Originally Posted by
cjurakpt
IMHO actively tucking is a huge misunderstanding pervasive in the world of taiji; you also see a lot of Okinawan stylists do it with explanations ranging from "just because" to "it makes the spine stronger"; unfortunately, this makes no sense biomechanically / neuromuscularly; fortunately, we can use information from the field of biomechanics to help us understand various postural concepts as they relate to FUNCTIONAL spine usage;
first off, the spine (and pelvis) are never static, so the idea of assuming and holding one position makes no sense - this holds even if you are doing static standing (zhang zhuan), because unless you stop breathing, you will have spinal movement because the way that the respiratory diaphragm, pelvic diaphragm, and even the pedal diaphragms work will require a "compensatory" spinal motion with every breath; not to mention the automatic vestibular system function vis a vis anti-gravity postural muscle function
2nd, as far as how to organize the spine, the old time osteopaths had the term "easy flexion", which denotes a spine that is aligned, but not rigid; it's like a spring that is in the mid-range of it's excursion; this allows a responsiveness in the spine that keeps it "lively" and able to adapt to multi-directional forces that may challenge it; conversely, when you tuck the tailbone, you are essentially creating a posterior pelvic tilt, which is a relatively less mobile position of the pelvis relative to hips and lumbar spine (the two structures with which it articulates on a boney level); as such, you loose the ability to have a full-body mediated postural response, and will end up using muscles like hamstrings to orient in gravity, which is inefficient and imprecise; furthermore, a tuck also increases relative hip extension, which has the exact opposite effect of "sung kwa", which is what happens when you have a slight anterior pelvic tilt / relative increase in hip flexion which creates a "softening" of the kwa (inguinal crease / loins), and allows, among other things, relative less impedance of ground reaction force up the kinetic chain - which is the force you initiate by inhalation (respiratory diaphragm descends; ground reaction force responds), which is what you use to "float" the connective tissue matrix (FYI - TC Bob has some very nice ways of qualifying this experience as does Scott B. [I admit grudgingly, my abject hatred of him notwithstanding])
the "point" of good spinal alignment is that it creates, among other things, a relative ideal situation within which the pelvic, abdominal and thoracic viscera can be pumped by the various diaphragms that abut them, in order to enhance clearance of lymphatic fluid and venous blood; the challenge is that it occurs in gravity, with all the organs predisposed to hanging down on top of each other (as opposed to quadrupeds, who don't have organ ptosis, prolapse or loading stress on a vertical spine)
the "secret"to start with good principles, and then pay attention to what is happening - probably you shouldn't do anything that feels wrong, although if your sense of your body in space is skewed, you may not be able to make that assessment alone at the beginning;
Reply With Quote
A central idea in WCK is "sinking." Sinking involves lowering the center of gravity. But to stay mobile, this should be done on a forward vector and not straight downward. This is much easier to do with the weight on K1 than with the weight on the heels. One should sink with the knees converging and the center of gravity going towards a point approximately two feet out in front of you. This is a key feature of Robert Chu's "structure test." This also increases your "forward pressure", because you are already moving forward without even moving your feet. Keeping the weight back on the heels encourages one to do the dreaded "Wing Chun slouch." The K1 point is not the ball of the foot, but it is considered more as a zone or region. The actual point of weight distribution is going to vary between K1, ball of the foot, more over the arch, etc. What counts is what you are using as your baseline "balance point" as Kenton mentions. As I have pointed out earlier, there is a significant biomechanical difference between using K1 as your baseline balance point vs. using the heel as your baseline balance point.
