hm…lion raving dragon. j/k
haha =)
actually I have a question about Cheng style Ba gua.
What are the form names?
I’m starting dragon system of yin style and its like
<animal essence> <attack style> <primary animal>
<lion> <pushing> <dragon>
I admit, good examples are hard to find, since it’s such a general statement that systems are one thing or another or both. But wouldn’t you agree that Chen tai chi is more of a sideways fighting system than say, Hsing-I? Or are you agreeing that centerline concept is more complex in bagua, Hsing-I or tai chi, than just a 2 dimensional line that runs up and down your opponents body?
well…
Tai Chi always strives to attack the “center”
and any attack must follow a “line”
so it could be said that there is a “centerline” theory of attack
however, this is different from what I have seen of things like WC which maybe would be better termed “front centerline” as they seem to enter from the front.
whatever angle the opponent is viewed from there is always a center, and it is this concept that is central to Taiji and Bagua. There is also the idea of “hiding one’s center” to prevent it from being attacked.
I guess the big difference is the emphasis on striking versus throwing/pushing/pulling
on the topic of the thread
the way I deal with someone attacking my “centerline” is to move it.
I think Bagua is supremely adapted to this type of defense.
i.e. don’t be there
I think in Taiji the goal is not to “guard” the centerline but actually bring the opponent in toward the centerline. When he arrives the centerline is no longer there. Its like he walked straight toward a revolving door, thought that he would hit the center post that the door revolves around but found himself on the other side…still on the outside of the door.
In order to do this you have to be able to relax and actually bring your opponent closer, all the time being aware of where he is at.
In Taiji you are never really “inside” you are always outside of the center.
I believe people misconstrue the centerline aspect of wing chun.
yes you attack the center but not necessarily straight on it can be attacked from an angle, also chain punching is pretty basic but for some reason people really like it or like to talk about it. I practice wing chun and other things as well
I would say versus tai chi or xing yi the man with better footwork and ability of his particular style should take it, wing chun just has some things that are very easy for someone of little skill to execute and get over on somebody by over whelming them that wont work so good on somebody of moderate ability.
Why is all the footwork of the wooden man ignored? OR the evasiveness it implies, or the redirection for when trying to dive right in doesnt work.
Count:
“But wouldn’t you agree that Chen tai chi is more of a sideways fighting system than say, Hsing-I?”
I dont know how to answer that because I am not really well versed enough in the workings of Xingyiquan to compare. Further, Taijiquan that I trained has sideways, straight, round, and all kinds of others methods of approach/attack. It depends on skill and preference of course.
“…Or are you agreeing that centerline concept is more complex in bagua, Hsing-I or tai chi, than just a 2 dimensional line that runs up and down your opponents body?”
Again, hard to compare without enough knowledge, I was not clear that this was the limit of the cneterline idea in something like wingchun?? If so, well yes Taijiquan centerline ideology is very complex. Basically Taijiquan, you guard, change, manipulate, fake, and attack many different levels, and “dimension” centerline. its plain physics really regarding centerline. I dont know that “centerline systems” are all that simple, but if they are, the simple ones are quite important to master as well in Taijiquan. This is why, regardless of which version of centerline we discuss, in my experience Taijiquan is still a very obvious and intended “centerline system”.
Peace All
After reading these post and giving it some thought, I realized that the centerline doesn’t apply to bagua in the same sense as you guys are seeing it. Ba-Gua attacks the side and back doors from our center. Using Xing-I as an example, it’s strikes are lined up with the nose or heart depending on the teacher, as they plow through you.
Ba-Gua’s core posture doesn’t line up that way at all. Power is derived from the waist while moving. The Yin style piercing palm moves through the center, but that’s with a foreward attack.
Moving makes the difference. On a straight line, Xing-I’s nose, foot and strike fall on the centerline as ya’ll call it. The same applies to Yin style Ba-Gua. Cheng style’s turning waist doesn’t allow for a standard centerline because it’s always changing.
(In the past, ba gua don’t use the term “bridge”. “Bridge” is widely used by southern styles. Perhaps ba gua adopted it at later stage.)
Both Ba-Gua and Xing-I have the Bridge. The term Might be southern, but this method has always been apart of these arts. How else can you push an opponent and remain relaxed?
I’ve got more to write, but I’ve got to go.
Until next time
Peace
Maoshan