David,
Great analogy with the Rubik's Cube! I think we agree more than we know on many levels, yet do to language limitations we seem to be differing.
I'm still not entirely certain about the waist turns. I don't think that there are conflicts. Again it may be a visual thing.
I do agree with your statement that "all movement originates from the mind". I am not sure I understand your statements on the three different ways. Ways of what? As I understand it, the mind is where it all begins. You must focus and lead with your mind intent. Next, all physical movement originates in the waist.
Your comment to Audi on the direction of the spins is a keen observation. I wonder if this is merely a coincidence that the turns on the heels are inward and the ball of the foot turns are outward or is there a specific rationale?
Michael.
What about those Spins?
Hi Michael,
I intend to put a clear statement about waist turns in a post under 'Principles,' soon.
What I meant by the three different ways was only three ways of looking at it. Take the mind first, then the eyes... example. Like walking down the street: you choose which way to go, you look where you're going. In Tung Kai Ying's schools the second movement, 'Grasping Sparrow's Tail to the Right,' is taught: look to the right, turn your head to the right, right hand and shoulders turn right, leg and foot turn right; it's a sequence. There really is nothing there that lessens the idea of the waist coordinating the upper and lower body.
As to the direction of the spins, I don't think it's mere coincidence. The outward spins are sort of a 'step around,' where the other half of the body is moving forward, and, like walking forward, the ball of the foot is the last part of the foot on the ground. An inward pivot has the other half of the body moving backward, and like walking backward, the last part of the foot on the ground is the heel.
We can walk forward on our heels, and walk backwards on our toes, but we usually don't; it's not that efficient.
David
I intend to put a clear statement about waist turns in a post under 'Principles,' soon.
What I meant by the three different ways was only three ways of looking at it. Take the mind first, then the eyes... example. Like walking down the street: you choose which way to go, you look where you're going. In Tung Kai Ying's schools the second movement, 'Grasping Sparrow's Tail to the Right,' is taught: look to the right, turn your head to the right, right hand and shoulders turn right, leg and foot turn right; it's a sequence. There really is nothing there that lessens the idea of the waist coordinating the upper and lower body.
As to the direction of the spins, I don't think it's mere coincidence. The outward spins are sort of a 'step around,' where the other half of the body is moving forward, and, like walking forward, the ball of the foot is the last part of the foot on the ground. An inward pivot has the other half of the body moving backward, and like walking backward, the last part of the foot on the ground is the heel.
We can walk forward on our heels, and walk backwards on our toes, but we usually don't; it's not that efficient.
David
David,
Interesting insight about the direction of the spins. I had never heard or thought of this, but it seems to make biomechanical sense. Putting it crudely, the weight of the swinging leg tends to shift the balance in the spinning foot onto the ball going forward or onto the heeling heading backward.
As for your future post about the origin of power and the waist, I am looking anxiously forward to it, since I had a similar idea. I am somewhat confused as to whether the waist is supposed to guide, control, lead, or generate power, concepts which do not necessarily imply the same physical movements. Adhering the qi to the spine is another concept that seems related to this, but which I have difficulty making consistent with other statements of principle.
I think the classic statements about this more or less talk about power being "rooted" in the feet and being "guided" or "led" by the waist, "formed" or expressed in the fingers, etc., all under the command of the mind. On the other hand, everyone seems to talk about the waist as being the origin of movement. For instance, if I can recall correctly (an iffy proposition), Yang Zhen Duo talks about the waist "carrying" or "bringing" (dai4?) the foot around, when he describes turning a foot in or out. Perhaps Jerry or Louis could clarify the terms generally used and the implications.
As for other ideas about where movement originates, in Jou Tsung Hwa's Tao of T'ai-Chi Chuan, he describes the first Chen routine as having the body lead (or move?) the hands (yi3 shen1 yun4 shou3), but the second routine as having the hands lead (or move?) the body (yi shou yun shen). Not being a Chen stylist, I have always found this a little bit mysterious and hard to square with my instruction of using the waist to "move" everything. However, I have encountered similar statements elsewhere and so repeat it here, in case someone else can explain the "complete" theory of T'ai Chi movement.
Respectfully submitted,
Audi
Interesting insight about the direction of the spins. I had never heard or thought of this, but it seems to make biomechanical sense. Putting it crudely, the weight of the swinging leg tends to shift the balance in the spinning foot onto the ball going forward or onto the heeling heading backward.
As for your future post about the origin of power and the waist, I am looking anxiously forward to it, since I had a similar idea. I am somewhat confused as to whether the waist is supposed to guide, control, lead, or generate power, concepts which do not necessarily imply the same physical movements. Adhering the qi to the spine is another concept that seems related to this, but which I have difficulty making consistent with other statements of principle.
I think the classic statements about this more or less talk about power being "rooted" in the feet and being "guided" or "led" by the waist, "formed" or expressed in the fingers, etc., all under the command of the mind. On the other hand, everyone seems to talk about the waist as being the origin of movement. For instance, if I can recall correctly (an iffy proposition), Yang Zhen Duo talks about the waist "carrying" or "bringing" (dai4?) the foot around, when he describes turning a foot in or out. Perhaps Jerry or Louis could clarify the terms generally used and the implications.
As for other ideas about where movement originates, in Jou Tsung Hwa's Tao of T'ai-Chi Chuan, he describes the first Chen routine as having the body lead (or move?) the hands (yi3 shen1 yun4 shou3), but the second routine as having the hands lead (or move?) the body (yi shou yun shen). Not being a Chen stylist, I have always found this a little bit mysterious and hard to square with my instruction of using the waist to "move" everything. However, I have encountered similar statements elsewhere and so repeat it here, in case someone else can explain the "complete" theory of T'ai Chi movement.
Respectfully submitted,
Audi
Hi folks,
For what it's worth, I was recently looking at a video of Chen Zhenglei performing the Chen Style Second Routine and was surprised to see the same squatting alternate-leg sweep performed that I described above in the Kempo Karate style I studied. Seeing this reinforces my doubt that the Yang-Style spins are intended as leg sweeps, since the mechanics of the performance are so difference.
By the way, seeing the Secound Routine makes me wonder again about any simple relationship between Chen Style and Yang Style. I find the First Routine fairly easy to relate too, even though very different; but the second routine has all sorts of elements that I have not yet found in any of the Yang-Style forms I have seen and cannot easily reconcile with apparent Yang Style preferences. In addition to the leg sweep I have described, I would cite lots of lateral cross stepping for example.
Respectfully submitted,
Audi
[This message has been edited by Audi (edited 04-08-2001).]
For what it's worth, I was recently looking at a video of Chen Zhenglei performing the Chen Style Second Routine and was surprised to see the same squatting alternate-leg sweep performed that I described above in the Kempo Karate style I studied. Seeing this reinforces my doubt that the Yang-Style spins are intended as leg sweeps, since the mechanics of the performance are so difference.
By the way, seeing the Secound Routine makes me wonder again about any simple relationship between Chen Style and Yang Style. I find the First Routine fairly easy to relate too, even though very different; but the second routine has all sorts of elements that I have not yet found in any of the Yang-Style forms I have seen and cannot easily reconcile with apparent Yang Style preferences. In addition to the leg sweep I have described, I would cite lots of lateral cross stepping for example.
Respectfully submitted,
Audi
[This message has been edited by Audi (edited 04-08-2001).]
Audi: Regarding your 4/8 post, here's an observation based on the Guang Ping two-person combat form. There's a movement in the form where A attacks with a left toe kick and eye thrust; B parries the foot attack by lifting his right leg and deflecting toward the inside with his right shin (while parrying the hand attack with a stork spreading wings posture); and A, borrowing B's energy from the foot parry, spins 360 on the ball of his right foot, places his left foot down behind his right foot, and attacks with a right heel kick. Another potential application of spins.
Gene
Gene