[QUOTE=Liddel;736396]
First i notice when opening the form, your horse is the same as the YGKYM in SLT. IMHO it should be wider apart, you look high and therefore not ‘AS’ stable as you could be with a slightly lower horse. This also has an effect on the horse power you can add to your actions.[/QUOTE]
I use a precise position of heel width to define my stance for both SLT and CK, that is the width of the shoulders to the inside of the heels of the stance, it relates to the position of the centre on gravity and the ability to push off the heel, in Biu Gee the stance is more relaxed and natural.
Stances in my view are simply there to understand how you can use the legs and to become aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the structures that you form when using energy from the point of contact to the floor.
How I apply knowledge of the legs is different from the strict nature of the developing understanding of the legs, to be dynamic with the legs you first have to become aware of how they operate.
[QUOTE=Liddel;736396]Secondly - its a bit robot like, it should be more natural and flowing IMO.[/QUOTE]
I agree, but what I try to do is de-personalise the forms, to make them more mechanical so that any individual can see exact positions and movements from one technique to another, I leave it to the student to personalise the forms for themselves.
My intention is to create a skeleton of structure and function that each individual adds their own flesh. I see the forms as having two main purposes, first as a catalogue of movements to help a student remember them all and how the energies can be applied (not strictly from the form as if you try to apply techniques as they appear in the form they do not work!) and secondly so that the teacher can observe and see that the student has understood what they have been taught.
[QUOTE=Liddel;736396]Finally, the Dai Bong’s in the third section are totally devoid of Yu Ma Lik. You put out the Dai Bong then after applying the action, you step foward.
IMO this is too late. In other words there is a moment where the bong is not supported.[/QUOTE]
I see the most important energy from this section as understanding the straight driving twitch energy of the leg which I relate to the Biu Ma, rather than the turning twitch energy, Huen Ma, of the first section, by separating the arms from the legs the student can become aware of this muscle action and practice its use rather than remain ‘hand/arm orientated’, once learned it then links to becomes a natural part of every technique.
[QUOTE=Liddel;736396]Now if you were to use this against a comming action, when your Bong Connected with the attack it would be without body/horse force at the point of contact, which is IMO the most important time for any action to have body support.
Just for comparison, i step my front foot foward a half pace and as i apply my double Dai Bong i step up with the back foot adding support and force in the hands. The work together. Now combined with the turning/tourqe like action of the Bongs forearm, you can generate much more power to disolve any action you connect with.
[/QUOTE]
When talking application rather than form I again agree with you but what I try to achieve in the forms is the isolation of the various muscle groups that generate energy, understand their use and develop awareness of them individually and learn via chi sau and application how they come together through experience in contact with an opponent.
I understand what you are saying as well as appreciate the comments, I take on board your views, this video (chopped for youtube) was done simply for my students some years ago, when I get around to producing ‘professional’ footage I will attempt to address many more issues while keeping it as staightforward as possible.
anyway i totally agree with you that if the student can understand what their doing and why and these things conform with the key principles of wc then thats all that matters ..