Pestle and Mortar??

[goliath]

I am pretty familiar with how this looks with in the Chen Style. Does it have a martial application though. If it does can you describe the best you can?

or take a picture :)

[Sandus]

The step at the end makes for a pretty fair stomp. There's also a low forward strike in the middle. Not sure if there's anything else going on there, but probably. As a general rule, I don't look too hard for martial applications in the forms, mostly because it becomes distracting.

[goliath]

hmm, okay thanks.

[noblenicky]

If you want to look for applications, look for the directions of the waist, and the limbs can vary.

- low kick instead of stomp
- Wrist lock by right hand and lift opponent's elbow by left hand
- sweep when you are close to opponent

Dont look for applications. Just focus on doing the form until you can gain whole body connection. Learning a taiji form is different to learning a karate/taekwondo katas.

[goliath]

Dont look for applications. Just focus on doing the form until you can gain whole body connection. Learning a taiji form is different to learning a karate/taekwondo katas.

Not sure I agree with you there.:) Our teacher encouraged applicative thinking while doing the Yang Style form... From my experience this helped me learn technique a whole lot easier. As well as teach me how to look at things a lil different.

[noblenicky]

Interesting. I am sure your teacher has a valid point.

From my experience this helped me learn technique a whole lot easier.

Hmm... does this mean when you do the form you focus on learning techniques? The question itself sounds strange, but in my studies, I would focus a lot more about doing the form correctly, and not breaking peng jing in every move (let alone breaking, there are some moves that I have difficulty holding to connect).

How much do you ration your focus between applicative thinking and trying to retain peng jing connection?

In my stage of learning at the moment, connecting seems to be a more important point (and maybe focus on applicative thinking later). And as I said in the first place, I'm sure your teacher has a valid point.

[daftyman]

I have found that 'applications' of the various postures can help people to visualise what is happening for that particular posture. They are able to see 'why' they move in that way.

The problem, for me, comes when this goes too far. It is a visualisation aid. The applications can be pretty obscure and the chances of ever being able to use them are so incredible small.

Of course, others don't need this and just get on with the body mechanics and the structure and connectedness.

To each their own.

[Guo_Xing_Yi]

From the initial step forward you're dissolving a forward blow to your right side as you step forward with your left foot. As you finish the dissolve, transferal of weight onto left leg brings about a nice tidy smack to the nuts. Opponents head drops (assuming that the smack connected), and remaining stomp/backfist is a blow to back of the head, and a quick root to regain balance.

-=Or=-

Failing that, the smack didnt connect, in which case the hand continues upward into an upper cut, with stomp to opponents leg in order to regain balance.

-=Or=-

Failing that, you step in really deeply, didnt connect with smack to nuts, left hand goes behind opponent, right hand distracts upward (fake/real) uppercut, and backfist to top of head, and PUSH forward using hips from stomp to make opponents spine collapse backward.

[goliath]

gack! so the nuts are between the pestle and the mortar? [cringes]

Hmm... does this mean when you do the form you focus on learning techniques? The question itself sounds strange, but in my studies, I would focus a lot more about doing the form correctly, and not breaking peng jing in every move (let alone breaking, there are some moves that I have difficulty holding to connect).


I read this and it sounds insulting..... your not insulting me are you? i am just checking... i am a lil sensitive lately, so I thought I would ask rather then assume. I am not really sure what you mean by connecting. If you mean Chi connections I never had a problem with that.

Vamp Rat hit the nail on the head and said what i was trying to say. It is a visual key.

How much do you ration your focus between applicative thinking and trying to retain peng jing connection?

that's up to the individual :) balance is different for everyone.

[noblenicky]

No, I think you (Goliath) are just a little too sensitive. I dont mean any disrespect.

Vampyre, I was meaning to say 'connected', but I said peng instead because I have read several opinions describing connected as peng. I shall now move away from this description if it causes everybody confusion. Connected. yes... :bang:

Everyone to their own balance. Cheers to that.

[nzric]

Remember that the movements should be distinctive in themselves. It's only at an advanced level that the movements should seem to blend into each other.

There's always an element of connectedness because often the beginning of one move is also the end of another, but it's not a good idea to string movements together "just because". Also, holding a movement can be a useful form of training - for the qigong posture (e.g. seven stars) and also to test your balance/conditioning throughout the transition of the move (esp. twisting moves e.g. single whip/brush knee).

Goliath - you'll find that people differ a lot in their training (as Vamp Rat said, different strokes for different folks). If someone makes a comment on your training method they aren't necessarily criticising. They may be giving advice or just coming from a different training pov.

Visualisation is great. I find it much easier to learn a movement by thinking "I'm deflecting his strike then twisting his head like this...", then to only focus on the movement itself instead of the application once you're doing the form

[Rubberband_man]

Tai Chi was at one time THE martial art in China, it has degraded for many reasons but is coming back. One I like for Mortar and Pestle is the full nelson with an optional shot to the back of occipital.