Cheng Tin Hung & 13 Dynamics school of Wu style Wudang TCC

[GrahamB]

What do you think? Not my style so can't comment on the style.

It goes on a bit but then so does the long form!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LooqJQwcMJM

[Giles]

Not my form either. But whatever. I like the way he moves in the solo form. Also the sense of calm in his gaze. And I don't doubt that he can effectively implement the techniques/moves he shows with the partner in blue. And these are obviously derived one way or another from the solo form.
However, in my view the stuff he does with the partner is mostly (although not always) a bit one-two. In the sense that he often blocks the attack and then strikes, throws etc. Certainly effective, but I think that these techniques/moves would be far more smooth, hard-to-read and effective if he were to use the incoming energy and continue the circles as part of his counters. I don't want to start writing an essay here; I guess people here will know what I mean.
A few selected moments where in my view he does actually use the circles more: 0:28 - 2:28 - 2:41 - 4:05
There are other more 'connected' moments too, these are just a few examples. But often I feel he's muscling it, and not really using the attacker's incoming energy (in the Newtonian sense) to generate his responses. He looks like a big strong guy and can certainly get results this way. But I believe that good tai chi fighting techniques should also stand a chance of working when the attacker is bigger/heavier than you are. I have my doubts whether the applications as shown in the video would work well in this latter situation.

Dan Docherty's people train plenty of tuishou, as he himself did, and I always felt that the skilled people in the school had good tingjin, smoothness and flow. But this video gives me the impression that this whole (unifying) dimension is frequently left out in the applications.
Maybe Neil Rosiak actually trains differently, is far more skilled in the tai chi sense, and he doesn't want to show the 'real stuff' in this video...?

[robert]

But often I feel he's muscling it, and not really using the attacker's incoming energy (in the Newtonian sense) to generate his responses. He looks like a big strong guy and can certainly get results this way.

I agree. Look at the push at 0:07 - he pushes with his legs, which is good, but his arms aren't opening, in fact they close a bit. Then when his leg is extended, he pushes with his arms. This seems fairly common with taiji in the west. There's a bit of the idea there, but it isn't trained into the body. My opinion.

[wayne hansen]

Yes some apps a little rough and yes he uses his size to barge through
Would be interesting to know where he sits in the DD group
I watched a few of his clips but lost interest

[cloudz]

good fighters don't give you much to work with, strikes come in, they go out. It's easier to do fancy and smoother flowing applications when the feeder gives plenty of momentum to work with. I think the 1-2 type of approach reflects the real fight experience as well as being the basic teaching method.
In some of his other clips where the practice is more free form the response are smoother and less staccato.

the guy he's working with is Sami Berik who has fought many times in the UK MMA scene; trained with Neil back then too.
he's trained a lot of fighters to success, fought in early NHB himself and worked many years as a doorman in London.

If he turns it up, he's a scary dude for sure. I get what you guys are saying, but at the same time it's one step sparring.
you can find lot's of nice looking stuff, but it's not realism is it. This isn't either, but it's less realistic to respond with too much in one go and in ways that don't anticipate a realistic response back. In other words the feeder: retracting the initial attack quickly, staying stable as they attack.

Flowing and circular, yea sure; you can find lots of aikido and tcc and so on that looks great in compliant training.
but no ma style ever looks as clean and tidy in a fight.

I suspect the more people work and train for fighting the less they care about being pretty and getting things done in ways that would be highly unlikely against other trained/ good fighters.

This isn't really apologetics, he doesn't need it. But I've trained with different schools and people, seen and done the kind of things you speak of.
I don't think it matters in the end; people will gravitate to their own way of working through their own experience. In this clip he's demonstrating basic application from the form. This is how he would teach it to people walking into class for the first time - he's a teacher first and foremost and put clips like this out to attract students.

Having worked with Neil both privately and in his classes; he's a class act in many ways, very dedicated to the CTH system, but went his own way from his teacher DD, though obviously has many ties, friends and contacts in and around the lineage. He now learns more about and refines the system under CTH son.

I'm not saying some of your critiques are misplaced, perhaps smaller guys do tend to become more technical - he is big and strong and so in most cases doesn't have to work as hard or cleverly to get things done. Then again he has had plenty of smaller as well as female students; they can make it work and lots have competed successfully either in tcc grappling or full contact. The proof is in the pudding - it's effective, if not the prettiest and pleasing on the eye. But I think thst's generally the case when comparing CTH taiji with other styles/systems - in my experience anyway.

[Giles]

@ Cloudz
Thanks for your perspectives and opinion, with you speaking as someone who knows Neil Rosiak personally.
My original remarks/critique of the applications are also about efficiency/effectivness, not about aesthetics or what 'pleases my eye'. What I try to train is to remain in the flow, to stick and move in when an attacker quickly retracts his fist/arm, to try and exploit the 'boomerang effect' and take the attacker's centre. But Mr Rosiak certainly has far more fighting experience than me and I respect that. It doesn't mean I'm therefore wrong in my comments, but I certainly take your points.

[wayne hansen]

I went back to read your original post Giles
I.e. I like his form
I like it less than his apps
Finding it more YCF that CTH
Too open and circular
What I like about CTHs form is the tight small circles and neck snapping applications
It is the nitty gritty

[cloudz]

@ Cloudz
Thanks for your perspectives and opinion, with you speaking as someone who knows Neil Rosiak personally.
My original remarks/critique of the applications are also about efficiency/effectivness, not about aesthetics or what 'pleases my eye'. What I try to train is to remain in the flow, to stick and move in when an attacker quickly retracts his fist/arm, to try and exploit the 'boomerang effect' and take the attacker's centre. But Mr Rosiak certainly has far more fighting experience than me and I respect that. It doesn't mean I'm therefore wrong in my comments, but I certainly take your points.

fair enough, but there are clips on his channel where I think the things you mention may be more evident; the ones that aren't fixed application, but free form practice. I think technically he's very good, and found him to be efficient and effective..
If you haven't seen them, maybe check them out and let me know what you think. maybe you're right and maybe I haven't scrutinised them in such a way, or have as keen an eye as you for those kind of details.

don't get me wrong, it's ok either way. we can all be better at times or think we can do better.
glad it's not just me

[Giles]

I went back to read your original post Giles
I.e. I like his form
I like it less than his apps
Finding it more YCF that CTH
Too open and circular
What I like about CTHs form is the tight small circles and neck snapping applications
It is the nitty gritty

Sorry, Wayne, was very busy for a while and overlooked this thread. Anyway: I'm basically a Yang style person (but broad church of 'Yang', not aligned to any particular 'authentic' lineage), so it's probably the more Yangish performance of the form that I can identify with. Actually I really like Wu style as well, even some supposedly 'robotic' performances of the forms, but I've only ever had brief contacts and exchanges with Wu-style peeps, never trained it properly myself. So I'm less aware of deviations or Yangifications.
Of course, I like neck-snapping applications as much as the next man!

[Giles]

fair enough, but there are clips on his channel where I think the things you mention may be more evident; the ones that aren't fixed application, but free form practice. I think technically he's very good, and found him to be efficient and effective..
If you haven't seen them, maybe check them out and let me know what you think. maybe you're right and maybe I haven't scrutinised them in such a way, or have as keen an eye as you for those kind of details.

don't get me wrong, it's ok either way. we can all be better at times or think we can do better.
glad it's not just me

Hey, cloudz, as said I've been very busy lately and still am, but I'll try to check out some more stuff on his channel and get back to you later with my semi-qualified impressions thereof.

[yeniseri]

I like how the routine is done! We all have to match the teaching to our physiology, biology along with individual understanding and that means what we see in the individual "play" and its utility is the real epitome of development.
It cannot be any other way. Misquoting the Daodejin, it says "things may not be done accoring to the individual rules, bias, whim, etc but all things will, nonetheless, be accomplished".