What went wrong with the transmission

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

What went wrong with the transmission

Postby Taijikid on Tue May 13, 2008 8:34 am

Topic Summary
Posted by: Taijikid Posted on: May 3rd, 2008, 4:37pm
Here is a clip of CMC doing his Taiji, which is excellent in my opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjV9bx9u ... re=related

Now look at these clips (there are more if you search youtube for it). They all look so lethargic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhpY9967 ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LehDcDD8 ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JHZLeFf ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jefEQZqm ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwpNXL4i ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrZ_VMxh ... re=related

You will start laughing may be about the third clip down. Shocked
Posted by: T J LePetomane Posted on: May 3rd, 2008, 6:28pm
In a statement, rollback tags the transmission. You can tell what's real by looking there.
Posted by: onyomi Posted on: May 4th, 2008, 10:55pm
Didn't he have thousands of students? Maybe poor quality control.
Posted by: Royal_Dragon Posted on: May 5th, 2008, 6:23am
Maybe he didn't know how to teach, OR held the secrets (IE fundamentals) back for only his seniors?
Posted by: ShanghaiJay Posted on: May 5th, 2008, 6:39am
The American that was his hand picked successor Tam Gibbs died of a burst appendix about a year after him.

In my humble opinion and I do have 10 years studying under one of CMC direct students. He died with a lot left untaught.

Perhaps he had other students in Asia that received a truer transmission.

Or perhaps he never meant to really teach foreigners anything I mean he was a very traditional master and I was running into that mindset in the 90's in China. Why the hell would he not have it in the 70's?

Jay
Posted by: Walter_Joyce Posted on: May 5th, 2008, 7:30am
Or perhaps he didn't have the full transmission himself.

It is a logical possibility.
Posted by: ShanghaiJay Posted on: May 5th, 2008, 7:12pm
Quote:
Or perhaps he didn't have the full transmission himself.

It is a logical possibility.


Possible but based on my personal experience I would tend to believe CMC had the goods.

My first teacher was an Army judoka stationed on Taiwan in the 60's and lost in an open match to a Xingyi guy in Taibei.

After two years of perseverance he was the first foreigner to be accepted into the Xingyi School. He studied there for for a total of 3 years and fought in local Lei Tai.

He did not begin studying with CMC until the early 70's in New York and had nothing but the highest regard for his Gongfu.

When I first arrived in Shanghai in 96 I met people that had known him since his Shanghai years. They all had a very high regard for him.
Posted by: sinkpoint Posted on: May 5th, 2008, 7:36pm
A lot of subtleties seems to be lost.
Most likely due to the student carbon copying from what he perceives as the teacher's movements without being told the exact intentions behind them are.
The lack of combative training and an environment to test these false assumptions probably didn't help either.
Posted by: meeks Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 3:35pm
too much emphasis on 'how does my form look' robs people of understanding... then when it goes from successor to successor it changes because the fundamentals of what it was really about is forgotten. that's when guys put their own flavor to movements based on their own unproven contrivances.
Posted by: I am... Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 3:49pm
on May 6th, 2008, 3:35pm, meeks wrote:
too much emphasis on 'how does my form look' robs people of understanding... then when it goes from successor to successor it changes because the fundamentals of what it was really about is forgotten. that's when guys put their own flavor to movements based on their own unproven contrivances.

+1 to that. In my book, one of the most important parts of the process.
Posted by: Bob Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 4:52pm
You need to get a copy of Ben Lo's very difficult-to-find video.

I've always had mixed feeling about CMC but I have reread a lot of the books about and had a little experience with one of the practitioners in the Ben Lo line and now I think they were on to something.

I also think many of the auxilliary training has either been kept back or lost, depending on who you learn from.
Posted by: ShanghaiJay Posted on: May 6th, 2008, 6:01pm
Quote:
I also think many of the auxilliary training has either been kept back or lost, depending on who you learn from.


I could not agree more. But that is also in the Wu Style I have been practicing for the last 12 years over here in Shanghai as well.

Jay
Posted by: RickMatz Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 6:34pm
on May 6th, 2008, 6:01pm, ShanghaiJay wrote:


I could not agree more. But that is also in the Wu Style I have been practicing for the last 12 years over here in Shanghai as well.

Jay


The 24 Forms?
Posted by: Ian Posted on: May 7th, 2008, 7:10pm
on May 5th, 2008, 7:36pm, sinkpoint wrote:
A lot of subtleties seems to be lost.
Most likely due to the student carbon copying from what he perceives as the teacher's movements without being told the exact intentions behind them are.
The lack of combative training and an environment to test these false assumptions probably didn't help either.


Good point.

I believe everyone's style should look different.

It doesn't make sense for a 250 pound American to do his taiji the same way as a 90 pound Chinese.

That doesn't mean you can just make shit up though Wink
Posted by: ShanghaiJay Posted on: May 8th, 2008, 12:01am
on May 7th, 2008, 6:34pm, RickMatz wrote:


The 24 Forms?


To what 24 Forms are you referring? The only ones I know of are the government forms.

In the CMC school I studied we had a very thorough curriculum of standing, rooting jibengong, short form, jian, ba shi, Push hands and Da Lu. But it can not compare to the amount of sets and exercises in the Wu Jianqian curriculum.

Jay

Posted by: ViagraOnlineCialisCHEAPES Posted on: May 8th, 2008, 12:13am
on May 8th, 2008, 12:01am, ShanghaiJay wrote:


To what 24 Forms are you referring? The only ones I know of are the government forms.

In the CMC school I studied we had a very thorough curriculum of standing, rooting jibengong, short form, jian, ba shi, Push hands and Da Lu. But it can not compare to the amount of sets and exercises in the Wu Jianqian curriculum.

Jay




I guess he's either talking about Eddie Wu's 24 exercises http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCpKR2eKuRc or the 24 exercises of Cheng Tin Hung.
Both of these sets have common elements to some of the Shanghai branch exercises.

Chris
Posted by: Bob Posted on: May 8th, 2008, 11:02am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7-TCotq ... re=related

This is one aspect of the training that I believe is missing in most CMC players and I also believe that CMC had this training. In an interview with Ben Lo in the Journal of Asian Martial Arts, Ben indicated that CMC wanted to teach him the spear but Ben refused saying if he had not yet mastered the sword how could he possibly learn the spear.

I believe, pure speculation, that Ben probably has the training and is one of those "secrets" that are held tight.
Posted by: RickMatz Posted on: May 8th, 2008, 7:21pm
on May 8th, 2008, 12:13am, ViagraOnlineCialisCHEAPES wrote:


I guess he's either talking about Eddie Wu's 24 exercises http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCpKR2eKuRc or the 24 exercises of Cheng Tin Hung.
Both of these sets have common elements to some of the Shanghai branch exercises.

Chris


That's what I'm referring to. Sifu Wu's 24 exercises.
Posted by: ShanghaiJay Posted on: May 8th, 2008, 9:49pm
on May 8th, 2008, 7:21pm, RickMatz wrote:


That's what I'm referring to. Sifu Wu's 24 exercises.


Some of those sets are in other sets in the Shanghai branch. But it depends on who your teacher was in the Shanghai branch as to what you learned.

The Shanghai branch also has a very developed PH shofa set 13 Shofa, sticky sticks and some striking jibengong I have not seen in the HK school.

Jay
Posted by: Formosa Neijia Posted on: May 8th, 2008, 11:15pm
on May 8th, 2008, 11:02am, Bob wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7-TCotq ... re=related

This is one aspect of the training that I believe is missing in most CMC players and I also believe that CMC had this training. In an interview with Ben Lo in the Journal of Asian Martial Arts, Ben indicated that CMC wanted to teach him the spear but Ben refused saying if he had not yet mastered the sword how could he possibly learn the spear.

I believe, pure speculation, that Ben probably has the training and is one of those "secrets" that are held tight.


J.J. Soong is considered one of ZMQ's top students (but perhaps not THE top) and his system has the spear training, and even broadsword. But then they also have the other 14 Yang moves that ZMQ took out of the 37. So it's a very complete system.

Soong's taiji is very interesting. It has ZMQ's flavor but is a fuller Yang style with all the training still intact.

Dave C.
Posted by: johnwang Posted on: May 9th, 2008, 12:09am
What do you think the meaning of hand position at 0.20, 0.27, and 2.11?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjV9bx9u ... re=related
Posted by: ViagraOnlineCialisCHEAPES Posted on: May 9th, 2008, 12:44am
on May 8th, 2008, 7:21pm, RickMatz wrote:


That's what I'm referring to. Sifu Wu's 24 exercises.


Many of the exercises, like for example the first two in the video, leg circling or the movement from 'shooting the tiger' are present in the Ma/Shanghai branch as well as in other lineages from Hongkong (although with considerable differences in execution sometimes).
Wu Gongyi was innovative. He created a new form (with things like leaning back in Xu Bu), a new way of doing pushhands (4 corners) and I think that it is very possible that he organized various existing jibengong into the 24 exercises. The same may be true for other masters like Ma Yuehliang.

Chris

Posted by: Taiji_buddha Posted on: May 9th, 2008, 6:35am
where is taijikids video?
Posted by: C.J.W. Posted on: May 9th, 2008, 6:41am
on May 8th, 2008, 11:15pm, Formosa Neijia wrote:


J.J. Soong is considered one of ZMQ's top students (but perhaps not THE top) and his system has the spear training, and even broadsword. But then they also have the other 14 Yang moves that ZMQ took out of the 37. So it's a very complete system.

Soong's taiji is very interesting. It has ZMQ's flavor but is a fuller Yang style with all the training still intact.

Dave C.


Soong practiced Wu style in China before switching to Yang under CMC. Some of his teachings reflect elements of Wu style.
Posted by: T J LePetomane Posted on: May 9th, 2008, 9:43pm
on May 9th, 2008, 12:09am, johnwang wrote:
What do you think the meaning of hand position at 0.20, 0.27, and 2.11?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjV9bx9u ... re=related


0.20 - Rollback, can be many different things, depending on the intent
0.27 - Fishes in 8 is a kind of pull down or deflection.
2.11 - Cloud Hands can be a launching point for almost any technique, but my favorite would have to be a hidden hand strike with the backhand.
Posted by: johnwang Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 1:30am
0.20 - Rollback, can be many different things, depending on the intent

It's rollback all right but it's better to hold on your opponent's elbow instead of pressing on his elbow.

0.27 - Fishes in 8 is a kind of pull down or deflection.

How can you pull your opponent if both of your hands are facing down?

2.11 - Cloud Hands can be a launching point for almost any technique, but my favorite would have to be a hidden hand strike with the backhand. [/quote]

How can you strike if your elbow is up.

I don't think CMC has correct intend in his form.
Posted by: T J LePetomane Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 9:55am
on May 10th, 2008, 1:30am, johnwang wrote:
0.20 - Rollback, can be many different things, depending on the intent

It's rollback all right but it's better to hold on your opponent's elbow instead of pressing on his elbow.


If you're going for some sort of armbar, perhaps, but if you're doing something else, then maybe not. The way I do that with rollback is to use my left hand around the wrist, and my right forearm around the elbow.

Quote:

0.27 - Fishes in 8 is a kind of pull down or deflection.

How can you pull your opponent if both of your hands are facing down?


Do I need to break out the sambo sweep clip again?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzJf2Hc4o0Y

A deflection is yet another use for the position. It's a good setup for anything related to the Tiger Xing, as well.

Quote:
2.11 - Cloud Hands can be a launching point for almost any technique, but my favorite would have to be a hidden hand strike with the backhand.How can you strike if your elbow is up.


If this keeps up, I'm gonna have to start charging you for lessons.

Quote:

I don't think CMC has correct intend in his form.


He was known to intentionally perform differently on camera in order to track how people learned his stuff. I don't trust any of his video, personally.
Posted by: johnwang Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 2:32pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzJf2Hc4o0Y

The shoulder pulling sweep require that your hand to pull downward along with body spinning and face changing. I don't think CMC's form had any intention to do that.

This is why the traffic cop can't be good MA guys because the lack of intent when they direct the traffic.

The solo form should speak the correct body language and show exactly what the intend should be (at that moment). Otherwise, there is no difference from dancing (even dancing has intend to tell some story).

In CMA, those moves without proper "intend" are called "lifeless moves" and should not be performed by any master level.
Posted by: bodiddly Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 4:16pm
John, you'd be correct if the intent of CMC was to grab a hold of and do something

I think his intent is fine.

Posted by: T J LePetomane Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 8:20pm

Yeah, I'd agree with Mr. Diddly.

For several reasons.

1) Cloud Hands and Step Back to Repulse Monkey are the two most potent Qigong postures in CMC's form. Most likely the good Doctor's mind is, first and foremost, on the health benefits.

2) The flat elbow backhand works, though I, personally, play it with my elbows down, when I can manage to do it correctly. Most of the action in that posture from a martial perspective actually happens on the transitions, in my opinion. The bulk of it is simply press/deflect to set up the next movement.

3) As has been mentioned over and again here and everywhere, for most folks, only about 5% of any given system is ever really "used" in combat. For CMC, and a lot of other Yang guys, Grasp Sparrows Tail is about 95% of what they need for fighting. The rest of it is about the Qigong, the meditation, the mental and physical conditioning, primarily, and not so much a direct listing of specific techniques.

4) Puppies are cute, and I don't have a fourth point.
Posted by: johnwang Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 9:31pm
We should try to avoid "lifeless moves" in any of our solo form training so people won't criticize that not enough or incorrect "intend".

1) on the health benefits.

Agree on this but Intend and health are not mutual exclusive.

2) The flat elbow

The drop down elbow can protect the chest.

3) the Qigong, the meditation, the mental and physical conditioning, primarily, and not so much a direct listing of specific techniques.

I agree! It's very confused to mix the combat and health discussion in the same thread.

4) Puppies are cute, and I don't have a fourth point.

Someone removed my macho spikes ring and replaced it by a sissy cute puppy.
Posted by: crazydave Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 9:34pm
John, I think that's a bear.


And I find it unnerving.
Posted by: T J LePetomane Posted on: May 10th, 2008, 9:45pm
on May 10th, 2008, 9:31pm, johnwang wrote:
We should try to avoid "lifeless moves" in any of our solo form training so people won't criticize that not enough or incorrect "intend".

1) on the health benefits.

Agree on this but Intend and health are not mutual exclusive.

2) The flat elbow

The drop down elbow can protect the chest.

3) the Qigong, the meditation, the mental and physical conditioning, primarily, and not so much a direct listing of specific techniques.

I agree! It's very confused to mix the combat and health discussion in the same thread.

4) Puppies are cute, and I don't have a fourth point.

Someone removed my macho spikes ring and replaced it by a sissy cute puppy.


Dagummit, I don't know if it's your argument or the beer, but I can't find anything to respond to, lol. Smiley

time for some shuteye, I guess.
Last edited by nianfong on Wed May 14, 2008 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Taijikid
Anjing
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:13 am
Location: Torrance, California

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests