Could it just be we have cultural differences here? Krabong, where are you from, if I may ask? And even should that not be the cause, This sure is one way of looking at it. This sure is another. And that does not go too well with Joanna's own other statement: 'Specks of dust lighting up for a moment in a ray of sun and then, gone.' Refers to thoughts or to generations of human beings, waves, rocks or carrots. Anyway, they all will be gone or changed into something else and where is something absolute in all this. And I am not saying there is nothing absolute, I'm trying to make the point that we are likely to deal with things relatively here and accuse them of this and that or praise them, life and death, but it means very little, actually nothing at all ultimately. Possibly. Kind regards to everyone, Puzzled Dragon
Interesting thing, energy - or the word "energy." Let's say someone in China says something like: "Your joints are squarish, just hinges, basically, but obviously when you swing your arm to punch your fist traces an arc, so the force of your punch swings in in a circular fashion. That's good because the mechanics of punching are such that circular motions whip up a lot of energy, so even though your joints are kind fo squarish, try to use then to whip in your techniques in an arcing motion, that'll be more powerful." Imagine they said that. Then, by the time its got translated to the West, for whatever reasons, it becomes something like "Squares are physical, circles are energetic." That's my theory. I call it the Crudelli arm-swing principle, after Chris Crudelli when he was shown by a taiji master how to relax his arm by swinging it round. By the time Chris was demonstrating it to boxers int he West it had somehow transformed in to an amazing, secret kung fu technique that gave you special, powerful energy. All well and good, only, if you check, the taiji master swung his arm the opposite way to Chris Cruddeli, lol. It had actually reversed in translation. The Cruddeli arm swinging effect. Or, it gains something in translation, in other words.
Hi FQ - thanks for your comment - no, I'm not in to this stuff, I just learned about it and decided it wasn't useful. But I can still talk about it a bit if I have to. Hi Puzzled Dragon - I really don't think my comment "It matters. Lives always matter." was either enigmatic or arrogant. I find your comments a little too nebulous and nihilistic for my liking, so I think our personalities may clash from time to time, even when discussing tangible things.
Great post, FQ - spot on. p.s. they do arm swinging in tongbeiquan and pigua too - that's another way we can know it's not all that special or unique.
If I may wax philosophically for a moment, regardless of idea pertaining to absoloutist or relative viewpoints, taking an over-view, I rather notice how ALL these threads or discussions which commence with enigmatic, opaque, statements pertainng to martial arts seem to very quickly veer off in to unrelated discussions. Put very simply, I see that happening for the simple reason that the statements in the first place are either meaningless, or too obscure to be a useful guide at this point. Ever see the same polarity magnets repel? That's how I see this phenomenon - obscure, usually deliberately impenetrable statements actually a-educate you - they don't educate at all - because they actively repel understanding, because there isn't anything meaningful to be learned - either because it isn't there, or because it's too obscure for the reader. Consequently, they repel the discussion in to peripheral areas. What's the victim yet again? Glorious quan.
That's the reason I try so hard to keep Quan separate from all the health, philosophy and spirituality stuff. In my view, most "IMA" people not only don't want their arts to just be about Quan, they actively want them not to be. That way, competence can be judged on something other than fighting ability.
I've met a lot of IMA people and almost all of them have insisted that their art is about "more than just fighting" and the vast majority of websites out there also talk about 101 other uses for their style. It can't have escaped your notice that most Tai Chi teachers don't simply advertise their Tai Chi as a fighting art. Phrases we use on our posters are things like: "Learn powerful & effective self-defense skills including Strikes, Kicks, Locks, Throws & Weapon Disarms" & "Just down-to-earth martial training with lots of contact, hard work & fun". Now you've got to admit that that sort of wording (superimposed over a picture of me hitting someone in the head,) is not typical Tai Chi fare. Come on, be honest...
If CMA was "at least" about fighting, then I wouldn't mind if sometimes it was about more as well. As long as at the very least, the base, it was about actual, useable, practical skills, with other aspects as bonuses. I rather suspect the "other aspects" are dubiously "there" in many cases, as JK basically says, as a distraction away from there being no core, practical base.
Me neither, but it wasn't very understanding nor very compassionate or loving either. Just to be alive for living's sake, OK, but if has it no more value than that... hm, specks of dust. Or not? We need not agree always, but sometimes should be fine, I hope. Or else, we shall be in disagreement and live with it too. No problem as I see it. Kind regards, Puzzled dragon
Hi PD - I think lives are worth a great deal. Sorry I wasn't more compassionate in my tone with you, but you used the smiley at me in post 35 and eye-rolling tends to make me a bit blunt. You also made a comment I found puzzling and a little disturbing in post 49: Aside from the not very compassionate content matter of your words, I consider the :yeleyes: icon to be a rather dark and hostile symbol. I think that my stating that "lives always matter" is considerably more compassionate than your waxing philosophical about how much the life of a smoker matters "Considering the expanse of the hitherto known universe and the estimated time of its existence". But I'm happy to get along with anyone who's prepared to try to get along with me
Put down them there six-shooters, cowboy - I covered that in posts 19, 27 and 30. Any other contributions?
I was still curious about what anyone thought in the posts I covered if they had experienced similar ideas etc. How the ideas of Squares and Circles can also be used to find weak points in stances, postures, attacks etc. When do you use a square/circle? When do you use it for footwork and opposed to torso? I have seen straight forward stepping it TCC but have also seen the crescent stepping (which is half a circle) is there a difference that anyone has found? When is it best to use one idea than the other? These are a few quick ideas not covered yet.
Zgronk- Off the top of my head, I'd say that I'm always looking for the most direct route possible, whether stepping or striking. However, I adapt to change upon encountering resistance or obstacles and if I need to arc around an obstacle or resistance, I'll take the smallest diversion possible while remaining fully efficient. I'd say that I use squares a lot for stances - a stance should always have both length and width, this gives you room to maneouvre in a way that a tightrope stance does not. The two feet can only occupy two points on a line, but the angles of the feet have a big influence on the range of motion of your torso. Roundness is in general a good idea in posture as it evens out the kinks, thereby minimising the weakness of any specific bent joint, and a gently curved limb has more adaptability than a locked limb. But additional localised folding and unfolding of joints allow you to undulate, creating extra opportunities for sequential long, medium and close range attacks. I should really be asleep right now, so sorry if this is not very detailed or clear.
My belief is that your method of movement should be based on your opponent. When dealing with a person of skill and athleticism, you must move with intelligence, and the best way to do this is to mask your motives. Rounded movements do this effectively, because the radius of your circle is an unknown, and can also change with relative ease. Unpredictability is an advantage. In the event that your prospective opponent is unskilled or unathletic, straightforward and direct movement is the mode of choice. Your opponent has no expectations, and therefore a straight forward move will give you an additional speed advantage. It's basically a fancy way of saying "exploit your opponent's weaknesses."
Sounds like good advice. I've also found that Bagua works well against Wing Chun people (circularity vs. linearity - the people I sparred with were less good at dealing with attacks from the sides and rear). Whereas straightforward attacking has worked very well against most of the Tai Chi and Bagua people I've encountered. So I think this is basically in agreement with what Sandus is saying. I think the moral here is firstly not to limit yourself to one kind of movement and secondly to spar / train with people who are good at the things you're not so good at, rather than just people with a similar movement vocabulary to yourself.
Great posts! I absolutely think it depends on how you train, what to expect, what you see etc. For example I think that straight lines (as Jk mentioned) tends to work well on Bagua and TCC people b/c they don't truly train against anything like that. Where as the reverse is true for the Wing chun, bagua example, to me though this does not show deficiency/weakness in the art but rather a weakness in training. I think the finer points of movements as well as balance can also be used in this relation for example. Where is the weight centered not only in the larger basis of the body, but also within the feet in a stance. When explored this also provides great clues to loss of balance, weakness of strikes etc. For example take your typical bow stance. If you weight is "perfectly" centered in this stance (on a larger full body scale) but is not equally distributed over the sole of the foot (i.e. too much on the balls of the toes, heels, sides etc) this too can slow movement, and upset your "root" or balance. I liken to superimposing the bagua to just around the foot and seeing where once again all your weight is. From my own exp. it should close to equally distributed (of course depending on a person's lvl of exp. as well as the application done) other than having it settled too far on the outside/inside etc. From what I have seen this can also be applied on a person's torso etc. From my somewhat limited exp. with the study this is how I have understood some basic ideas of squares and circles and how you can use them to help balance/stance working/seeing weaknesses etc.
