Hi there all,
Tim, Still loving this site BTW.

I have been having fun with this idea for awhile now. Just wanted to mull it over with you guys.

It relates to turning the centre.

Many schools of martial arts teach that power comes from the waist or that power is directed from the waist. Funny thing is though, that I have come across quite a few (what I consider to be) high level guys, hardly turning their centres at all. I have encountered both Hsing Yi and Tai Ji teachers that seem not to be using their waists.

After discovering the whipping effect of turning the centre one way and then the other, I was pleasently inspired by being told to hold the centre still when striking. Remembering that old maxim "masters look like beginners", I played with whittling down my waist action untill my waist moved less and less, then practically not at all.

Moreover, I realized that by conducting the trajectory of my arm/fist just across my centre line, I could compensate for the lack of centre motion, to produce a tighter whip to my strikes.

This led me to investigate movements where the arms move away from the centre line to the sides of the body. I discovered that I could gain as much, if not more, power to my strikes by increasing the speed of my arms relative to my centre turn, so that at a certain point it felt as if my centre was motionless. It still produces a whippy effect, but now, by adjusting the speed of my arms relative to my center turn, I can project the same amount of power in any direction whether turning my centre left or right.

God I hope this makes sense!!

Anyway, the clarity feels wonderful. Tim, I beleive this is called "stillness in motion".

From a tactical veiw point, at close range, not turning the centre, but facing an opponent square on, requires less time and distance for multiple striking. On the other hand, from a greater distance, having the centre turned away from the lead hand is more advantages in terms of reach and reduction of target area.

Mind you, thats just striking. For stand up grappling or throws any position seems to have potential.

Which brings me to a question, for Tim or anyone who has researched this area. In ground fighting ( of which I have minimal experience) is this concept of centre/stillness in motion utilized, or is it mainly leverage and weight play?

Any comments on this question or the above gratfully received.


Wind walker

Hi Windwalker,
In most martial arts, movements are practiced bigger at first and then smaller (more compact) later. Once your body is aligned correctly into a kind of linked unit, a small move in the center will produce a big move at the terminus (usually the hands). Just like a whip, the momentun is generated at the handle, but the handle must stop completely in order to produce a crack at the end of the whip (stillness in motion). Masters of the whip can produce an extremely forceful pulse and resultant crack at the end of the whip with a very small movement of the handle. The same goes for high level martial artists.

In ground fighting, the center is very important, and the degree of control of one's hip movement is a big (if not the biggest) difference between an advanced grappler and a novice.Often times the hips are adjusting independently of the arms to control the opponent's center while the arms set up submissions. But the power of the center is still important in all techniques. Power can flow from the center pressure without the center actually moving in space (just like force flows continually outward in isometric exercises, even though the body appears to be still).

In addition to turning, power can also generated in the vertical plane by compression/expansion of the waist and hip joints.
Tim's comments are applicable in this case too.

BTW, I always thought that "stillness in motion"
describes the desired state of practitioner's mind. Is it used for the description of physical aspects of the training too?

I thought it was "Stillness Emotion"
meaning not fearing death nor caring if you killed your opponent or training partner.

I'd go crazy if such asinine things bothered me.

Bob #2,

> I'd go crazy if such asinine things bothered me.

Thank you for appreciating the difficulty of the task

Thanks for your comments,

Wolf,
I think the term "stillness in motion" can be
applied to a number of things. As Tim has stated, the crack of the whip, or as he explained in his book on throws, relative stillness between you and your opponent. Also, as you say, the almost meditative state of mind during practice. I also like the interpretation of having the body working so well that there is no waisting or blocking of energy, that produces a feeling of stillness.

Like alot of the so called classics, there is usually more than one meaning to be found. Take "not allowing a surface for your opponent to land on" for instance. This can mean to yield to oncoming force, or to dodge and weeve, or at touch, to rotate the limbs and or body.

Alot of folks I have spoken to seem to dismiss these writings as too vauge, secretive and ambiguous. I am more of the mind that they are great tools for investigation into the study of martial arts.