dedicated to the discussion of the chinese internal martial arts of xingyiquan, baguazhang, taijiquan, related arts, and anything else best discussed over a bottle of rum
I'm not sure that the stuff in the books are for students. I think they're for people who don't know the art, and for those who just wanted visual records of masters so their forms could be practiced. After all, who can learn tcc from any book? Afa the applications, I think they were just done as standard practice for books of this sort.
Imo, the best people to discuss the issue of YCF's or YZD's application of SW would be someone from the Yang International association. I'm not sure if they'd say that the picture described represents one of their applications.
Afa photos of applications, in general, for me the important bit is how the position was reached, not how it looks statically. Sure, from the perspective of a boxer, leaving the right hand low while throwing the left is a defect that might be exploited.
But, afa YCF's ability to fight, it doesn't make a difference to me. Knowing one way or the other won't help me out of any situations, not even tcc debates Oh well, at least it keeps people talkin'.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
GrahamB wrote:I don't understand how you can be in such a state of denial Nial - on this thread is a video of your own grand teacher showing a whole series of techniques just like this one you hate so much!
I mean - he's right there on video doing it and yet you are somehow blind to it? I'm staggered by the level of denial. And don't give me some excuse about it's ok because he's fighting multiple opponents. Most of the time the other opponent is flat out on the floor and yet he's still doing it when there's only one other guy standing!
But anyway - who bloody cares? Who has got so much time to get so upset about a picture in an old book? It's strangely obsessive compulsive. I mean, do you think tai chi is a series of applications in a form that you apply 'as is' to real fighting? Nothing could be further from the truth - the form is just a series of possible examples for you to practice with - it's really about applying the strategy of yin yang to fighting - which by its nature has to be formless.
Aw crap. I'm even boring myself now. Over and out!
At no stage does he leave a hook - beak hand behind him as far as possible while palm striking! That is the key detail, again I've discussed this, but the hook hand is the crucial detail for a fighters eye, it STATES deliberate intention!
So should someone given the choice adopt The Cheng-fu posture in all its heavenly glorious detail as shown against a single opponent when attacking them head on with a palm strike to the chest?
Neil wrote: the counter argument seems to be - but he was popular? or that other CMAs did something similar, but stupidity can't be purged due to the existence of other idiots! The martial arts world has always been full of them, isn't that why Master Ken works?
So everyone who followed Chenfu was an idiot? Man that notion smacks of thinking your the smartest kid in the room with down syndrome ... fact is you still got down syndrome!
On Dan Bian ( single whip ) Instead of me debunking your perceived notions I'm going to use Chen fu's own words Dan Bian is used to thwart attacks to your left or right" You can also use it to attack with your palm. The hook (i.e. Gou) of your right is used as one kind of rolling energy. Each part-the fingers, knuckles, and wrist-is articulated in turning downward like a wheel. Pg 33 "Question and answers on TJQ" by Yang Chen Fu. He describing attaching and adhering in a downward hooking motion similar to how a praying mantis practitioners use their hooking method.. e.g while at the same time using Lie (i.e splitting) pulling with the hook hand and pushing/palm striking with the other. In "the Essence and Application of TJQ" on Dan Bian: Chen fu states "the movement swings left and right, back and forth[b] using the power of the pivot." Pg 27
You also talk about his lack of mobility but in both texts he uses the term Zhongxin (his center) to many times to count when he talk about his movements. Obviously he's is referring to shifting and moving his center (as any other MA does...) Sound like he's mobile to me....
Once again these are Chen Fu's words not mine... (except for the commentary)
I don't know what your looking at (some BS still photo??) it should be clear now that photos are just that "photos" and nothing more. And the last time I sat in a room with Yang Zhenduo in the nineties and I'm quite sure he knew what Dan Bian does too
ok Niell I get it. "You think Chenfu's art is suspect" ok it's your right.. but attempting to cast aspersion with half truths on a guy long dead (that many revere and look up to) is just wrong. And if I might add... your words can to someone just starting out in IMA, extinguish that enthusiastic rush we all had when we were new ( I guarantee you someone just starting out in Yang TCC has read your words and has thought WTF? ) and IMO that worse that slagging a dead guy!
Ba-men wrote: ok Niell I get it. "You think Chenfu's art is suspect" ok it's your right.. but attempting to cast aspersion with half truths on a guy long dead (that many revere and look up to) is just wrong. And if I might add... your words can to someone just starting out in IMA, extinguish that enthusiastic rush we all had when we were new ( I guarantee you someone just starting out in Yang TCC has read your words and has thought WTF? ) and IMO that worse that slagging a dead guy!
Are you suggesting that questioning is bad for the student? That would be polar opposite to my approach!
I would encourage a student to question everything, and therefore understand in minute detail the expression of his art and KNOW ITS FUNCTION! I drill and drill and drill again how important detail is in "yin-yang" boxing where the Zhen Wu's snake and tortoise are constantly fucking with each other and never seperate, where form and movement are concealing and revaeling intent and so having the opponent on puppet strings. There is no room for misundrstanding as the classics teach "a minute discreapency can lead to the error of 1000 miles!"
I think it vital to answer the question "Why?" and "How?" rather than simply "What is?" It is clear from those who insist on drilling Single Whip as perhaps indicated falsely by Cheng-fu that they have never asked Why? and certainly with some of those who have asked such a question on at least an "intellectual" rather than "physically applied" level it seems that they have been happy with the fairytale and never asked but "how?"
We can see with the idea of threads on "what is your XYZ application" and how they are often presented that "what is" is where many get stuck. Some on here have even suggested that TCC has no bridging strategy or tactics, that we just let the opponent meet us then we adhere. Such statements display a barrenness of understanding, a lack of questioning the Why? and how?
It is the anthesis of how I coach, and of the world class coaches I personally know in the wolrds of Sanda, Boxing and MMA. Shamefully by no means has my own ability reached the level of my Sifu Dan Docherty, nor his senior student Paul Mitchel who also had a large part to play in my own limited understanding and abilities. But hopefully I have caught on to some of their points, and now as a coach I recognise the struggles I had myself and even make videos for my students which highlight some of the Why and How, and explain the details, leaving no unconsidered, inexplicable movement, at least when demonstrated I hope.
For example ....
Here I explore the seven stars gurard... (all about that non-existing, for some, engagement strategies and tactics all related back to quoted classic lines, in the hope that my students with derive further benefit from their intellectual side of training, chanting the classics durig nei gung practice) I hopefully clearly expain the reasoning behind the "shapes / forms" I addopt, and how this manages my opponents intent and responses and conceals my own. I also give reasons for minimal movement and how to ensure one's action can be minimal and not scattered! ...
Here again I pick up traditional application and demonstrate the relevance of its chosen control points, i.e. what both my arms are DOING!:
Here I give reason for much of Brush Knee Twist Step and the details of it's application, the shit that is never picked up by "copy and paste"...
At no point do I make funny shaped hands behind me doing nothing... and I can't believe Lu Chan or Ban Hao etc. did either, and perhaps, I will concede, Cheng-fu could have been taking the piss a bit, protecting an inside the door technique, but that cannot and doesn't excuse the many modern-day practitioners who, as I have said, "copy and paste" without any understanding of Why and How, committing the unethical action (when we consider that martial arts can mean life and death afterall ) of teaching the "what is" devoid of purposful martial "art"!
You say that what you were taught contains martial virtue, fair enough, it seems you do not ascribe to the image presented, therefore you cannot condone the way Single Whip is presented (in published format) by Cheng-fu as legitimate, and that's O.K. , i can accept that, its kept hidden, but that also means that you therefore recognise that the many cheng-fu decended TCC people who DO in fact practice Single Whip as he demonstrated are fundamentally WRONG!
And so the point stands, anq underprepared Walter Mitty taichee warrior is far more dangerous to him or herself than a totally untrained person as they are more likely to try out some shit that will fail and perhaps escalate a real encounter, training is conditioning and conditioning real bad habits makes your double irony absolutely spot on:
GrahamB wrote:I don't think slagging off the ability of somebody who died before you were born based on a single picture in a book written and published before you were born is a very good example of "Kung fu".
We can go round and round and round in circles but when all is said and done I can't see anyone disagreeing with Niall's central contention: The application Yang shows (repeated in the pic Niall posted above) makes no sense of the technique of single whip. Period.
But this problem of having silly applications in books is not limited to Yang Cheng-fu (as noted, some of Feng Ziqiang's applications in his book are downright silly.) So why did these masters do it...?
I think he is showing one simple direct application If someone steps in with a big roundhouse go inside jam him at the ac joint We used this on the white crane and clf guys back in the 70,s Quite often they were severely damaged and it pulled up the fight quick smart In the book he only had one app for each move So complexity wasn't the point It's a lot of fuss over what some guy did back in the 20,s That's when lucky luciano took a knife to a gun fight
Don't put power into the form let it naturally arise from the form
Sure, a direct attack works against a round attack. But alas! If you mistime it, you get clouted. Ergo: Maintain a guard. Rather than - well, having your non-striking arm extended far the rear. And why have that rear hand in a hook formation?
Sorry, but I just ain't buying.
As a "technique application" it is as demented as deploying White Crane Spreads Wings as a defense against that rare, rare guy who attacks with you with a particularly crafty assault: A high straight to your head and a simultaneous low hook to your rib cage.
Though I am sure there are some unlettered fools still teaching White Crane as a technique to address exactly this (dubious) combative eventuality...
BTW Niall:
There is (believe it or not) an even sillier application for single whip out there.
To wit: Demented testicle rubbing tantric sex, yoga and taiji guru (with the inevitable ponytail) is assaulted by two vicious yoga chicks in his studio. How will the master respond? With Taiji, of course! In a flash of deadly technique, Guru KOs chick A by applying his deadly left palm to her dial; while Simultaneously, decking chick B by flicking her under her dainty chin with his right hook hand Ta-da! Two KOs! One technique!
Seriously, you can 't make this shit up.
Graham Barlow:
If you would repost the video I attempt to describe above, I would love ye to death.
BTW, was the same chap not part of a reality TV show teaching clueless celebs how to get in touch with their "inner selves" by rubbing, pinching and slapping their parts? And one of the poor fools was actually filmed saying, quite thoughtfully: "Hmmm, it seems to be working...."
The right arm might be back just to give u a view All styles use the hooked hand except sun I know many variations of its use Yang here is showing u how it is done in form Fighting is beyond form and I am sure he could show dozens of variations
Don't put power into the form let it naturally arise from the form
Andy_S wrote:We can go round and round and round in circles but when all is said and done I can't see anyone disagreeing with Niall's central contention: The application Yang shows (repeated in the pic Niall posted above) makes no sense of the technique of single whip. Period.
But this problem of having silly applications in books is not limited to Yang Cheng-fu (as noted, some of Feng Ziqiang's applications in his book are downright silly.) So why did these masters do it...?
Watch Nialls latest single whip application and you will see him demonstrating it off supposed punches to his head. How is that not just as much silly/dangerous fantasy as anything else ?
A good boxer/ MMA puncher throwing full speed and power punches to the head is going to have his arm plucked out of the air like that? Bollocks
Last edited by cloudz on Wed Nov 12, 2014 6:01 am, edited 4 times in total.
Andy_S wrote:We can go round and round and round in circles but when all is said and done I can't see anyone disagreeing with Niall's central contention: The application Yang shows (repeated in the pic Niall posted above) makes no sense of the technique of single whip. Period.
But this problem of having silly applications in books is not limited to Yang Cheng-fu (as noted, some of Feng Ziqiang's applications in his book are downright silly.) So why did these masters do it...?
Watch Nialls latest single whip application and you will see him demonstrating it off supposed punches to his head. How is that not just as much silly/dangerous fantasy as anything else ?
A good boxer/ MMA puncher throwing full speed and power punches to the head is going to have his arm plucked out of the air like that? Bollocks
Indeed, perhaps it is beyond your ability? Probably as you can't seem to differentiate a boxers jab, cross, hook or uppercut, with a spinning back fist! I don't snatch out of the air either I capture with my forearms using peng and slide - (form the hook hand( which is a grab! All as I use evasive footwork!
Much is missed by those without the tools to see !!!
Last edited by Niall Keane on Wed Nov 12, 2014 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andy_S wrote:We can go round and round and round in circles but when all is said and done I can't see anyone disagreeing with Niall's central contention: The application Yang shows (repeated in the pic Niall posted above) makes no sense of the technique of single whip. Period.
But this problem of having silly applications in books is not limited to Yang Cheng-fu (as noted, some of Feng Ziqiang's applications in his book are downright silly.) So why did these masters do it...?
I think one of the things that's missed about Yang Cheng Fu demonstration is that Smith mentions I think it's in masters are methods that Yang Cheng Fu used to do standing postures and the two postures he used to do are single whip (extended version) and raised hands. Now it's mentioned that single whip is the most expansive of all the postures in the tai chi form (a Yang posture) and that raised hands with more or less all the weight centred over one leg would be a Yin posture. Also I would like to mention that single whip is a posture where both hands in the extended position are Yang in that they both issue energy as opposed to say other postures where the striking hand is Yang and the deflecting hand is essentially a Yin hand. That is how the energy is being balanced through the body (yin-yang harmony). As for exact application as demonstrated in the book a forward palm can be striking into the forearm or the chest or the throat or the face of an opponent. As to how that hand is delivered in application well that is not apparent from the photo but if I was to take any of your videos and pause at any point I would then have two-dimensional view of what you're doing and that would be very deceptive and far from the truth of what you think you'd be presenting. One only gets a three-dimensional image when movement is added to the pause. If I was to look at CTH.s footage (three-dimensional) from the shadowboxer as a promotional video image to promote the movie I could pick it to pieces if I was looking for realistic application instead when watching Grand Master I take it in its presentation and hope to derive something constructive from it. I personally do not feel that you're asking questions with the idea of improving anythink I think you're just asking to promote yourself. When going back to the posture before single whip in the Yang style you will notice that the two hands lengthen after withdraw push and proceed to the left quadrant and the left-hand upon reaching far left proceeds downward across the groin area arriving at the right waist area and the right-hand starts to form a hook and proceeds to cross the upper gate both reaching a point just before the left foot steps around to the left. Now the particular movement described above is for clearing the way on the left side of the body defensive and taking control of whatever is there in whatever gate and it is at this point that single whip proceeds from a Yin position to fully expanded Yang position. When it arrives at its Yang position late Yang becomes it becomes early yin as it changes and move to the next posture which is raised hands (Yang style). If one assumes that at the Yin position one has control over the opponent's movement the left-hand moving forward (the forearm also has multiple applications) in the right arm (stalk beak hand) can be likened to the hand thrown behind such as is seen in European fencing adding power or counterbalancing forward hand, forearm et cetera. I find your applications of single whip somewhat rudimentary and lacking in subtlety or sophistication. Perhaps you'd fare some what better if you took you art out of the agnostic arena you seem to have placed it in. I looked at your first video of seven stars and your reasoning of why you don't go left, you don't go right blah blah and I think that your somewhat shortsighted in that if you were to look at the Wu form as handed down from CTH you would see that there are postures that allow you to take control of an attack by stepping left, stepping right or retreating to the rear although there was nothing wrong with moving to where you moved except is an extremely limited perception of tai chi application. Thai Keik Chuan was never designed as a ring fighting application although certain past Masters have decided to take it in this direction. OhI just like to finish with that is extremely bad form and nothing to do with kung Fu to speak ill of the dead. Your statement "Much is missed by those without the tools to see !!! " I think you're absolutely right so perhaps you should open your eyes. In spirit Eric Fitzgerald
For those that wish to look at what you're single whip here it is: Single Whip.MOV: http://youtu.be/PUbqWaR1Hg8
Oh well, at least it keeps people talkin'.
