Fist under elbow

[GrahamB]

"It prunes vital branches from the tree of potentiality." - classic BruceP



Very Zen - I like it.

[Steve James]

Some of the old masters wrote that there were infinite variations of Taijiquan and, far from being a problem, was the reason that it was an enjoyable lifetime study.

Afa FUE, I think we started by noting that "fist" is not the same as "punch," but it's not not the same either . The name of the posture does not describe what the upper hand is doing. So, we have pictures or the oral teaching of its explanation. Of course almost everyone says that the way they've learned is the way someone important in TJQ history did it. Ok, fair enough.

However, neither the posture/movement name nor the photographs should limit a practitioner's imagination. Well, for ex., a tall person might employ it differently against someone shorter, or vice versa. It could be a throw or a strike. And, it doesn't have to be taken as part of the traditional sequence. There's no reason that FUE can't be preceded or followed by a different movement. In a tussle, the other guy might not know the form anyway.

So, keep the interpretations coming.

[everything]

Great point because it's not just this particular posture; it's the art in general. The abstract-ness irritates people like johnwang, but it at once makes it easier to learn, minimalistic in a way, but also open as you say. If you are using "8 energies" in some other way, it makes perfect sense. Taijiquan isn't quite a totally "formless" art (it has forms as one main training method after all), but the abstract-ness does seem to leave plenty of room for the "formless" adherents. Rollback energy is just rolling energy backward behind you, so it's not just the rollback in ph. Many techniques can use rollback. FUE doesn't seem quite this abstract (again if it were the same as step forward parry punch, FUE wouldn't actually exist in the forms), but yeah ok. "Art" is open to interpretation.

[Bao]

?..we have pictures or the oral teaching of its explanation. .
...
However, neither the posture/movement name nor the photographs should limit a practitioner's imagination.

I see a posture/movement as an individual Chinese Character. A character can be a verb, a noun, subject, what it means depends on the context. Any movement of the form can be used as a punch, qinna, throw, take-down. They all have their own strategies, they are symbolic to some extent by they also represent sets of techniques that use the same kind of body mechanics. If you understand the underlying principles of the mechanics present, it certainly doesn't matter how you use the mechanics or how you interpret them as functional practical use.

a tall person might employ it differently against someone shorter, or vice versa.

Exactly! And again, it has to do with situation and context.

[wayne hansen]

Sure there are lots of applications for each part of the form
However there should be one primary app that keeps the form true to its original intention and stops the form dissolving into oblivion
It should also be the mean for all the variations of that app
The saying the square for development the circle for intensity follows that way of thought
Only when the attack is perfect can the response be classical
I remember a karate friend once telling me there was an old karate saying that I wish I had written down
It was something like
If the attack is wrong to the perfect defence then the perfect defence is wrong for the attack
Ie if you are using a right middle outer block to a punch to young left side it is wrong
If you can make it work then the attack is weak and not worth practicing against

[Steve James]

However there should be one primary app that keeps the form true to its original intention and stops the form dissolving into oblivion

I simply disagree. There's no "should" involved. Otherwise, you or your school is the only one doing it right. What is necessary is a clear intent.

[wayne hansen]

No plenty of people get it right but for an art to be passed on there needs to be a standard
If not form is not needed
I chuan works well without form

[everything]

I take the easy way out and argue the middle road. Very yin/yang.

It's not a formless art but it's not, say, a list of 40 throws. There are some clear techniques/apps with some abstraction.

[Steve James]

Well, imo, FUE is just the name for a particular movement/moment in the form, not a definition of the action. No particular application needs to be handed down. Iirc, you pointed out that FUE wasn't in the san shou form. Several people have noted similarities in the hand positions in other martial arts. Others, that "fist" in the name doesn't refer to a "fist" at all.

I would agree that each school has a traditional or conventional application in mind. However, that's the point. They have an application in mind. It doesn't have to be "the" application. Rather it is the intent for the application that is imagined.

There's nothing particularly special about FUE; it's just one expression of the "13" whatevers. The upper hand can be a fist, and the lower a palm. I think it's fine to teach one specific application; but, I think if it were critical, there'd be no disagreement. This thread wouldn't exist.

[wayne hansen]

I am not trying to convince you just stating my opinion for any who think it might have some value

[Bao]

Sure there are lots of applications for each part of the form
However there should be one primary app that keeps the form true to its original intention and stops the form dissolving into oblivion
It should also be the mean for all the variations of that app

You know, I do agree to some extent. At least, that could prevent the shenfa/body mechanics to change, to preserve the health/medical aspect of the forms. But to some extent, I do think the mechanics already have been altered, especially in some more modern schools as the art has been watered down. I am thinking mostly about the short 24 courses people take in China and everywhere else nowadays and then go out and teach. But also if you look at a posture as "Single whip" in the big five traditional schools of Chen, Yang, Sun, Hao/Wu(Yuxiang) and Wu (Jianquan), they all do single whip with quite different mechanics. If you look at Yang small/medium/large frames, you also find differences in the different frames formats. Yet the applications often remain the same.

[johnwang]

I would agree that each school has a traditional or conventional application in mind.

In Chang Taiji, FUE is used as:

- Your right hand grab on your opponent's left elbow joint.
- Your left hand grab on his left wrist joint.
- You pull his left arm to his right (to your left) across his body.
- You use left knee to strike on his chest.
- You release your left hand and push on his neck/chin.

At the end, your right hand is under your left elbow joint. Your left knee strike drop down to a 7 star stance.

[Steve James]

But also if you look at a posture as "Single whip" in the big five traditional schools of Chen, Yang, Sun, Hao/Wu(Yuxiang) and Wu (Jianquan), they all do single whip with quite different mechanics.

There was an entire thread on SW, with contributors from several arts, and I don't know if there was any agreement on application. Not to mention that there are those who'd emphasize any form movement as a strike, throw, or qinna application. If something is used as a strike and a qinna application or throw, there is more than one application. Jmo.

[Subitai]

I would agree that each school has a traditional or conventional application in mind.

In Chang Taiji, FUE is used as:

- Your right hand grab on your opponent's left elbow joint.
- Your left hand grab on his left wrist joint.
- You pull his left arm to his right (to your left) across his body.
- You use left knee to strike on his chest.
- You release your left hand and push on his neck/chin.

At the end, your right hand is under your left elbow joint. Your left knee strike drop down to a 7 star stance.

Once again...I gotta side with John "Kick arse" Wang!

The way you just described it is very close to how we do it...so very similar. It's not hard and it's not premeditated. All you really need prior to... is have your Left hand grabbing or plucking your opponents left wrist and follow from there. There are different ways to enter but once it starts it's basic.

I also believe that there is or should be a base way that a school may favor to teach something at least at 1st. All the variation stuff should come later once your better skilled.

[Steve James]

In Chang Taiji

I think that was the point I was making. But, I'd be happy to say that the Chang method (based on shuaijiao) is definitive for Chang Taiji. If everybody does FUE that way, and it's the standard, cool. However, imo, it isn't bad to compare different methods and applications. Maybe someone actually learned something from John's description. Maybe someone has or knows a qinna application. Hey, I think someone here mentioned that his style has a punch somewhere in the move.