Single weightedness?

[Polaris]

Well, Bart Saris is the most famous European student of Ma Jiang-bao, which makes him orthodox Wu style, and has the reputation of being a good, friendly teacher. This means his lineage comes through the Shanghai branch of the Chien-ch'uan T'ai Chi Ch'uan Association. Not all disciples of the Wu family are listed on wustyle.com, but there is a link to the Shanghai branch on the wustyle.com site. Sifu Eddie Wu Kuang-yu will definitely know who he is.

[Wushuer]

Polaris,
Thank you. I had wondered why I did not know that name, as I know most of the major Wu style players on this (American) continent at least by their names. Most I have met.
I bow to Ma Jiang-bau as a direct lineage holder of the Wu family. His students would surely be knowledgable practicioners.
Can I go against what my Sifu told me directly? No, I cannot.
Would anyone here?

I am in total agreement with Ron about movement from the hip and being single weighted, in the context of Wu style it is the way things are done. While practicing Wu family TCC I perform in this fashion. This type of movement defines what I do, I do not simply move this way when I practice, I move this way at all times...
EXCEPT when I practice YCF style TCC. Then I move in the manner I have learned from my instructor and as set forth in his books and through his videos by YZD. To do otherwise would be disrespectful of YZD and consequently his ancestors.
I would not dream of trying to convice students of YZD that his or YZJ's forms are incorrect TCC.
I hope Ron is not either.
Let us not forget, if it weren't for the Yang family, the Wu family would not have TCC in the first place.
The Yang family must have some idea what they are doing. Wouldn't you say?

Ron,
I got a bit testy in my last posts. I apologize to you.
It appeared as if you were being a bit disrespectful of the Yang family and their style of TCC not to mention Sifu Eddie. While I welcome differing opinions (how could I not? Just look at this forum, I am from the same basic background as you, Wu style, and have been constantly amazed at the differences) I am not one to whom you can disrespect the Masters without my getting a bit testy.
I was pleasantly surprised to see your posts here backing me up on the method of movement practiced in Wu family TCC. Especially as your anatomical knowledge and your ability to express these theories goes way beyond mine. I have mentioned before that the knowledge I possess of Wu style came from strict hands on learning. My Sifu's did not go much into theory, they simply told us "Here, do it just like this" and then showed us exactly what to do, then made sure we did it that way.
So while I could show anyone how to practice Wu style, I taught beginners for a long time and have several disciples and many senior students of the Wu family who took their original form and push hands instruction from me, I have not the words to express their theories in such clarity.
Please forgive me if I have been less than respectful towards you. My only defense is that I am touchy when I perceive disrespect towards the masters.
I will do my best to moderate my posts in future.


[This message has been edited by Wushuer (edited 05-22-2003).]

[RonKreshmar]

Hi Wushuer,

I wasn't backing you up re the hips in Wu style. Wu style leans, flexes their pelvis.
Can you imagine what that might do to a helpless spine. Especially if you twist it at the same time.

Anyways, don't worry about putting the twist back in.

Bart Saris has found it hidden under his master's big belly.

Here's what he says:

"A last example of how things sometimes happen concerning the turning of the waist, comes from my own experience.

Before becoming a student of master Ma Jiang-Bao and the original Wu style, I had been practicing Cheng Man-Ching's simplified Yang form for some 5 years. At that time Ma Jiang-Bao, Wu Chian-Chuan's grandson, was still teaching in Düsseldorf, Germany. Until then people like Benjamin Lo and William Chen had been my t.c.c. role models. In the Yang style version they practice, the archery stance is an upright one and the body from the hips upward is moved as one whole under the slogan "turn, don't twist". The shoulders always have to be on the same plane as the hips, so I was taught.

During the first almost 2 years that I followed master Ma's lessons, I did not even notice the difference in the way he moved! Though he would frequently mention during instruction that "the waist" had to be turned, which meant that the upper body had to be turned by twisting in the waist area, I automatically translated that for myself into "turn hips plus upper body". Of course Wu style t.c.c. did not feel very comfortable as a consequence! When he showed the movements, the fact that I changed them into something entirely different escaped my attention completely. Apart from my having been wrongly programmed, there were two other reasons for this. First of all, master Ma is a fairly large and above all sturdily built person with a big belly, behind which the turning in the waist area is partly hidden. Besides, it is not the case that, while twisting in the waist area, the hip area is forced to be immobile. It rather loosely follows the rest of the body. In the movements the twisting of the waist area functions within the sequence "hand-trunk-foot/weight". Taken together it was difficult for my biased eye to see exactly what happened. Also the issue did not have master Ma's special attention at that moment, because of the way he structures his lessons."

Now, it appears, we have the hands leading the body.

So, many ways to do it and so many ways to arrive at the right one.

The master's clearly don't say do it anyway you like, do they?

So, when different masters do it differently, who do you wish to follow?

What did you conclude from looking at Chen Fake?

Take care,

Ron

[Wushuer]

Ron,
The pictures are blurred to the point of uselessness for accurate viewing. I got nothing from them.
So....?
You do not practice Wu style, as they lean and turn their pelvis, ruining their backs. You do not practice Yang style, as they turn their upper torso and ruin their backs.
Which style do you practice?

Who do I listen to when faced with conflicting advice?
First and foremost I listen to Sifa Wu Tai Sin. Previous to him I listened to Sifa Wu Yan Hsia. Sifu Wu Kwong Yu (Eddie) was my teacher along with Sifu Stephen Britt. These were my first teachers and I bow to them.
Since I am too far away from Sifu to follow his training any longer I now listen to Grandmaster Yang Zhen Duo, who I have not met but as he is the master of my school I follow his advice through his books and my center director. Master Yang Jun, his grandson, would also be listened to with no hesitation on my part. In fact I'm sincerely hoping to attend a seminar with Master Yang Jun this summer to further learn how to ruin my back.
As these masters all agree that each of them is perfectly capable of teaching me legitimate TCC and have no quarrels with each others methods, and between them have many lifetimes of TCC training and experience, I have no problem following their instructions and no fears of being lead down the wrong path.

I think I'll go lean, twist my pelvis and turn my upper body in improper ways for a while.
What can I say? I'm a glutton for punishment.

[Polaris]

R.K. & W.,

The report on Ma Jiang-bao is interesting. The Hong Kong Wu style doesn't emphasize turning from the waist at all. At first, their torsos stay unitary and all movement is led from different combinations of the ball and socket joints in the hips. Later, there is a limited flexion in the torso, but only from top to bottom, not side to side, even in the Lotus kicks. There are "openings" in the shoulders which certainly make it appear as if the upper back has moved relative to the pelvis, but that is an illusion based on the fact that they can extend their shoulders and arms quite a ways away from their spine. The Hong Kong Wu style has gotten the nickname of "Long Arm" T'ai Chi Ch'uan as a result of their work on these extensions.

So we see that even within the same style there are profound differences. As for the question of who you should believe, that is personal. Even though other established styles may train somewhat differently, they are still worthy of respect for their accomplishments. One has to find a school which is established and reliable, and suits your temperament. There are old stories of how tough Yang Lu-ch'an, Yang Pan-hou, Yang Shao-hou or Wu Ta-kuei were, roughing up and routinely injuring their students; then there are stories of how much more relatively gentle Yang Ch'eng-fu, Wu Chien-ch'uan or Ma Yueh-liang were. It is up to your fate in the end, I suppose.

P.

[Wushuer]

Polaris,
I think we're hearing from someone who comes from the Ma Yueh-ling lineage, which has some other style mixed in, though I cannot remember what style Master Ma was a master of previous to learning Wu Chien Chuans forms.
Every master who "came over" from another style brings some of their old style with them. I would imagine Yang Lu Chan did the same, though I am probably speaking sacriledge by saying that.
Any "differences" between the Hong Kong schools and the North American schools are probably less than you would imagine. The differences seem to come in mostly between the Wu schools of Wu Chien Chuan and Ma Yueh-ling lineages.
I know when we had a visit by a WCC Academy from the Phillipines we found a lot of "differences" that when you boiled them down turned out to be different emphasyses on applications of the same form. Done one way you emphasised one martial application, done another you emphasised a different application with what was the same basic form.
These "differences" were superficial, the basic form was the same. We were both Wu Chien Chuan descended schools though.
I have never seen the Ma Yeuh-ling-Wu form, so I cannot speak to it intelligently, therefore would be remiss in commenting.

My back is surely all twisted up beyond repair now. I ran through the Wu family fast form and the YCF 13 posture form while on my break.
Funny, my back feels better instead of worse.

[JerryKarin]

Ron,

You are skirting the edge of an area which will get you kicked off the board again. Please review Yang Jun's message: http://www.yangfamilytaichi.com/ubb/Forum14/HTML/000004.html
We require that posters on this board show respect for all teachers and won't hesitate to ban anyone who can't manage that.

Take care,

Jerry

[RonKreshmar]

Hi Polaris, Wushuer,

Re the Hong Kong style, this is what Saris had to say in the context of being nasty to Jou for disrespecting the Hong Kong branch.

"By the way, when only twenty years old, Wu Gong-Yi was already leading the martial arts department of the most important military academy of those days in China. There was a good reason for that too. Apart from all this, he changed and modified his father's form somewhat according to his own views, to make t.c.c. even more accessible. For that purpose he heightened the postures considerably once again and made the movements very small and compact indeed.

Judging by the available pictures, however, it looks like he only consistently went further in the direction his father initiated, going as far as possible without impairing the art. Once landed in Hong Kong, however, he saw himself at a certain point put to the task of teaching several hundreds of persons at the same time. To be able to do this, he designed a special method for that, which later would be called "one-two-three" form or also sometimes "square" form. It was meant for didactical purposes only, to provide "basics" to be worked out at a later stage. Connectedness, roundness and fluidity had to be brought in afterwards.

Of course a number of people stopped following the lessons before arriving at that point. Some of these started passing on this didactical method as if it were Wu Kung-Yi's authentic solo form, thus causing the kind of misunderstanding that evidently mislead You Tsung Hwa too, and with him many that read his book.

Meanwhile however one must regretfully admit that Wu Kung-Yi's teaching method started to lead its own life including variants and variants on variants."

Variants on variants!

Yes, as you say " One has to find a school which is established and reliable".

This is why YZD's transmission of the YCF form is an excellent starting point for beginners.

If someone wants to learn the YCF form you will learn an accurate version of it-right down to picture proof. As a matter of fact YZD's version is even more graceful than his fathers.

Wushuer,

I never said that the way the torso is turned in the YZD or YZJ version will harm you. I'm not going to repeat myself this time, if you want you can re-read the posts carefully.

I don't do forms anymore. When I did it was through Yang Shou Zheng's line. Now I just do the feet, legs, torso, and hands.

Maybe have another look at the pictures when you are off your medication, they are not that blurry.

Take care,

Ron

[RonKreshmar]

Jerry,

At least this time you didn't contribute your bit.

What do you find offensive this time?


Ron

[Polaris]

All,

Yes, I find YZD's forms to be a quite solid representation of YCF's version of TCC. I often use quotes of YZD, things he has said in various magazine interviews as examples for my students of how a traditional, respectable teacher and practitioner will present themselves. Not just for what he says, but also exactly how he says it. Top notch all the way.

Just as there are variants of Wu Kung-yi's "square" form, there are hundreds of variants of YCF's form as well. The most famous being Cheng Man-ch'ing's. Then there are descendants of YCF's other disciples, the Fu family, the Tung family, etc.

I was just reading Saris' reply to Jou's disparagement of Wu Kung-yi's level today myself. My German isn't as good as it used to be, so I appreciate the translation! Fascinating, and Saris does make some convincing points. One thing I would quibble with is his timeline. My sources tell me that WKY was assigned the task of formulating his own teaching form in the 1920s, by Wu Chien-ch'uan and Yang Shao-hou. As I have mentioned before, Wu Kung-yi was mentored especially by Yang Shao-hou in many aspects of T'ai Chi Ch'uan as well as in the formulation of his square form. They all wanted to make sure that it would still be an accurate form for martial art while being easier for teaching large groups of people all at once. So he had to convince an impressive array of judges! This isn't as well known, but WKY also, as a result of this research, formulated several new styles of Pushing Hands as well. Wu Kung-yi's son, the 4th generation's talented Wu Ta-kuei, added his refinements in his turn, so that the present standard is somewhat different from the square form shown in the Gold Book. Wu Kuang-yu was taught the form as a child and teenager by his grandfather WKY himself, and then later his education was taken over by his father Wu Ta-kuei, so now his forms reflect both of their teaching, as well as his own personal touch.

My experience indeed is that most don't stay with the program long enough to begin to be able to accurately smooth out the Wu style square form, which remains square but even, continuous and connected if done correctly. There are also different round forms and fast forms taught in HK, but the square teaching form is taught first. Its breakdown is a handy list of the martial art applications, so it doesn't lose its utility for training purposes even after many years. Wu Kung-yi used to say that the T'ai Chi forms (not just his) were like treasure boxes - the more you pulled out of them, the more treasure you would find.

Regards,
P.

[This message has been edited by Polaris (edited 05-22-2003).]

[Louis Swaim]

Greetings Polaris,

You seem to have a good knowledge of Wu style history. I’m wondering if you could shed some light on a question. A number of years ago, a friend gave me a little book he had bought at a flea market here in California. He bought it with a bunch of other Chinese books, but had no particular interest in Taijiquan, so he gave it to me. The book is titled _Taijiquan Yanjiufa_ (study methods of taijiquan), published in Hong Kong by Jiankang Taijiquan She (good health taijiquan society). The author’s name is Wu Baoxiang, a Guangdong native, who studied several arts, including Praying Mantis, Xingyi, and Bagua, before learning Taijiquan from Wu Jianquan. The book has around 70 photos of the author’s form, 8 photos of him demonstrating push hands with Wu Jianquan, a few sword, saber, and staff photos, and some short historical, theoretical and classical texts. There’s no pub date, but my guess is that it was printed in the mid to late thirties or early forties.

Do you have any idea who Wu Baoxiang was? Are there any surviving students of his line?

Take care,
Louis

[Polaris]

Louis,

I haven't heard of Wu Baoxiang before, but the combination of arts that he studied does ring a bell. After moving to Shanghai in 1928, Wu Chien-ch'uan was appointed the supervisor of the T'ai Chi Ch'uan division of the Ching Wu Athletic Association. Ching Wu was founded in 1909 by Hou Yuan-chia, who was interested in teaching martial arts to the general public in order to strengthen the China of his day, as well as to provide a forum for the different martial arts schools to get to know each other better, to foster mutual respect. He was also dedicated to preserving the legacy of traditional Chinese martial arts for future generations. All of the styles that you mention Wu Baoxiang learning were (and are) taught at Ching Wu schools, so it is conceivable that Wu Baoxiang learned them and Wu style all at the same place.

Those pictures of the fellow practicing Push Hands with Wu Chien-ch'uan would be quite rare, of great historical interest. And presumably in the public domain, by now!

Regards,
P.



[This message has been edited by Polaris (edited 05-23-2003).]

[Louis Swaim]

Greetings Polaris,

You wrote: “Those pictures of the fellow practicing Push Hands with Wu Chien-ch'uan would be quite rare, of great historical interest. And presumably in the public domain, by now!”

Yes, they’re fascinating. They are taken out of doors, with old buildings and countryside in the background. Each is labeled, peng, lu, ji, an, cai, lie, zhou, kao. Wu Jianquan appears much as he does in other photos I’ve seen. Wu Baoxiang is rather slight in build, wearing black horn rim spectacles. Perhaps someday I’ll get a scanner so I can share them.

Take care,
Louis

[Polaris]

Louis,

Are the photos set in a small courtyard, and are we looking at the two of them Pushing Hands in front of two low (4' or so) stone walls that right angle into each other behind them? Also, are there one or two potted plants (they look like hibiscus) about the same height as the wall up against the left hand wall, as well as several smaller pots on top of the wall behind them? The fellow with the glasses should have a lighter colored shirt than WCC, and his shirt is a much lighter shade than his pants. All of WCC's clothes are dark, except for his collar and socks. In several of the photos, one or the other of them are laughing, as well.
If these things are so, then I have seen the photos. Very nice...

Cheers!
P.

[This message has been edited by Polaris (edited 05-23-2003).]

[Louis Swaim]

Greetings Polaris,

Yes. Your description matches the photos appearing in the Wu Baoxiang book.

Interesting!

Take care,
Louis