DP,

Did you pay to learn that crap?

Please share with the board the location of your school of thousands of sunken chested, tail-tuckin' Chi-huggers so we can go learn the 'correct way'.

Bob #2

Bob the Second,

Since your parole board does not allow you to travel outside of the State of California what would be the point?

Ben,

You see what you have started here? You'll probably think twice before asking any of us for help ever again! (But betwen you & me it's Bob who needs the most help).

Dragonpawn,
My parole enables me to travel to nearly every state in the union and certain parts of Canada with a bit of paperwork and a little sweet talk. The point would be: You are proud of your teacher and school. And could have conviced a few internet surfers to come check out the concave-chested, arduously-tucked, dantien-swrilling, heel-weighted, flat-backed, chi-hugging Tai-Ji.

Ben,
It was you who said "Any help welcome hanks". Some of the ladies at a local bar call me Hank. I don't know why. But now lots of people know me as Hank. So take your time looking for a good teacher. And observe very old people. The way some of them slump and curl has much to do with how they patterned their posture their entire life. From what I've seen- the tough old Masters kept straight and solid. But that's just what I've seen.

I am Bob #2.
(Hank)

Bob,

As a matter of fact I was just talking to my teacher about arranging a weekend seminar for the Spring. Hopefully it would be geared toward advanced practitioners. It would also provide a good oportunity to exchange ideas.

It will probably take me about a month to work out the details but I wouldn't mind gauging interest now. So if you or anyone out there would be interested in coming to NYC for a seminar let me know. I will change my profile to include my e-mail.

I will also take this opportunity to ask Tim if I can post the details of the seminar once they are finalized.

By the way, I just picked up the latest edition of the Journal of Asian Martial Arts & there is an interesting article on Spinal Movement in Taijiquan & Other MAs. It does not really address tucking directly though. It is more about leaning.

"I don't look to the internet for the truth about fighting or training, I use these posts as a means to explore my understanding that is derived from my training." Walter, well said.

Dragonprawm, thanks for the pointer at the magazine. There was this 90-year old guy coming out of nowhere last year wrote a series of valuable articles on the Xingyi he learned from Shang Yunxiang and Shang's MA brother. In one of his articles he said in Xingyi you should "use your spine as if it's a dragon". Another highly influential article came out in the recently years is called "The Spine Theory", in which the author explains that your power should come from the spine instead of the dantien as many people have your believed.

A few thoughts after reading this thread:
1. Have proper respect on each other. Otherwise our problems are much deeper than tucking the tail bone or not.

2. If A is good and B is not A, it doesn't mean B is bad. Get over the black and white mentality and you will see contradictions everywhere. For example, if you think relaxation is good because your teacher tells you so, don't tease your buddy because he believes tightening is good. The same teacher may tell one student to relax and the other one to tightening up.

3. Training, combat and demonstration don't have to be the same and often they are not. A lot of the problems with today's CMA is caused by mixing up these three things. Some may think I am downright crazy so let me give two examples. Standing is a training method; how many people stand there like a dumb post in combat? Taiji forms are for demonstrations(uh oh, did i just say that?); did Wu used any thing from Taiji set in the famous Wu-Chen fight?

Question: Dragonprawn, how do you feel after standing with the weight at your heels? Ha ha ha.
Also, how do you handle the mind and duration aspect of standing?

I'm proud to be a butt tucker (that's tucker with a "t". It's improved my rooting abilities tremendously. In practicing applications, when I'm unsuccessful it's usually because I'm untucked, butt stickin' out, allignment broken, therefore no root and no power. My personal belief is whatever works for you, do it. In my own experimentation tucking allows me to be rooted, stable, connected, able to generate power from my legs. For me untucking breaks my root and whole body connection, from there applications become all upper body and weak. As for the standing with the weight in your heels, I can't say that I've ever heard any logical reason for it. I don't know why anyone would want to train in any way that inhibits maximum contact between their feet and the ground. But hey, I am the clueless one, and no matter how I train Bob #2 will always be able to kick my ass!

IronMoose,

Well said. But I differ on point #3. When I stand,or spar most things are the same (tucked, round, etc.) except of course the movement. But my teacher really emphasizes not forgetting any principles no matter what we are doing.

The fight you reference is not a good example for all of the attendant reasons pointed out in the 30 sum odd page article on it in the recent Qi (US) magazine. There was alot of stuff going on then & there on many levels (everyone who has not already should read that article, it is amazing). But, yes to answer your question. I recently viewed the fight on a CD ROM & the Wu master used back fist from the form. As for those "baby fist" punches, I have no idea what that was all about.

As to your question about how I feel, let me clarify that we keep our feet flat on the floor with the weight concentrated in the heels & outer edges of the feet. My teacher says that even the big toe can be pictured as if gripping the ground too.

As for mental preparation - although it is useful before form & central to medition, our horse stance is the preliminary & primary exercise to our Nei Kung routine. Our Nei Kung requires no mental preparation. A half hour or so of the kind of horse stance we do will clear your head automatically!

Clueless,

Your point is also good & I hope I have clarified that weight in the heels thing.

If you tuck (no lean), then the pelvic area is brought forward slightly and up and the hip kua can be 'opened' by way of connection to the ground through 'pushing' on the outside of the feet, the heels and outside of knees. Gives a strong stable 'base' from which to issue and receive power, with energy stored more in the feet, you know sprouts in feet, directed by waist...

Non-tucking (slight lean)leaves the pelvis in a nuetral and hip kua in a nuetral or slightly closed position if knees slighty 'pinched' in. 'Weight' is distributed over whole foot, maybe slighty more on the ball of the foot and energy is stored more in dan tien. Makes it easier to issue and receive power on the 'move'.

Both methods have advantages and disadvantages, from my experience 'tuck' and associated postural requirements easier to do 'correctly', because 'little' difference between standing methods and fighting. Non tuck has a more 'dynamic' nature so has to be balance between standing and complementary stepping methods, i think its harder to get it right.

Dragonprawn,
Just a point of clarification; people that develop problems from "slumping" as they sit in chairs do not develop lordosis (an exaggerated curvature of the lower spine ), they develop just the opposite (their lower back goes into flexion, it loses it's natural lumbar curve, what you call "tucking" ). If you are interested in the subject of proper alignment and the common problems that often develop from sitting in modern chairs, a couple of good books are "Posture Makes Perfect" by Dr. Victor Barker (ISBN 0-87040-871-2) and "Pain Free" by Pete Egoscue (ISBN 0-553-37988-7).

You are welcome to post the details of your school's seminar, just send me an e mail with the information.

Clueless one,

To simply put, placing the weight at the heels increases the work out level. Say if you can stand for one hour with the weight on your whole feet, you may only last 30 minutes when you move your weight backward to your heels while keeping the height of your stance. Similarly, the 30/70 Xingyi weight distribution a lot of people have taken for granted doesn't have to be 30/70. Depending on the stage of your training, you may start at 50/50, then 30/70, then 10/90, then 0/100, then back to 30/70.

Like I said before, the act of standing involves the form(posture), the mind, and the time. Form and mind together determinds the work out level. Some forms are easy, some hard; some mind work are light(learn how to relax), some heavy(learn how to tighten up - i am not joking). So you will end up with four pairs:
1.Easy posture, relaxing;
2.Demanding posture, relaxing;
3.Easy posture, intense mind;
4.Demanding posture, intense mind.
They are all "correct" depending on your goal and circumstances.

Its not just a matter of semantics to say that you can't 'place' or 'move' your weight around. The distribution of your weight is determined by your postural alignment/symmetry and changed by deforming or breaking it, and the stored energy thus 'freed' can 'power' your technique. You can 'break' your symmetry from outside in or inside out.

The postural requirements of Hebei xing yi align the body in such a way as to have 'weight' distributed more to rear than front, so when alignment broken and tension released it goes forward. Shanxi requirements give more 'even' or neutral distribution to allow forward or backwards. While xin yi styles end up with forward distributed bow stance, because this posture allows easier dantien tension/release or open/close.

Once your body has adapted to the particular alignment requirements of your art, any 'extra' stress you feel is probably indication of incorrect alignment/tension; tension should be complemented by relaxation ( similar to 'agonist' and 'antagonist' muscle relationship).

Tim,

I have to differ with you a bit here. You are correct to say that slumping in a chair can lead to flexion (I think the correct term is kyphosis). This, however, is not the opposite of lordosis (as it is sometimes regarded). For one thing kyphosis, or having a slouch, or "humpback" involves the the thoracic region, whereas lordosis involves the lumbar vertibrae.

More importantly, kyphosis is a leading cause of lordosis because it forces the lower back to compensate for the imbalance created by the curve occurring at the higher level of the spine (this according to the Institute for Spinal Disorders out there in Cali). So they are not opposite, but interrelated problems.

Other causes of lordosis are obesity (leaning backward to improve balance) & osteoarthritis. The kind of tucked in Nei Kung I practice can help all of these things. You hear talk of the Tai Chi "hunchback" (not to my knowledge ever considered a bad thing) as it may be seen in old masters. Nonetheless I do caution people against curving their upper backs too much going for a chest concave appearance. This in my view would be harmful. The tuck must focus on the lower back.

Thanks for permission to post that seminar. I'm getting it together & will e-mail you.

Iron Moose,
It seems that some of the differences in opinion about standing can be attributed to the fact that we practice different arts. Standing with your weight in your heels may be relevant to xing yi, but it definitely isn't relevant to yin style ba gua. Our standing postures are done with feet parallel, in a wide stance, double weighted, etc. In this type of posture no benefits can be derived from standing with your weight in your heels, unless the goal is to learn how to get knocked on your ass.

As for pushing on the outside of the feet, if one is trying to compensate for fallen arches, knees caollapsed in, and closed down perineum, then this would be a good thing. Otherwise, it seems less than efficient. In my experience pushing on the outside of the feet disperses the force over the ground, while pushing through the kua, through the center of the legs, and straight through the center of the feet sends the force into the ground and creates an even more stable base and stronger root.

Those are just my thoughts for whatever their worth. Like I said before, whatever works for you, do it.

can you check my perineum and tell me if it's open or closed?

Clueless one...

Double weighted doesn't mean the same thing as 'even weighted'. (just a note cause that may cause confusion in the future).

Double weighted means to use force on force with an opponent impeading ones ability to turn and move easily... double weighting is considered an 'illness' in the Tai Ji classics.

Pardon me for being a stickler... my intenet is to be helpful.

Shane

Shane,

According to that article in the Jounal of Martial Arts I cited above the concepts of double weightedness & spinal positioning (or bending) are the two most contentious topics in all of TCC.

That said, I like your explanation. I'd heard it before & was trying to recall it when I read the mention of double weighting in the article. It makes sense - it does not have to do with weight distribution. Thanks for the reminder.

Clueless,

I keep my weight over the heels & outer edges of the foot whenever I push in a move & I never collapse my knees. You have to be careful of that in fact. A common thing beginners do is pull their knee to turn their foot instead of twisting from the heel as we train them to do. That could lead to knee trouble for sure. Of course I'm not even sure that many people turn their feet at the end of moves. I started a thread to discuss it once, but nobody responded.

Bob #2,

I agree, I don't think the taint closes or opens per se (unless you get an episiotomy).

Dragonprawn,
The "hunchback" of your old Taiji masters IS kyphosis(and from a functional point of view, it is always a "bad thing." )

what if one could posit that: it's possible to (in general) aim for weight dropping through the foot in a way which avoids pronation, but is not rigid. hence, weight falls on the outside/heel of foot in fully dropped weight (much as it does on the heel/outside of a hand in a push up, avoiding strain), yet allows for fluidity and stepping (allowing of course for a fluid and natural transfer of weight across the foot in continuous (more or less) motion.) and that neither does such a consideration of weight mean necessarily "pressing outwards", but could also mean letting weight drop in true rootedness, while retaining a rounded position of qua? i.e., we are not talking about a stance which dissipates weight angularly into lateral force, but drops it straight down (you could practice on ice). and movement which does not collapse knee or ankle, but maintains fluidity, roundness, and structure?

and what if one could posit that it's possible that release of the lower back could produce a lengthening of the spine, and connection of the upper torso with the pelvis/leg/foot in such a way that produces what some call "tuck" but without the attendant tension which some associate with that word? and of course combined with "head suspended" on the other end? so that the body aligned with gravity in a way that the spine was lengthened, and flexible? with weight dropping from the top of the head smoothly to the root, with enough body curves to connect the hands with the center and root in a sort of "geodesic dome" set of "curves"?

and, finally, what if one could posit that leaning was possible, in a way that the body was aligned with gravity, with the spine lengthened? so that one was not overbalanced, but a fluid wave (like a rooted blade of grass) with weight dropping smoothly into the root, and the whole body was connected smoothly and without tension.
and than what ever leaning was present, moment to moment was functional, in terms of strike, yielding, or throw--and in concert with the movement of the opponent in what's sometimes referred to as a yin/yang relationship?

do people feel this is possible? are these things good things?

thanks for a good discussion. best...

Ben Lee,

What do you think. Has this thread helped or hindered your progress?

I am interested in hearing other opinions about Standing Practice (aka I Chuan).
Is it a regular practice (daily, weekly)? How long do you stand? How long have you been practicing it? What are some of the things you focus on (or try NOT to focus on)? What are some of the things you have noticed as a result of this practice? Do you think that you have developed more energy, balance, focus, etc as a result of this? Is it something that you can eliminate or move away from as time passes?
Any opinions are welcomed. Tim, I am particularly interested in your comments on this subject as well...

Thanks

ANJ
Click on "Search" then type in "standing" under the keyword search.

ANJ,

I learned many aspects of Yi-Chuan from Tim and found that when I practice regularly I have more endurance, better posture (in all aspects of life), better balance and am much stonger in general. If I practiced more regularly and pushed myself harder- I have no doubt that I'd drasticly improve. But I'm busy and lazy so my Yi-Chuan practice sessions stay around the following format:

8-excercises (1-2 minutes each)
stand in wuji (2-4 minutes)
stand in 7 postures (1-2 minutes)
stand in wuji (2-4 minutes)
stand in 'holding tiger' posture (1 minute R/L)

Then practice the few Shi-rli I remember correctly.

When I practice consecutive nights I always set my timer adding 15-30 seconds for each session. And usually practice Yi-Chuan after practicing BaGua forms.

A little is better than nothing.

oh yeah... you asked what we do/don't focus on.

During the excercises I focus on doing them correctly, slowly and smoothly.

I make sure I'm exhibiting the postures correctly (as I understand them) and also remind myself of the mental images Tim taught to keep the skeletal alignment and Jing of each posture.

Lastly- I try to accept whatever pain my muscles give me when they are burning and wait for that damn timer to sound.

Shane, Thanks for sharing your experience. That's what I am looking for.

Tim, after sifting through a lot of opinions in the search you suggested, I don't think that really covered the "personal experience" aspect of standing as I had hoped it would.

Although there were a lot of things covered, the standing posture and different stages of being able to feel energy within your body, sinking, relaxing, and the results of these practices by individuals, really was not covered very well.

Did/do you ever practice standing on a regular basis? If so, how long has it been since you began? How long do you hold a single posture? I have heard of people practicing until they work up to an hour. I am unclear as to whether that is one hour-one stance, or several stances within an hour.

Again, any opinions/comments would be appreciated.

Thanks,
ANJ

My teachers taught that standing for 40 minutes in one session was the maximum time. After 40 minutes the benefits are minimal. The 40 minute time limit is total, for all postures you hold that day. The minumum time for each individual posture is 5 minutes. Sometimes you can hold one posture longer (up to 20 minutes).

What is your purpose with stance training?

Tim,

Do you recommend somone stand in each posture for the same amount of time and gradually work up to a full 5 minutes in each- or stand in one posture for 5 minutes and less time in the other postures?

Iron Bastard- you already know the answer. Stance training allows the body to unify in proper alignment, helping the practicioner develop that springy-solid power and a good root at the same time. Then, when applied to movement the body settles into proper alignment allowing for whole body power.

Shane

I, like the Iron Bastard, have often wondered about stance training myself. I studied a particular style of Yiquan where there were 18 different postures, 12 standing 6 in various sitting and laying positions. My experience has been pretty much the same as Shane's. However I'm not to sure about Shane's answer.

For example, proper alignment, I think I understand as the relationship between shoulders hips, elbows knees, and hands feet. But is this not more external than internal? Springy-solid power, why can't I throw sandbags in various wieghts to develop this(i.e. 35, 50, 70lb). Root, if I use the natural phenomena of trees. Aren't the roots of trees in constant movement? Yet when doing stance training our feet are not moving. So why use this term "root"?

I'm not saying Shane is wrong in fact I agree whole heartedly with his conclusion. But I don't think his answer was clear enough.

Maybe Tim could help out.

Scotty

I was going to use the word 'base' but I figured someone would spaz.

crap- I just noticed you said "the MINUMUM time for each posture is 5 minutes".... I misread earlier and thought that was the maximum.

sheesh.

There is a very lively discussion forum, centered around YiQuan at: www.tomabey.com

Iron Bastard,
Simply put, isometric exercise, correctly done, will make you stronger in a short amount of time.

I think I got a lot stronger faster doing isometric excercises than years of weight lifting. By stronger, I don't mean the amount of weight I can lift but strength I feel when I wrestle with other people.

Scotty,

You mentioned only 12 of the major joints, there are 18. the other 6 are scapula, upper thorax, scapula then bottom of cervix, middle, and upper. Yes these are external. Internal would be intention, breath, and motion.

The way to practice is to extent, in any particular posture, stop not relax, extent some more, than more. Each extention requires a little whole body tension. By doing so you will be aligning as well as opening your joints.

I beleive this is what Tim was refferring to as an isometric excercise correctly done. You will find Shane,s description correct.