Hi Tim and others,

This topic has been partially answered (or argued) somewhere else in this forum, but I'd like to ask some specific questions, for completeness.

After alleviating chronic back pain using chek's method, I started doing tai chi because my rehab trainer recommended it. After a year or so doing tai chi, I do feel that my back and whole body structure feels stronger and more efficient in moving.


However, recently some friends who have been doing tai chi in other schools told me that, among other things (which I wont mention because it's been sufficiently discussed elsewhere in this forum) I should depress the sternum, and round the shoulder, unless I can't 'issue energy'. One of them demonstrated this by throwing me with ward off. I also read somewhere that hsing-i advocates the 'three rounds', one of them is rounding of the back. I also find references of this abound in books and on the web.

If I interpret this advise literally, it goes against what I have been taught during my back rehabilitation (chests up, shoulder blades close to the spine and do not disengage from the back).


Now, the TC teacher that i learn from (chen man ching style, and also does hard kungfu, hunggar i think) gives this basic advice on posture: body upright, erect head, loose shoulder, knees not over toes, but nothing about round shoulder or depressing sternum. I'm still reluctant to ask him questions about this topic. He never does any "issuing" to me but i've seen him doing it to other people.

The questions are,
1)does rounding the back necessarily mean disengaging the scapulaes and hunching (kyphosis)? When doing tai chi sometimes my back feels 'round' laterally (i.e. sideways) eventhough my chests are up and scapulaes stay close to the spine.
2)Tim mention in another thread that the TC classic says the back should be 'lifted'. During the rehab I learnt to relax the muscles at the neck so the muscles along the rest of the spine can be free to exert an upward force. Is this the correct interpretation?
3)In the same paragraph, Tim also mentions that the chests should not 'hold any weight'. Does it mean I that as well as not sinking the chests (equivalent to depressing the sternum??) I should not consciously lift them up either?

Thank you in advance,

Hi Rannga,

It sounds like you are practicing correctly. I teach that the chest should be held up in its natural position, as if there is a hook under the center of your sternum pulling your chest upward.

If you press up the crown of the head, "drop" your scapulae down your back and lift your chest without tensing the shoulders you should arrive at the correct posture.

You can also observe the posture of small children if you are unsure of correct, natural posture.

If you "depress" or otherwise collapse the chest and round the back, you will have achieved "senile posture," the alignment commonly seen in the elderly infirm.

Jones:
I learned CMC from a reliable source and the chest is to be hollowed with the back strait, the character is interpreted as "hold" up the chest in a manner as if you were holding a candy in your mouth and wanted to preserve it.

Basically keep the chest up so the lungs can function normally and the spine is kept in a natural position. More in the CMC version then some other interpretations of Yang Family the strait-upright stance is as hallmark of the form as are the beautiful ladies wrist and other specifics.
Many Yang family practitioner (other than CMC) over do the roundness it is a mis-understanding of the form and Yang Chen Fu's postures (see a good early photo of Yang, Chen Fu's chest during the form- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_style_tai_chi_chuan)Some will say he changed the postures later in life however photos from the same book in this reference show the major change was Yang, Chen Fu's obesity that makes his back look hunched (kyphotic).
During application there are those that will extremely round the back and with a stiff ward- off and get a throw, with the tail tucked under and the hips out at the same time this is an extreme posture. It can work in push hands but is not very useful in other grappling games. Furthermore it does not work well without force.


Jamie

Excuse the inappropo question, but...THAT is Yang Chen Fu??? The only photos I've ever seen are him when he was older and much, much heavier. Wow. I had no idea he was ever so slim. He must have been amazing at that weight.

Tim, Jamie,

Many thanks for your advice. I find that the images of the 'hook' and 'preserving candy' help.

Nice to know that tcc and modern physiology do not contradict each other in this aspect.

RJ

Yes that is Yang, Chen Fu
this is from photos from his book ghost written by Chen Man-Ch'ing (Zhengmanqing) "professor"

Does the book contain any more useful technical stuff that the Professor wrote in his own books(ie. not much)?

books
The Essence and Applications of Taijiquan
-Is the original book with the last chapters on spear and/or two person form edited out.
This is the book the photos are from, translated by louis Swain

Yang Chen Fu was illiterate so the claims that he wrote the book (by his family) are exagerated. The book was ghost written by Zhenmanqing "Professor".

Also: Mastering Yang Style Taijiquan is more of the same and extreamly helpful
It is very clear and to the point


Tai Chi Touchstones: Yang Family Secret Transmissions is another good book
These are all Yang Chen Fu teachings


Tai Chi Sword by Chen Wei-Ming
Chen Wei Mings sword form is another great reference.

Please do not discount the works of Professor Zhengmanqing Chen Man Ching he was an intellect, a painter poet and calligrapher his works contribute to a far more creative and spiritual meditation that discover a deep rhelm of soft application that rediscovered the yin energy in the Yang family form. This geneouis ability of soft application may not have been transmitted (expecially in the non-Chinese students -"lost in the translation") but his book does offer the didactic.


some honorable mentions
Taijiquan, Classical Yang Style: The Complete Form and Qigong (Paperback)
by Yang Jwing-Ming

Also The Dao of Taijiquan: Way to Rejuvenation... by Jou Tsung Hwa is considered a mainstay of our generstion

Study of Taijiquan by Sun Lutang
Sun Lu Tang is probally the most talented Chinese Internal Martail Artist of the era and his writtings are invaluable

The worst books are by the talentless Herman Kauz, what a waste of paper.

TCB your librarian.
classes off and hair down

Thanks, Bob!

I have "Thirteen Chapters" and "Touchstones."

I studied with one of his students, but have always craved more hardcore technical explanations to shore up my weaknesses. I'll check out your recommendations.

Hi, rangga jones.

The confusion you have over this topic is common. Two lines of thought have developed over the issue, both center around the martial artist's interpretation of peng.

Among some martial artists, peng is expressed as a rounding of the back or "disengaging the scapulae" as you put it. Yes, hunching—accomplished by contracting the teres minor in the chest to pull the shoulders forward. The idea is that this "chest bow" helps the artist generate more power by "snapping" the weight of the torso in time with the whipping of the striking limb. In addition, peng (the hunched shoulders) is thought to facilitate neutralization of incoming force by creating a "roundness" to the artist that helps incoming force roll and be neutralized.

Another line of thought (held by Tim Cartmell) holds that sacrificing one's alignment can only hurt the artist's ability to generate force and neutralize attacks. If one is to use whole body power, one must have proper alignment to transmit it. Peng here is interpreted not so much as a body posture but more as an upward lifting buoyancy. When expressed in a body posture, the head suspended from above, chest lifted posture exemplifies this buoyancy. The perfect alignment creates a springiness.

Being that there is no final authority in the martial arts, there is no "right" interpretation. However, grab some folk to spar with and try both methods. See which one is more effective. I think you'll find that not hunching is a more effective method for combat.

The hunching method strikes me as more segmented, reminiscent of "hard style" martial arts. But as you read this remember that there are no "hard styles" per se. Any style can be practiced with what are colloquially referred to as "hard style" principles. So a Taijiquan practitioner practicing this hunching method is, in my opinion, utilizing an approach that is more "hard" in method. I have seen this hunching method deployed in several Chinese styles, including the well know styles Southern White Crane, Xingyiquan, Baguazhang, and Taijiquan.

The origin of these different interpretations of peng is not known to my knowledge. Some teachers are not even aware of the two lines of thought. Most just continue to use their body in the way they were originally taught (i.e., hunching or not). But if you ever come across a teacher who was originally taught to hunch but no longer does because he found it was not productive in combat, I'd study with him. He listens to Mother Nature.

Buoyancy, a great way of putting it.
Thanks Joel

Thank you Joel, very helpful.

At the moment I do taichi for rehabilitation only, so I won't have the opportunity to test the postures by sparring. (I'm primarily a cyclist and rock climber). But who knows, someday maybe.

I'll stick with the buoyant/lifted chest advice. You guys maybe interested to know that I've been keeping the chests 'buoyant' during cycling this last week or so and found that it adds extra oomph during uphill climb. I used to hunch during bike ride for years (hence the back pain). Also, having the image of the head leading and the rest of the body (and the bike) follow makes the climb noticeably more effortless.

Thanks everyone,
RJ