Not applying moves as they appear in the form

[D_Glenn]

The idea of absolute precision being based on a very delicate threshold for strength or weakness does not hold up to common sense scrutiny. If:

A) 'The precision threshold for acceptable structural strength is so narrow that an inch either direction compromise's the structure's integrity and renders it insufficient for combat purposes', and since we already know that the following is independently true...

B) 'The nature of real combat is so complex and chaotic that it proscribes any possible chance of being able to 1) recognize the exact opportunity to apply a given precise structure, 2) recognize such opportunity in time to actually apply such structure, nevermind 3) be able to configure oneself with the same structural precision as such posture requires', then....

C) The notion that 'the art of Taijiquan is such that each posture is intended to be used flexibly in a variety of possible tactical applications' is not logically possible, since to deviate even an inch from the precise choreography would represent an unacceptable level of structural compromise, therefore......

Either A or C is true. Both cannot be true simultaneously. Further, if A is true, then due to B being independently and unquestionably true, it must be true that the art of Taijiquan is completely useless for any realistic combat whatsoever. Since we operate out of the assumption that such a condition for the art of Taijiquan (being useless for real combat) is not the case, the evidence strongly favors that C is true instead of A, since we know that if C is true, the art of Taijiquan can still be viable for real combat situations even with B being true.

I think the interview with WXZ in the other thread touches on this- taijiquan is actually just 8 (methods/energies/powers/capabilities) + 5 directions = 13.

Baguazhang is also 8 (ba neng) x the 5 mechanics (moving with, against, containing, straight, and rising). Understand these and you cover all possibilities.

.

[BruceP]

If you don't have a "imaginary opponent" in mind and assume where his position is the how do you know what footwork that you should train in your form?

I learned to use the 5-steps concept as the guide to applying the movements (not moves) as they appear in the form. The right footwork happens pretty naturally as a result. Uh huh...the 13 torso methods and 5-steps is what comprises tjq basic fighting method. At least that's what I was taught. OMMV

[RobP2]

lets say i do a figure eight motion solo training... what application is that?.. or what qualities is that helping develop?

It can develop qualities of range of motion, fluid movement, speed, co-ordination and any number of things. The application depends on the situation and how you use the qualities you develop through the attribute training. Beyond common sense structural / physiolgogical requirements, though, there is no right or wrong way to do it or specific requirements for hand positions, no individual postures with names. I think consequently people worry less about doing it "right" and more about doing what is neccesary

cheers

Rob

[bailewen]

A) 'The precision threshold for acceptable structural strength is so narrow that an inch either direction compromise's the structure's integrity and renders it insufficient for combat purposes', and since we already know that the following is independently true...

B) 'The nature of real combat is so complex and chaotic that it proscribes any possible chance of being able to 1) recognize the exact opportunity to apply a given precise structure, 2) recognize such opportunity in time to actually apply such structure, nevermind 3) be able to configure oneself with the same structural precision as such posture requires', then....

C) The notion that 'the art of Taijiquan is such that each posture is intended to be used flexibly in a variety of possible tactical applications' is not logically possible, since to deviate even an inch from the precise choreography would represent an unacceptable level of structural compromise, therefore......

I dunno man. As to point A, well that just means you have to be really fucking precise in your practice and as to the implication that that's not possible (point B), well, as I pointed out on the thread on poorly executed diagonal flying:






Doesn't get much more perfectly true to the form than that and I see tons more examples (in push hands anyways) every time I have a class with Shifu. Typically he "performs" the movement solo right after applying it to someone so we can see what he did just in case it happened too fast.

Ian brought up a really good question but for me, rather than wondering why you have to change the moves to apply them, I would ask why don't you change the form to match the moves. It's a point I have seen both John Wang and Shooter bring up before. The Shaolin forms I know work a little differently and actually do teach "principles" more but the Taiji form I learned is just chock full of great techniques that can be applied exactly as they are peformed in the form but that leaves point C which is much more complex.

Opening up the box of flexible applications and being able to divorce the moves from specific techniques requires a fundamental understanding of what the moves are for in terms of jin, something I don't really have a good handle on yet. I still kind of operate on technique so now I have to move beyong what I Know into what I have been taught. I can use the exact move of Brush Knee Twist Step as an arm bar, as a throw (if you add a stealing step) or as a defense against a lop sau-punch combo from a southern stylist but ask me to explain it in terms of jin....I guess I'll stick to talking technique for now.

[Chris McKinley]

D_Glenn,

RE: "Understand these and you cover all possibilities.". Perhaps so. That's certainly a lot more tenable philosophy for the inherently chaotic context of combat than the notion of absolute precision being a non-negotiable necessity. As a separate point, though, understanding alone of the 8 x 5 you referenced is absolutely no guarantee of being able to effectively manifest anything tactically in a real environment. I'm not directing that to you, specifically, but just tossing it out there to everybody for general information. There's a big difference between a tactic at the "Aha!" stage of new insight and that same tactic being developed to the point of spontaneous unconscious competence under duress. Generally speaking, you will still need to work your understanding of something to temper it in the fires of pressure since we will still generally fight as we train, regardless of our understanding.

[Chris McKinley]

Omar,

RE: "Doesn't get much more perfectly true to the form than that and I see tons more examples (in push hands anyways) every time I have a class with Shifu.". Perhaps it doesn't, yet the structure of the gentleman in your examples is clearly significantly different between the form version and the application. Better than most, perhaps, yet still different enough to serve as counter-evidence that point A from my previous post is true. He's clearly off by more than a few inches between the demonstrated form posture and the application. My personal view is that that fact is in no way a detraction from the gentleman's skill. In fact, to the contrary, I believe it demonstrates his understanding that the posture serves as a lesson in concept rather than in strict outer choreography, and that he can skillfully apply that concept in application.

[bailewen]

Well I guess I would have to take issue with the premise of point A. I don't know that the precision threshold for acceptable structural strength is so narrow that an inch either direction compromise's the structure's integrity and renders it insufficient for combat purposes. I refute that premise entirely. It can compromise the stucture's integrity...or not. As long as the entire structure adjusts appropriately to compensate for the 2 inch repositioning of the hands, then nothing is lost.

Fact is, I observe massive variations in his form performances just from day to day. In the second example, the one with the Shuai Jiao vidcap, I have seen him perform this move with the hands in front anywhere from waist to face level. Yesterday, in performing "lu" in "Phoenix Spreads here Wings left and right" I on each lu, about 1/3 of the way in, he suddenly decided to spin around for a full 360.

The differences I see between performance and form that bother me are usually more like what I was seeing on the "diagonal flying thread". Differences in vector and relative angles. I not really seen a diagonal flying performance where one turned out at the end so that the leading hand/arm swung out to one side and then down severely as is needed to sweep a person over your lead leg for the throw that people like for that move. IMO, that kind of "flight path" just not indicative of diagonal flying. For the two examples I posted above though, the only variations between form (as I practice it at this point in time) and application are those needed to adjust for the height and specific hand and foot locations of the opponents. Other than that, both moves are being applied in the same way they were explained to me abstractly. Classic applications with very little improvisation. I just need to reject assumption A. an inch here or there makes little difference as long as the whole body is working together appropriately.

[Bao]

Omar writes:

"perfectly true to the form"

You know, what is form? The answer to this question is missing here. Form is many things:a personal interpretation; a tool to practice principles; a way to structure and remember techniques taught etc.

"Moves as they appear in the form" - what does this mean? The moves appear in the form in the manner that the individual understand them according to his own level and experience.

Taiji is about principle, not about "form". If you understand principles and can manage to keep to the principles and fundaments of taijiquan in a real battle, it doesn't matter how it looks like or how you interprete the moves. If you manage to 'sink and relax' when an aggressor approach you, or lunge a fist at you, you have allready come pretty far. You also need "wu xin" (no mind/heart) when you fight. If it seems like trouble how to use the moves, you can not accomplish this mind-set. So it's better to forget about "form" when you fight. And if you have practiced the form diligently for everyday for about ten or fifteen years or so, the movements of the form will never leave you. Form practice is like learning how to ride a bike, fighting is to ride it after learning it = you don't need, or should not, think about how your feet move when you ride the bike. You should not think about how your arm moves when you fight.

Stick to the basic principles and forget about form - 'sink and relax' - this is how you use the form when you fight. The movements will follow.

[Chris McKinley]

Omar,

RE: "Well I guess I would have to take issue with the premise of point A. I don't know that the precision threshold for acceptable structural strength is so narrow that an inch either direction compromise's the structure's integrity and renders it insufficient for combat purposes.". I took issue with the premise as well. In fact, that's more or less why I provided a logical refutation of that premise previously. It is not possible for that premise to be true and for Taijiquan to be a viable combat art. Either the premise is true, and the precision threshold renders the art untenable in the chaos of a real fight, or it is not true, in which case it is quite possible to deviate, even substantially, from the precise choreography of the form and still be combat viable.

IME, in all cases of those with both 1) significant amounts of training in IMA and 2) real combat experience, including my own opinion, the latter is true.

[Ian]

Ian brought up a really good question but for me, rather than wondering why you have to change the moves to apply them...

To be clear, I'm not saying you should change anything to apply a move.

I'm toying with the idea that there are right ways and wrong ways to perform taichi moves.

Btw, I don't think 'doing it wrong' has anything to do with the external shape not matching the form 100%. I think it has to do with the energy of the move.

So taking work at shuttles on both sides an example, one hand goes forward, one hand twists diagonally up and forward. You can work that move against any number of attacks, but if you have one hand as a palm strike and the other hand as an arm wrap, for example, that's a completely different move - different intent and energy - although it could look similar.

I would ask why don't you change the form to match the moves.

That makes a lot of sense to me. I prefer to know some techniques or movements first, and then learn solo drills to refine them. It's why I said:

"And if the application for brush knee twist step were really the same as what Cung Le is showing, why not practice it that way in the form?"

If you want to be good at defending a round kick, work that move at taichi speed. Don't take a move that has a completely different intent and energy (such as brush knee twist step) and insist it's the same. Square peg in a round hole.

[bailewen]

[edit]My post was aimed at Chris but Ian's comments are relevant too.[/edit]

lol.

Point taken. I thought you were making a different point. It then raises a second question though.

- What constitutes acceptable change from the form choreography or put another way, at what point does the move cease to be the same move.

As I alluded to earlier, I feel that a significant portion of the applications I have seen online, in fact most of the workable ones, have past that limit. Graham's posted applicaiton of "Diagonal Flying" is, IMHO, already no longer diagonal flying. The clip posted earlier of Cung Le doing a movement which, in still frame, I must admit, is fairly identical to Brush Knee....is not Brush Knee. I agree with Count that is the "opposite". At first I didn't see what he meant but when I get back to my earlier attempt at explaining what defines a move, in terms of force vectors and "flight path" and such, it becomes obvious. "Brush Knee" means to brush the knee as if you had something on it and were brushing it off. Less metaphorically, the brushing hand starts at the chest or near the opposite arm elbow and travels down and out. The Cung Le application, in contrast, starts at the outside and travels up and in.

The move is superficially similar and you can make a vid cap that looks like "brush knee" but "brush knee[/i] is a movement, not a pose. I have the same problem with that interpretation of BKTS as I do with Grahams application of "Diagonal Flying". Dynamically, they are completely different.

[Ian]

The clip posted earlier of Cung Le doing a movement which, in still frame, I must admit, is fairly identical to Brush Knee....is not Brush Knee. I agree with Count that is the "opposite". At first I didn't see what he meant but when I get back to my earlier attempt at explaining what defines a move, in terms of force vectors and "flight path" and such, it becomes obvious. "Brush Knee" means to brush the knee as if you had something on it and were brushing it off. Less metaphorically, the brushing hand starts at the chest or near the opposite arm elbow and travels down and out. The Cung Le application, in contrast, starts at the outside and travels up and in.

Exactly what I meant in my initial post.

[johnwang]

"Brush Knee" means to brush the knee as if you had something on it and were brushing it off.

Will you call this "brush knee"?

http://johnswang.com/catch_front_kick.wmv

"Moves as they appear in the form" - what does this mean?

I like to use a more concrete example for this discussion. You can execute "leg block" by using your left hand to hold on your opponent's right elbow, your right hand hold on different position such as:

- left lapel,
- right lapel,
- high left lapel behind the neck
- belt hold behind the waist,
- belt hold in front of the waist,
- left shoulder under hook,
- left shoulder over hook,
- head lock,
- reverse head lock,
- right elbow under,
- right elbow over,
- right knee,
- left knee,
- ...

Will you consider all those different contact points throws as a single throw or as many different throws. If you like to train "principle", you may treat all those throws as one "别 (Bie) - block" principle. You can use one sole drill (head down, leg up) to train all those throws to develop your correct body mechanic. The question is, since different "block" throws will require different:

- footwork
- entering strategy
- body coordination
- hands position
- ...

If you have always trained your form (drill) with the standard movement then when will you train the difference? When are you going to break down your "abstraction" and map into detail "concrete"? You may say that as long as you train the "principle", you should be able to map into different concrete reality in combat by default. IMPO, if one is good in one type of "block", he may not be good in another type of "block". This is why in SC, there are only about "60 principles" but it maps into over "400 throws".

[bailewen]

"Brush Knee" means to brush the knee as if you had something on it and were brushing it off.

Will you call this "brush knee"?

http://johnswang.com/catch_front_kick.wmv

That's closer but still kind of a stretch. I have not seen how you perform Brush Knee in the form though. The application above does meet the conditions I described above as the arm travels in the same direction, down and out. I'm not sure how I feel about the timing of the leg and arm. In that leg catch, you withdraw the leg as your arm "brushes". The arm and leg are moving in opposite directions. I tend to think of one of the other defining characteristics of Brush Knee as being the coordination of the same side hand and foot.

I guess my answer is that I can't say for sure. In terms of my question: When does a technique stop being that technique, your posted clip is right on the edge of where I would draw that line. I suppose I'd have to see a clip of Chang style Taiji solo practice to tell.

If you have always trained your form (drill) with the standard movement then when will you train the difference? When are you going to break down your "abstraction" and map into detail "concrete"?

Good question. My answer is that there is no "standard" movement. You train the difference all the time. When you do your solo practice you should explore potential differences in application. This is why recently a new shidi pulled me aside and asked me recently if Shifu kept adding moves to the form. I don't think he adds moves but he does often do the same moves differently. One day he plays brush knee with the palm as more of a finger stab to the eyes, the next day his intent seems to be more on using the move as "cracking. (use the brushing hand to pull on the persons wrist and spin your body so that your chest presses on the back of his elbow. The "palm stike" hand ends up simple as an assist in guiding your opponents body into the cracking technique). It's only a difference of inches in the hand positions, foot positions and footwork but it's the difference between a strike and an arm break.

How about combining brush knee with stealing step? If you use the upper hand to sneak up under your opponents arm-pit and place that same side foot slightly in front of his foot and then spin away from that direction you have a nice throw. Use the brushing hand to grab his opposite side wrist. Then you have 3 points contact + stealing step.

[johnwang]

The moment that you add "opponent" into the picture, the moment that your form will no longer be the same.

You may wear the "same clothes" at home all year around but you can't wear the same clothes for different dates. Some girl likes to see you dress formal, some girl likes to see you dress casual, and some girls like to see you be naked.