needed. What gets fun is being in a clinch and the guy hacing his ribd open and having th epower to break ribs or knock-out from close -in. Works on the ground too.

Or are you standing square on
If you are more talking about standing grappling - could you give a few example what you mean, much appreciated.

Stances and and feet placement has nothing to do with the discussion whatsoever. Positional dominance is active and ever changing. I "think" of setting up and staying one step ahead, same as on the ground. Then Murphy steps in.[/quote]


I like to see a video of this so i get a clear understanding of this.

cheers

[cloudz]

I am far more interested in someone's physical understanding-for the simple reason that I have been hilariously surpised by really well written descriptions-in detail-by folks who turned out to have nothing by way of a physical understanding, but a written description at least gets the ball rolling.

I kind of share that opinion, that the written word can flatter to decieve

Funny thing is, you said some time after that internal people that don't or can't articulate it well don't know what they're doing or aren't doing "internal" at all.. Or similar words to that effect.

I re read your reply to me. I feel to that it flatters to deceive somewhat. Sounds all great and all that, but I'm left thinking.. is it anything I'v not come across before in some guise or otherc or been on the end of?
I also feel that sometimes while we can feel things we are doing and understand how we do them, articulating to them to another is much harder. To the degree that to another reading it it is more obfuscating than it is clarifying..


In the first paragraph quoted above by WILLIE - you are talking about short power.

Is it that you can only do it cross side?

Second paragraph espouses the effectiveness of "giving up oneself to follow others" basically.

taiji 101 isn't it.

I have no problem at all believing you have a high level of ability, I trust what guys like Dmitri etc. have to say. But does that mean you know or can do things above and beyond other good teachers people here have or indeed some may be themselves.

Not so much, but maybe your articulation or perspective of them differs some. And that's all good, but that in itself doesn't make it anything special.

Just sayin'

[cloudz]

If left leg is where the weight is that is Yin - substantial(fixed) - this makes the right arm yin also, substantial. Other cross side of the body is Yang - insubstantial.(free)

I think you got your terms backwards. Fullness is traditionally considered a yang state and emptiness, yin.

Nop, that's not what I learn here in Taiwan:

Yin, passiv, weighted
Yang, active, no weight, for the legs

That's as I understood it.. and that is was cross corelated to the upper torso ie. if left leg was yin, that makes the right arm yin.

I find it odd that you were taught the opposite meanings for yin and yang for the upper torso ie. that Yang was substantial. Or could be that I'm reading it wrong.

So why would substantial be yin some may ask. The theory behind that as i uderstood it was that Yin is related to the earth. Earth being substantial. And that Yang relates to Heaven - insubstantial.

But I agree to the conclusions reached - after a certain point these theories have served their purpose, well and truly..

[cloudz]

I've included my own quotes replied to because it is some pages back..

I'm not sure you grasped what bao was getting at re. the speed thing. Your weight is either one place or another - it's all well and good saying it better to issue across your body, for whatever reason. But when things are happening fast - it's the adjusting to the situation so you can use that that may slow you down.

That makes no sense in either case. One side weighted punching launches weight from one foot to the other with a shift.

I took it as "same side" punching. that you were punching from the same side your weight was.. a misunderstanding perhaps..

cross-line has the weight availible in the body to change internally instead of being launched around the spine and stay in the body and issue out from it.

So how do you change your weight internally. Are you saying that you can shift your weight from one side to the other with no shift, no movement ?

I don't really get it. You havn't even clearly explaine what you mean by cross line. Someone posted a fine picture. Is that it ?

I'm not a mind reader.

Therefore it changes at speed in a shorter path. the mobility factor also involves what lifts the legs into the trunk and where you kick from. Which, contrary to all your saying usually makes people comment on how fast I am!

Theres no point in debating it. you simply cannot say what you are saying if you undersood both methods. To someone who undertands both, the statment that it's slower is just non...sense.

Not doubting your speed. I just think you havn't understood what I was getting at. Again why should I understand your method ? You havn't explained it anywhere near clearly enough.

Where and how is it taught in the Chinese internal arts ?

If it is basically the posture in the picture posted, then yes I understand that and recognise it as "twist step", but that does little to tally up with the method you are describing..

I didn't mean that anything would physically have slowed you down, but that hitting from same side might sometimes be the quickest and fastest thing to do given the right opening, and you are in the right position for it. But that was when i though we were talking about hitting from the same side your weight was on. You have subsequently pointed out that is not what you mean by terms same side , or one side punching..

[quote=cloudz]If you're in a good position to and throw a right cross - the power comes from your rear right leg, what power and speed did you lose ?[/quote]
[quote=bodywork]From winding around the spine from the left foot and allowing it to engage more mass in with the right side which is axiomatic and that increases weight times velocity and creates and offers more momentum and deeper penetraition. More importantly is the ability to instantly shift weight and prevent many throw attempts. That gets more complex with a positive / negative support but it is nonetheless very effective.[/quote]

ok that's confusing because you seem to be confirming that you wouldn't lose anything

we agree.

And what power / speed will you gain and or lose by switching in that split moment. likely the firsdt thing you'll lose is the opportunity to throw it. no?

[quote=bodywork]Having spent the majority of my life moving the other way, I am quite satisfied that this is both faster, and more powerful, particularly in anti throwing and in instant power in the hands.[/quote]

An understandable idea of what is meant here by cross line method would come in handy.

I'm sure this is just misunderstanding on my part - but what are we meaning by "same side weighted people"

Lauching left to right with weight on the same hand side to hit loses a substantial portion of weight.

This would be clearer if you said which hand was doing the hitting. I've played around doing various permutations and not noticed any significant "loss of weight". not entirely clear what is meant by it, or where it would go. With everything thrown the goal must be to get full weight behind the strike. There doesn't seem to be any significant leakage from various permutations. I'll be as bold as to say my speed and power is fairly consistent, which is not to say all strikes are created equal. But it can all be useful enough..

Throwing people by bringing their weight over their center or on to one side.

Agreed, that i understand!

[quote=cloudz]Say a jab is issued rear leg to front hand (across), any punch from the rear hand would be same side then. so would that mean you only ever strike with your front hand ?[/quote]

No, you wind or issue from either side but because of the way the weight is carried you can touch, press, strike or throw and the floor is felt in your hands.

This sounds like a clue. Are you intimating that the weight is held centrally. because then I could undrstand that your method is minimising weight shifting by keeping things more central..

i can dig that.

It is sharp, painful, and requires no windup to deliver. so retraction and external winding up is not needed. What gets fun is being in a clinch and the guy hacing his ribd open and having th epower to break ribs or knock-out from close -in. Works on the ground too.

sounds like "short power". nice.

[quote=cloudz]Or are you standing square on
If you are more talking about standing grappling - could you give a few example what you mean, much appreciated.[/quote]

Stances and and feet placement has nothing to do with the discussion whatsoever. Positional dominance is active and ever changing. I "think" of setting up and staying one step ahead, same as on the ground. Then Murphy steps in.

sounds like following. cool

cheers

and sorry if I'm being a bit of a pain with this. If i can get a little new insight from you out of it, it'll be worth it..