Deflecting a thousand catties with four taels

[GrahamB]

I'd agree with you, agreeing with Wayne that leverage, "doesn't really cover what we do in Tai Chi", however, the issue is what "4oz defeats a 1,000 pounds" means.

[Steve James]

Leverage is clearly one way to magnify force. With a long enough lever, you could move a thousand pound object using four ounces of force.

Can't be kinematics because that field specifically doesn't take force into consideration. Yes, it's dynamics, which includes geometry, angles, and how a force changes the motion of an object.

Fwiw, see T'ai-Chi Ch'uan: Its Effects and Practical Applications by Yearning K (YK) Chen, who was a student of Tian Zhaolin. His book is full of Newtonian explanations and diagrams. I'm sure some of the old-timers have the book.

Afa moving an object with hydraulics, that's simple. Hydraulics refers specifically to incompressible fluids (specifically oil) in solid containers. However, the human body is equally pneumatic, if not more so. But, fair enough. there are pipes carrying fluids. The problem is that the pipes and the container/s are flexible. You couldn't move a thousand pound object with four ounces if the container flexed or the oil had bubbles in it.

I don't think 'leverage' is the TCC answer because humans are much more complicated than solid objects; people aren't made of wood, metal, or stone. That said, hydraulics is wrong for the same reason. Though both are valid methods of moving objects, things like timing and sensitivity are more useful.

[Bao]

however, the issue is what "4oz defeats a 1,000 pounds" means.

Mmm... I have always understood it as using a small force to direct/redirect a big force. Simple really. And I don't understand the big fuzz.

The literal meaning of the character bo, 拨, (commonly translated to "deflect" or "defeat") is "to push aside with the hand".
So a small amount of weight moves a big amount of weight. Which means that the object must either be unstable or in motion.

The "4oz" is the subjective, it's not YOU who use the 4 oz to move 1000 pounds, it's the 4 oz that moves the 1,000 pounds. So it's pretty straightforward and there's no use of leverage or any kind of help implied in the idiom.

If you want to move something or something bigger it needs to be unbalanced or set in motion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VFVnN-Hf90

Or if necessary help out a little...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGS7rlKyKeA

[DiaitaDoc]

People seem to be against leverage as a term that applies to TaiJi. I think I’m beginning to see why…

… leverage is about more than simple balance beams, rigid levers and fulcrums.

It’s found in gear systems, pulley systems, hydraulics, pneumatics… basically most systems that apply a mechanical advantage.

Hell, it’s even used in Machiavellian ways, outside of the physical world (not my usage in this thread though).

Maybe some people dislike the term leverage because they understand it as a linear, almost static force.

Maybe some people dislike the term because it’s not sexy enough, or scholarly enough, or mystical enough.

I still say that most of TaiJi is about leverage… dynamic, adaptive leverage, not linear, static leverage.

Like in wrestling, or Judo, or Shuai Jiao or Sumo (yes I see TaiJi as primarily a throwing art).

So that’s my take on 4oz. Moving 1000lbs : adaptive leverage applied through TaiJi principles in order to destabilize and achieve control, initiative, pacing, attrition and submission of an opponent.

[Steve James]

The thing about leverage is that it isn't unique to tcc. So, it's considered by many to be 'low level.' Of course, it's low level the way Newton is low level compared to Einstein or Heisenberg.

But, most simply don't think tcc is limited to leverage, which is always about force. Is making someone miss because you moved an illustration of '4 oz v 1000' lbs? Was 4ozs used? Was it tcc if 10 ozs or 10 lbs were used?

I think the answer is whether it works, not whether it was ideal. If the opponent is stronger, what can you do? You might have trained to be strong, but the opponent is still twice as strong. In that sense, it is like the op video with the little dog taking down the bull.

[origami_itto]

As with many people, I initially learned (incorrectly) that “double weighting” had to do with our own stance/footwork. Took me a while to realize that “double weighting” is actually “double pressure”* in TaiJi.

Taiji Boxing emphasizes softness over hardness not only because of the principle that softness can overcome hardness, but mainly to keep practitioners from committing the error of “double pressure”. Some people think that “double pressure” means that both legs are supporting the weight at the same time, and so they avoid performing any horse-riding stances. This is so incorrect that it will make practitioners neurotic.
　　I will leave it up you whether you want to perform the horse-riding stances in the boxing set, since the concept of double pressure instead has to do with pushing hands.
( https://brennantranslation.wordpress.co ... -xu-zhiyi/ )

Yao FuChun & Jiang RongQiao wrote:
When someone has been training for a number of years, practicing until he is otherwise very skillful, and yet is not able to carry out neutralizations, sending out his hands only to end up under his opponent’s control, he has still not understood the error of “double pressure”. If you wish to avoid the error of double pressure, you have to understand the passive and active aspects. Passive and active means emptiness and fullness, as well as indirect and direct. When I encounter an opponent, if I feel a situation of double pressure, I then sink away one side so there is both emptiness (passive) and fullness (active). When he empties, I fill. When his pressure becomes heavy, mine lightens. When sticking, it is easy to yield. By yielding, you are able to stick. Indirect techniques can become direct, and direct techniques can immediately be changed to become indirect. Indirect, direct, empty, full, none of these come from myself, they are all changes I make according to the opponent’s actions. Able to stick and yield, knowing both passive and active, you will then be able to deal with opponents effortlessly, and it can be said that you are identifying energies.
( https://brennantranslation.wordpress.co ... -rongqiao/ )

Long ZiXiang wrote:
The use of force in a nutshell: “If you drop one side, you can move. If you have equal pressure on both sides, you will be stuck.” By extension, if two people are equally using force, they will be resisting against each other and the stronger one will win. Therefore equal pressure on both sides means getting stuck. But if two people are using force against each other and one suddenly loosens, then the one who is exerting strength will be neutralized by the one who relaxes. Therefore letting go on one side means being free to move.
( https://brennantranslation.wordpress.co ... g-zixiang/ )

Using this principle is, imo, what allows us to lead opponents into vulnerable positions and apply the 4 oz. rule.

If a 1000lb tower is on the cusp of falling over, then it doesn’t take much to send it toppling.

So the 4 oz. Moving 1000lbs is the endgame, once the 1000lbs have been guided to the limit of stability.

*Interestingly, the older TaiJi texts use “double pressure”, but the XingYi texts of the same era & later explain “double weighting” as being very much related to the stance. So I suspect that, being classified as an internal art, XingYi’s terminology & concepts bled into TaiJi… perhaps through Sun Lu Tang?

I agree very much with this.

People seem to be against leverage as a term that applies to TaiJi. I think I’m beginning to see why…

… leverage is about more than simple balance beams, rigid levers and fulcrums.

I think the main opposition is just simple ignorance.
Secondarily it's about being stubborn in one's own viewpoint and convinced of the idiocy of others so looking for discord instead of agreement.
Leverage is definitely part of the total package. As always I think it's a mistake to start drawing it down to a single aspect or factor or quality.

"It's not leverage, it's mechanics"

kind of hard to discuss one without the other, my dude.

"leverage" doesn't really cover what we do in Tai chi. Hydraulics is certainly better...

Man I don't really buy that. Hydraulics is like your circulatory system, it doesn't produce sufficient strength to accomplish work with the body itself, just move the fluid around. If you look at a hydraulic mechanical system, you're talking about pushing large volumes of liquid into tighter spaces to produce an expansive force, and I just don't perceive the pressure that would be involved in a truly hydraulic mechanism. I'm open to be convinced but I am highly skeptical of this.

What I am convinced of is that by and large the "connectedness" that results from Taijiquan practice enables a much improved conservation of energy/momentum in the body that can then be expressed outside the body.

The energy expressed when you take a step forward is also present when you, for example, shift your weight from one leg to the other, and this allows us to express that as force at our fingertips to accomplish work.

[windwalker]

But, most simply don't think tcc is limited to leverage, which is always about force. Is making someone miss because you moved an illustration of '4 oz v 1000' lbs? Was 4ozs used? Was it tcc if 10 ozs or 10 lbs were used?
But, most simply don't think tcc is limited to leverage, which is always about force.
Is making someone miss because you moved an illustration of '4 oz v 1000' lbs?

Was 4ozs used? Was it tcc if 10 ozs or 10 lbs were used?

Some thoughts to questions asked...

Not meant as definitive, only illustrative of differences .


We use it as a base level for developing an "awareness" of what is actually thought to be affected..


Does not involve any thing the aforementioned posts presented.


All the demos, used to show this tend to be questioned, "cc for subtitles"

better stick with writing

4 oz a metaphor for being very light..in touch.
Starting from that point progressively becoming lighter and lighter.

we use 3 levels, skin, hair, and air....

Referenced in some post "double weight" with the attending questions of what it means...
depending on practice..

in our practice its the central idea of change between body and mind
the understanding that while taiji is said to be spherical in nature, the body is not,,,the mind can be...
if it is trained to be so....first in body, then in mind, from the mind to the body.

[Bao]

yes I see TaiJi as primarily a throwing art

You are allowed to focus your Tai Chi on whatever you want.

[D_Glenn]

There’s an old story, maybe about a Daoist, where nobody could get an ox to move and he saved the day by using a string tied around a ring in the nose.

So in China it’s using a string to lead the ox.

[Steve James]

In the US, this is something ranchers use to lead bulls.

[wayne hansen]

Leverage is not wrong it is just low level
Pneumatic is what I should have said instead of hydraulic
However that is even short of the mark
Psychology fluid dynamics manipulation of the nervous system and many other things come into play
Easy to show hard to write
As I always say. Tai chi is literally passed on from hand to hand
If your teacher doesn’t have it you can’t take it
I remember one day I got both hands on my teachers chest
I applied Hsing I tiger full power
He just rolled his chest at exactly the right moment and blasted me across the room
Words can’t do it justice
Even if you were in the room you would not see how
Just the result
So to explain with the right words is beyond me

[DiaitaDoc]

Leverage is not wrong it is just low level

Ok, so… Kyuzo Mifune was a low level martial artist?

Easy to show hard to write

By all means, show us!

[wayne hansen]

We were talking about tai chi not judo
I am sure with him there was more than just plain leverage used
When striking is part of the game parameters change
In no gi things change from just plain leverage

[ThomasK]

But, most simply don't think tcc is limited to leverage, which is always about force. Is making someone miss because you moved an illustration of '4 oz v 1000' lbs? Was 4ozs used? Was it tcc if 10 ozs or 10 lbs were used?
But, most simply don't think tcc is limited to leverage, which is always about force.
Is making someone miss because you moved an illustration of '4 oz v 1000' lbs?

Was 4ozs used? Was it tcc if 10 ozs or 10 lbs were used?

Some thoughts to questions asked...

Not meant as definitive, only illustrative of differences .


We use it as a base level for developing an "awareness" of what is actually thought to be affected..


Does not involve any thing the aforementioned posts presented.


All the demos, used to show this tend to be questioned, "cc for subtitles"

better stick with writing

4 oz a metaphor for being very light..in touch.
Starting from that point progressively becoming lighter and lighter.

we use 3 levels, skin, hair, and air....

Referenced in some post "double weight" with the attending questions of what it means...
depending on practice..

in our practice its the central idea of change between body and mind
the understanding that while taiji is said to be spherical in nature, the body is not,,,the mind can be...
if it is trained to be so....first in body, then in mind, from the mind to the body.

I agree that the mind will eventually be spherical. But important to remove emotional quality, emotional content from that sphere. Else you wil get karma for influencing people with that.

The body has it's own mechanics and structure. People add on top of that, many useless layers. When instead one should let go more, relax more, let the body move how it naturally wants to. No model or method will ever be as good as the one already present in the body, hidden yet obvious. But you need pre-defined methods to gradually uncover that nature and learn to work with it. Not getting lost on your way.

Can you maybe explain a bit more what double weightedness means in your practice? Does it have to do with 'Youji' and 'Wuji'?

By the way, 'Youji' made me think of objective reality and 'Wuji' of maya, or illusory reality. Both being aspects of the living reality.

Kind thanks.

[ThomasK]

In the US, this is something ranchers use to lead bulls.

Now we need comparative studies for bulls in China and USA. Weight differences, nose structure, pain receptors,...