Common Tai Chi Mistakes: Low Stance Equals Sinking

[@ragemydream]

VERY WELL ARTICULATED. THANKS

[@nichalausrook2397]

Thanks, I'll keep this in mind while I'm doing my practice ❤

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

You're welcome. Hope it helps

[@arunachalampalani4321]

Very well explained based on your experience. Really appreciate your time, effort and passion.

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

Thank you. I appreciate your support

[@darengrosman6121]

Great explanation of a subtle potentially misunderstood concept thanks for posting

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

You're welcome. Glad you got something from it.

[@TrainKungFu]

Good explanation

[@ivistaiji7644]

I'm not sure your assumption about how a deep stance is used in Taijiquan is correct.

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

Hello, @ivistaiji7644. Thank you for your comment. I'm not sure what assumption you feel I've made. I've observed that some practitioners seem to conflate lowering their stance/center of gravity with the concept of sinking. I don't mean to deter people from deep stance work, merely to clarify that a deep stance isn't the same as sinking. Regards and Happy New Year, Grant

[@ivistaiji7644]

@@DarsanaMartialArts I have the feeling that you are not differentiating the two things but rather separating them and completely ruling out that they could be linked to each other in any way, directly or indirectly.

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

Okay, ivistaiji7644. I can understand you feeling that way. It wasn't my intention to rule out a connection between the two. There are many ways in which I think sinking and lowering one's stance can be related. For example, the joints must be opened for sinking to occur. This requires some "sitting" down into the stance to open the kua, etc. That said, a low stance does not produce sinking - at least not in the way that I understand and use the term. A person can have a low stance and not be sinking at all. I've personally worked with practitioners who struggled with differentiating these two concepts. That was what I was trying to convey. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

[@ivistaiji7644]

@@DarsanaMartialArts fair enough...I always wonder if new information presented to the public will result in more enlightenment or more confusion for the general public. How many people do you think could now come to the conclusion that low postures and transitions at low level are not good for 'sinking' at all and that this can only be achieved by standing in a high standing position? in the other hand there are a number of schools that initially work through 'fang song'.

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

@ivistaiji7644 I really don't think that mutual exclusivity is the general conclusion to be drawn from this video. That said, I do want people to come away understanding that sinking is not dependent on a low stance, and a low stance, particularly if conflated with sinking or rooting, can become an impediment to releasing and sinking. I think the video communicates that clearly. Perhaps I'll make a video in the future covering the role of low stances in training. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. Regards, Grant

[@piehound]

Being rooted or not rooted happens only in comparison with your opponent. If you uproot him then you were rooted and he wasn't. Other definitions are questionable. It's a zero sum game.

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

Hello @piehound. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. If I understood you correctly, you are saying that being rooted only exists in the presence of another person, and then, only when your root proves superior. Perhaps it depends on how you define the term "rooted." To me, rootedness can be roughly defined as a measure of one's capacity to conduct force to and from the ground, and being rooted is a state produced by that capacity. That said, the term "rooted" is widely used in the martial arts community, and I don't imagine that my way of using it is universal or the only right way. Below, I simply offer some thoughts from my perspective for your consideration... To me, being rooted is a description of a physical state one is in, or perhaps, a physical quality one possesses (rootedness). Of course, any quality one might posses, such as strength, or any state one is in, such as being stable, is subject to differing degrees, and therefore, may be possessed in greater or lesser measure by different individuals. In a given instance of comparison, one might be said to be more or less strong, or more or less stable than the person they are being compared to, but that difference in degree does not negate the existence of the qualities one may posses or the states one may be in. They exist independent of someone else to compare them to. They also exist independent of a measuring test - such as one person trying to uproot another. A pyramid structure, for example, can be said to have stability independent of any force applied to test how stable it is. If a force is able to knock it over, it isn't any less possessing of the quality of stability. It merely did not possess enough stability to withstand that particular force. I believe the same can be said for being rooted. Furthermore, we can identify components that contribute to the sate of being rooted, or the quality of rootedness, and design training methods to develop them, training methods which do not require the presence of a partner. I might even say that that is what much of classical martial arts training is. Forms, static postures, and a variety of solo exercises are designed precisely to develop such qualities as rootedness or the ability to produce such states as being rooted. Let me say that none of this is meant to deny the importance of partner practice in the development of rootedness and other body qualities. Partners provide what might be the most crucial means of testing the qualities we develop in solo practice. Of course, this line of thought is entirely based upon the way I use the term "rooted," which may differ from the way others use it. Hopefully, this is taken in the spirit that it is offered, the friendly sharing of thoughts among fellow practitioners on the path. Regards, Grant

[@piehound]

@@DarsanaMartialArts generally I appreciate folks who can use their minds and words. Discussion and negotiation are preferable to violence as tools to accomplish anything of value. And philosophy can sometimes be enjoyable for its own sake. But my original interest in Tai Chi was for so called self - defense. Some call it " fighting." Unfortunately by the time a confrontation has become physical . . . spoken words are quite useless. And that includes text. Seems to me no amount of intellectual theory can be a satisfactory substitute for actual push - hands practice. My goal is to be able to neutralize physical attacks. Ergo i have no need to overdo the theoretical aspects of Tai Chi theory. Thx. Unless of course teaching that way is your bag. Then be happy with it.

[@johndough8115]

@@piehound Imagine trying to push a heavy arcade cabinet... vs... a block of very flexible silicone/jello, of the same size. Its easy to move the Arcade cabinet... because of how Rigid it is. However, when you try to push into the block of silicone... the entire thing flexes and absorbs your push energy... without sliding its base. Just like trying to kick a very flexible branch... doesnt harm / break the branch... no matter how hard you kicked it. This is what true Grounding is. Its the ability to unify your entire "RELAXED" body mass... as if its a bag of Jello like material. When you tighten your muscles... it locks the Skeletal structure, and that creates stiffness that can be exploited by the OP. Its like giving them a lever, to be able to easily move you with. When you relax you muscles... using only relaxed mass... your entire structure becomes so flexible and absorbent, that the OP cant actually move your base. At this point... you are using your flexing Tendons, to collect and store their energy... and you can release it like a BOW... sending them flying (if being NICE was your intent). I also dont work via "Theory". Most of my training is in Wing Chun. However, some of that WC training, also included slow motion form work, which are similar to Tai Chi internal development methods (WC uses a more simplified version of the same technology). I also did try a few push hand drills. As well as Mastered Fajin expression (both Push and Impact versions). I tell people, that one of the common mistakes when trying to do Tai Chi forms... is being too stiff / tight. The secret to internal development... is to relax all of your muscles... to the point where your body is just about to fall to the ground. You want just barely enough... to hold your body and limbs, upright / level. This causes a LOT more strain on your Joints... especially when doing the minimum 1hr long sessions. That long session joint stress, causes the development of "Super Tendons" (among many other developments). However... if you are using too much muscle power to keep your limbs and body up... then your tendons are never going to be stressed enough to develop... in the proper Internal way. Also, being partially stiffened.. you tend to cause parts of the body mass, to not be fully "Unified". I have 31 yrs of experience, spanning many different arts. This includes countless heavy/full contact fights, against many different fighters, from many different artforms. The teacher is on the right track... Its just that his descriptions could use a little more definition, for better clarity.

[@DarsanaMartialArts]

Hello, @johndough8115. Thank you for sharing this clear, accurate, and thorough explanation of what grounding/rooting is, how it conducts force to and from he ground, and how to practice in order to develop it. I think anyone interested in this topic would benefit from reading it. Regards, Grant

[@piehound]

@@johndough8115 YOU imagine trying to push a heavy arcade cabinet. I've got enough heavy things in my life. Thank you very much.