I also want to say I met Ed and found him to be a great bloke very skilled in Rou-shou. Ed's wife just had a baby, too. Getting any sleep yet, Ed?

Buddy

yes I'm lucky, Jyoti has been a good sleeper in the 11months since she was born- or went Ho Tien to use the technical term. I absorbed the 'Slow Loris Gong' of Da Shou Quan over a prolonged period in Taipei zoo. Tim probably remembers. It's true what they say about its incredible capacity to develop profound and practical torpor. I apply it in my daily life and naturally it rubs off on those around me.

Still I find it quite stressful when I don't get my ususal 22hours sleep per night.

Jyoti headbutted her mother today and made it look like a sneeze. I was so proud!

All my students know of the influence of the Slow Loris (on training and life in general). But now that you've posted, I'll have to admit there is a co-founder of the style.

Slow Loris style RULES!

Recently I freaked out my Mother by spending nearly two hours to reach for and have a single sip of a beer while watching a video. She threatened to call the police twice by the time I put the bottle back on the table!

Deep down inside she really admired the muscle control I exhibited. When she leaves her room again I'm sure she'll admit it.

Ed,
To get back to your original question about backs curved the wrong way - where I train we REALLY emphasize the tucking in of the tailbone. To me it is the key to everything we do in tai chi.

Anyway, in beginners doing the opening move of the form or someone starting to do a horse stance you will often encounter those that cannot tuck right away. However, with training they can tuck in for the whole form, in push hands, in internal training, and applications.

What works is have them lean forward at the waist all the way without bending their knees, just sort of hanging with their head down and arms folded. After a minute have them bend their knees and unbend their waists (but not too much), kind of rocking forward into a tucked-in horse stance.

This works well, probably by stretching and warming up the muscles first. But although it helps many of the type of people you have decribed right away, some must work on it over quite a bit of time (especially if they have back problems).

Coolhand, tucking in and chest concave are two different principles. Chest concave has to do with "lifting the back". Both tucking in and chest concave are important for alignment.

DragonPrawn,

Can you do ordinary squats with a 45lb weight on your shoulders... and keep your tuck?

I think this is a very interesting debate. One certainly does not want to collapse the spine in any way, especially when it is sustaining a fair amount of pressure. Thus, squatting with this kind of tuck, with weights, would probably not be good, and I wouldn't want to attempt it. At the same time, squats lift the weight (barbell on shoulders)--and thus exert force--in an arc which is mainly up and slightly back. While, say, a push or brush knee sends force primarily forward.

Personally, when I've found myself, say, pushing a car--or as the classics say "a cart"--and thus am pushing mainly forward, I've found I automatically tuck. Certainly if I do the opposite, i.e., hyper-extend, I have no power to move the car at all. The car "uproots me." This natural adaptation on my part, I assume, does two things: (1) connects the upper torso with the legs more (2) gives a better angle of transmission from the rear foot to the hand(s).
Thus I, and perhaps most people, intuitively tuck when pushing a car, to obtain more "root" and body integration.

Also, I think such things may depend partly on a given application of a movement. Pi pa contains closing, which also *can* imply "swallowing." In which case a tuck just sort of happens, in my opinion. One application of brush knee as a strike can involve hitting slightly downward, "squishing" the target into the ground. In this case, perhaps the tuck involves a bit of a wave in the spine, like, (is my impression) hsing i can. Repulse monkey can be used as a downward strike, as I believe, can the similar advancing move in hsing i (i have only the slightest acquaintance with hsing i, so please forgive me if i am mistaken about it)and so could also involve a slight spinal wave. I wish I knew many more applications than I do, but it seems to me that the application, with its particular vectors and distance at point of impact or exertion of force, might influence the optimal position of the body somewhat.

In any case, in my limited experience, I've seen people who struck me as very skilled who came down on both sides of the tuck/no tuck debate. What ever they are doing, they seem to find the most fluid and powerful position for what they are trying to accomplish.

I wonder if some of the issue has to do with a differing opinion on whether one should *deliberately* strive to tuck or not. A parallel: some teachers teach reverse breathing, and some do not. But again when I push a car I do it automatically. I have to have air in me to have power, and could even think (as two excellent teachers I've come across teach) of *approaching* the point of "pushing" with an inhale. But at the point of exertion, a bit of air escapes, in a way that would be identical to "reverse breathing" if one were to approach it deliberately, rather than let it intuitively happen. Certainly it seems to me that spending energy *deliberately* trying to tuck, or reverse breathe, in the heat of the moment is nigh impossible. But people do try to train things so they hope they will have an appropriate response without thinking about it. And different people may teach different parts of the puzzle as "deliberate."

I appreciate and enjoy this column very much. It is perhaps the most generally thoughtful column, in my opinion, I've come across on these subjects.

Respectfully to all...

I appreciate this thread also.

I would like to point out to all the butt-tuckers that part of 'traditional' TaiJi training (like Tim experienced) is performing the ENTIRE long form with the thighs parallel to the ground which builds extremely strong leg muscles. And would be IMPOSSIBLE to do while tucked.

Can I squat with that much weight?
Take a look at my picture. What do you think?

But seriously, tucking in helps you to lift weight (or issue power). It makes you lift with your whole body, not just your arms. We tuck in during uprooting exercises, for example. It is easy to lose the tuck when you yield before an uprooting push. You have to be extra aware of this.

I wonder about the long form you describe Tim as doing. Tim looks tucked in the pictures and videos. My fellow students comment on how solid his applications look. If one can tuck during squats, uprooting, etc., when the thighs are beyond parallel, why can't you tuck in this form? Is it the duration?

hmm. I don't think I can go that low in the form, or horse *without* tucking. I wonder if everyone is using the word the same way.

Respectfully...

1-tucking in while lifting weight will only help you damage your spine.

2-unless you're some sort of spastic free-limbing freak you can't "use your arms" lifting weight during a squat.

3- Tim tucked... you must be insane.

4- look at my picture and let me know if you think I tuck.

http://www.wutang.org/articles/mabu_mabustance.html

While I do not know this teacher or program, and thus have no opinion of, or knowledge of, the teacher or program...this link leads to a detailed article on ma bu, with some interesting points I think. It's one detailed perspective. I submit it in the spirit of sharing.

Respectfully...

Tim. Where are you at on all this?

I ASKED YOU A QUESTION!

Bob #2 - No you didn't.
Internalenthusiast - Thanks for sharing a very good article that not only supports my experience of tucking in but also talks about the proper alignment of the feet. Essential.

Dragonprawn: you are welcome. I suspect we share some of the same background, somewhere along the line. It's the first article I've seen that goes into such detail, save a book on Nei Kung I've got. I thought it was interesting.

Best wishes.

"tucking in helps you to lift weight "

is a half truth.At the lowest points of a FULL squat(or lower than parallel) their is a natural tendency for this to occur.However it is not intentionally implemented or strived for by any reputable lifter or coach...quite the contrary actually.

In the Olympic lifts and in many of the power lifts (deadlifts,snatches,cleans ect)one is strongly advised to iniate by 'lifting with the chest' as the lower spine region simultaneously attains a concave/slightly arched contour.

As mentioned above tell us how one "tucks" in the "tailbone".The "tailbone" is already tucked under...unless of course you are naive enough to 'seek to straighten your tailbone'

The proper term is PELVIC 'counternutation' and 'nutation.'

Where do you teach your class of counterNUTS at?

You are probably correct. I don't claim to know squat about squats. I don't weight train. But we are discussing tai chi, not weight lifting, so I think the part you deem half true still applies.

As for the tailbone part, I find so far that in online discussions different people have many (often complex) ways of describing the anatomical and physical properties of their tai chi. For that matter, I don't even normally say tailbone.

The problem here, I guess is that we cannot demonstrate what exactly we are doing. This is probably why someone asked earlier if everyone using the word tuck had the same meaning.

I have been posting here to share info that has helped me. If it hadn't I wouldn't be talking about it. I am also trying to be open minded about what others are doing. Good tai chi with enthusiastic practitioners only seems to exist in isolated pockets here and there, which is why I find the potential of this message board so appealing.

On that note, maybe someone could tell me why there haven't been many posts lately. Is it a summer vacation thing?

I don't know if it's OK to say where I teach or train.

Dragonprawn,
I've written quite a bit on my views of alignment on the board before (you can use the 'keyword search' if you are interested). I don't believe in using force to rotate the pelvis backward or in using force to 'flatten' the lower back (tucking). The Internal arts (as I learned them) are based on developing the natural power of the body (it might be helpful to look at a small child, the natural curves of the back are perfect and obvious). Forcing the body into unnatural postures I believe will only result in the ability to produce less force. I agree that from the neutral position, sometimes the back will arch (when sprawling for example, or lifting a heavy weight) and sometimes it will round (when rolling for example)so there is a degree of flexibility. But only if you are free on the excess tension created by attempting to force the natural alignment of the back into unnatural positions.

Finally, I'm not so arrogant as to assume I know more about 'correct' alignment than nature. Whether the natural curves in the spine were put there by God or evolution, they are there are
for a reason.

The squat analogy doesn't apply to you. I looked at your picture, you have a dozen legs.

Walter,

Because you made fun of me in the Flame room, I checked out your old posts to see if you were a laywer waiting to be sued. I found your responses in the May "To tuck or not to tuck" thread, which reminds me of a book I recently got my paws on.

The author remarked that the old "tail bone" adjustment was not discussed in the later stage of Wang Xiangzhai's teaching, it was replaced with the adjustment of "waist", whose relaxation is crucial to the connnection between the upper and lower body. The part I am stucked is one of the training methods, it recommends one lean back your buttocks a little as if they are sitting on a stool with missing legs, the muscle of the buttocks open outward as if fish gills open up at two sides...

How would you interpret this text? Is this opening up a result or something one can "ask" the body to do? Anybody with insight are welcomed to shine your lights on this subject.