Origins of silk reeling Qigong in Chen style taijiquan

[windwalker]

pointless.....

[cloudz]

oh please with the physics lessons..
why can't a straight punch as in 'parry and punch', just basically be a straight punch..

everything doesn't have to be turned into bloody rocket science.

I understand perfectly where the rotation is, so what ?
every boxer now needs this lesson in physics; to better understand what exactly ...

a rotation (waist/hip turn) round a central axis won't make a straight punch circular or spherical.. tai chi or not.

and what on earth does that ladies push hands have to do with a straight punch as in the form move parry and punch from Yang and Wu style; yes, fuck all, that's what..

[windwalker]

oh please with the physics lessons..
why can't a straight punch as in 'parry and punch', just basically be a straight punch..

everything doesn't have to be turned into bloody rocket science.

I understand perfectly where the rotation is, so what ?
every boxer now need this lesson in physics; to understand what exactly ...

Some may not have the understanding they feel they have.

Like you for example.

The illustrations help to make this more clear, for some.

Maybe not for others.

For example you say you understand what rotation is, can you relate it to central equilibrium.

[cloudz]

what understanding don't I have, about what.

if it's the bullshit you yap on and post clips about - I would rather not have it.
condescending dip shit

[cloudz]

it's people like you who are sending a fine martial art down the toilet.

no wait
you and your special brand of mates in Asia already did that.

[cloudz]

stop conning yourself first of all
you're not conning anyone else with that shit.

please god let's hope so

[charles]

Are we to take it that Chen style has no straight line force to speak of

Thanks to the quirks of this forum, I lost my reply to your post.

I'll summarize simply by saying don't confuse the outward direction of application/force with the mechanism that is used to produce the application/force. A straight-line of force can be produced from a helical action.

[wayne hansen]

Charles thanks for your clarification it was mainly what I thought without any real understanding of the history

[cloudz]

Are we to take it that Chen style has no straight line force to speak of

Thanks to the quirks of this forum, I lost my reply to your post.

I'll summarize simply by saying don't confuse the outward direction of application/force with the mechanism that is used to produce the application/force. A straight-line of force can be produced from a helical action.

I guess it can... but sometimes the obsession on silk reeling might make one wonder...
another academic term a dumb ass thumper like me need to look up eh
well thanks for that

[cloudz]

actually I take it back

the definition of helical is contradictory to straight line force; I just looked it up.
it's as a helix; spiral by definition.

it's going to have to be one or the other I'm afraid. you can't have your cake and eat it Charles

it's either spiral force or it's 'straight line'..
if everyone and their dog uses spiral force, all the time, by definition and anatomy... it renders 'silk reeling' as fairly meaningless I would think.

but i don't believe that, and I'm not just trying to be difficult..
heck.. maybe i am.

[windwalker]

Are we to take it that Chen style has no straight line force to speak of

Thanks to the quirks of this forum, I lost my reply to your post.

I'll summarize simply by saying don't confuse the outward direction of application/force with the mechanism that is used to produce the application/force. A straight-line of force can be produced from a helical action.

Not just Chen

Some circles are visible others are not.
Expressions differing among styles.

[Steve James]

it's either spiral force or it's 'straight line'..

Naw, it's a spiral line to produce a linear force.

[cloudz]

it's either spiral force or it's 'straight line'..

Naw, it's a spiral line to produce a linear force.

I don't agree there's a 'spiral line'.

[charles]

the definition of helical is contradictory to straight line force; I just looked it up.
it's as a helix; spiral by definition.

A helix, by definition, is not a spiral. A helix is a 3D motion, a spiral, a 2D motion, by definition. In common language, the two are used interchangeably, but that is incorrect.

it's either spiral force or it's 'straight line'..

I'm a mechanical engineer. There are many, many mechanisms that produce linear motion from angular ("circular"/"rotational") motion, not to mention mechanisms that produce rotational motion from linear motion. One that is common is called a crank mechanism and is what makes your car go: pistons move in a linear motion to turn a crank shaft rotating the wheels. A screw driver is another - it produces linear in/out motion by rotation of the screw driver, driving the helical thread of a screw. An Archimedien screw is another and uses rotational motion to produce linear lift. And many other examples. The human body is capable of doing the same. It does so in Chen and other arts.

if everyone and their dog uses spiral force, all the time, by definition and anatomy... it renders 'silk reeling' as fairly meaningless I would think.

Pretty much true. The term is over-used and under understood. The question then is what is unique about Chen Taijiquan - and other styles of Taijiquan - that makes this an important mechanism of movement for that/those styles? There has to be SOME reason that it is central to the style. If you wish to understand it, that is the question to which to find the answer. When one cuts through all the esoterica, the answer isn't all that complicated, but one has to want to understand it.

[cloudz]

I'm going to try again.

I was addressing Charles, because i was asking specifically about Chen style; and I respect his knowledge about it. For a start he's been practicing it for many years.

With all respect I don'y think you have Steve.. And as for the other guy, let's just not even go there.
I have had plenty of good discussions with Charles, and will listen and respect what he has to say. But I think I have to clarify a bit exactly what I'm getting at.
Confusion reins supreme in this place if you let it.

Here's the deal; Silk reeling exercises where brought up, I've seen them and plenty of you probably have too.
To my mind they train spiral force to the point of contact - the ones I've seen tend to focus on the the upper body; so let's even forget about how you might deliver spiral force into a straight kick.. for now.

Now I get how rotations through the body produce spiral force. I can accept that the body can combine to make helical movements or action(s), as Charles described.

My disconnect comes at force delivered at the point of contact and the nature of that force.

Can I see a silk reeling exercise that doesn't have rotation through the shoulder. That's not at the shoulder; so that means where the arm/hand does not rotate ?
A front kick doesn't rotate through the hip same with a straight punch where the fist doesn't rotate. In brush knee for example - the hand does not rotate; the palm lands vertical.

How do those actions marry up to the arm / hand actions that are typical of silk reeling exercises. They don't map directly. So what I am saying is there is something a miss in what Charles said in the post I addressed.

In the silk reeling exercises i use spiral force is or would be evident in the hand or to put another way, the point of contact.

I will accept a rotation at the shoulder will deliver spiral force at the point of contact. What i won't buy is that a rotation in one area of the body but not in the limb delivering the force, will deliver that force subject to the action of the former body part - 'just because'.

Just by virtue of force travelling 'through' the body and being set on spin. We are not made of gears, we are not 'washing machines set on spin.
We don't need physics degrees or maths degrees to understand spiral and straight force...

I don't think that in Yang style/ Wu style; brush knee, parry and punch, fan through back, press(ji) that spiral force is being delvered at the point of contact.

If the 'whole form' was silk reeling as Charles claimed is how Chen style basically is - then I would take that as spiral force being delivered with every delivery of every strike. This is what I was asking him to clarify...

By saying the body has helical action but delivers straight line force tells me something. It tells me what he said before in regards the silk reeling and the form wasn't indeed true of Chen style. Just like it isn't true of Yang or Wu style. Just like it isn't true of MMA guys using any number of striking techniques tht don't involve rotation of the striking limb.

spiral force at the point of contact is produced a certain way, and i know full well how to produce it on someone at contact. and the same principle applies to striking.

If Charles wants to further address my observations and how they relate to Chen style then hopefully the net won't eat his response. (again)