internal before external is a waste of time?

[johnwang]

As far as turning on you heel will give you more reach than turning on the toe argument. If you turn on your heel, your striking has alreay committed. If you turn on your toe, your striking has not committed yet. The turining on the toe is before the strike that you just align your back foot before your "spring". You have not started your springing yet.

This argument is very similiar to 2 different ways to do your "leg block" throw. You can use stealing step to spin your body.

- The moment that you land your back leg, the moment that you kick back your other leg. This way your back kick and body spin are integrated into one move (maximum Fajin).
- After you have landed your back leg in a solid horse stance, you then kick back your other leg. Since there is a delay after you land your foot and before you kick the other leg back, you are not fully taking advantage on your body spinning. The advantage of this approach is it will be much safer for you because your start your throw from a solid horse stance.

Which approach is better? To against

- average opponent's, you may be able to execute by your 1st method because it will give you the maximum speed and maximum Fajin.
- skillful opponents, you may want to consider your own safety 1st and sacrifice some of your speed and power.

[bailewen]

cdobe,

The angle of the foot doesn't really matter. Those dots aren't the pivot point. Those are the attachment points. Regardless of the angle of the foot, those 3 points, a,b,c are the location of the actual leg.

I give up. Communication fail. To my mind, this isn't a matter of opinion. It's human anatomy. "Better" or "worse" are subjective claims that can be argued. I think I've reached my limit for trying to explain the skeletal structure of the leg. Talk to you again on a different topic.

=========================================================================================

This argument is very similiar to 2 different ways to do your "leg block" throw. You can use stealing step to spin your body. . .

I can completely agree with that. That's why I won't take sides on which way to pivot is "better". I have a preference but when sparring I'm not sure if I even follow my own supposed preference. "Live" footwork has too many little shuffling moves and adjustments to really fit into any strict rules. As my Shifu once said about all the taiji rules for body method and tactics and so on: "Every single rule is sometimes wrong."

[cdobe]

:P

cdobe,

The angle of the foot doesn't really matter. Those dots aren't the pivot point. Those are the attachment points. Regardless of the angle of the foot, those 3 points, a,b,c are the location of the actual leg.

I give up. Communication fail. To my mind, this isn't a matter of opinion. It's human anatomy. "Better" or "worse" are subjective claims that can be argued. I think I've reached my limit for trying to explain the skeletal structure of the leg. Talk to you again on a different topic.

You have only failed, if you give up now. You can do it, Omar

It is easier than you think, because I have learned a little about human anatomy, when I studied biology at the university. See, you don't have to explain the structure of the human foot to me. This should make it so much easier, don't you think. But if you happen to have any questions about the human body, feel free to ask, because I am also well trained in teaching this stuff.

@all
How do you call a point in English around which a rotation takes place?

[johnwang]

That's why I won't take sides on which way to pivot is "better".

Anyway, this subject that we have is still more interested than the "internal" or "external" discussion. I would never draw my picture 3 o'clock in the morning if it was just an "internal 1st" or "external 1st" discussion.

[bailewen]

You have only failed, if you give up now. You can do it, Omar

lol. Maybe later. The cost/benifit ratio for making myself clear is too high right now. Maybe I'll take a stab at it with a simple geometric diagram tomorrrow. Draw...scan...upload...just for this?

btw,

How do you call a point in English around which a rotation takes place?

I was referring to it as the "pivot point". I didn't label the heel pivot points in my pic above. I just labeled the attachment points between leg and foot.

Later. 8)

[DeusTrismegistus]

Cdobe the word you are looking for is axis.

As far as heel vs ball I have been taught ball of the foot but I have actually noticed myself pivoting on the heel sometimes during sparring. I think it depends more on your set up and other factors than something as simple as reach or power. I can generate significant power with the ball of the foot method, the heel isn't floating at impact but the heel roots at the moment impact to complete your ground connection. As for reach that is mainly dependent on your front foot and posture. If you do Bailewen's wall test and maintain both the alignment from back foot to hips to head and the alignment of front toe, knee and head in the vertical then your reach is unchanged or slightly increased. So I think it is mainly a matter of preference and circumstance.

[Michael]

An axis is a line, not a point. I think center is the right word.

[Doc Stier]

Many good points in this discussion.

However, most comments seem to be about structural alignment, reach, and power generation primarily from a fixed position. I am far more concerned about these issues as they relate to rapid and continual movement, since for me every real fighting scenario has generally involved a fluctuating change of position and interval gap between me and my opponent. As a result, I don't train to engage in stationary stand still fighting, because the fight automatically then becomes a contest of comparative speed, power, and technique.

I learned long ago that any opponent can be faster or stronger than I am, and some may be both, or may use techniques which are unfamiliar to me! Thus, I prefer to avoid a stationary comparison of these factors as much as possible.

Instead, I prefer to train myself to maintain the correct feeling of optimum structural alignment and power generation capability in every stance used while actively moving around, as suggested in the form sets. Additionally, I depend on proper footwork to deny the opponent's use of an effective reach when I am defending, while conversely also using proper footwork to insure my most effective range when I am attacking. In so doing, most of the stance issues debated here are moot points for me.

[D_Glenn]

^ Best post ever!!!

[Daniel]

+1

Good post, Doc.


D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[DeusTrismegistus]

Many good points in this discussion.

However, most comments seem to be about structural alignment, reach, and power generation primarily from a fixed position. I am far more concerned about these issues as they relate to rapid and continual movement, since for me every real fighting scenario has generally involved a fluctuating change of position and interval gap between me and my opponent. As a result, I don't train to engage in stationary stand still fighting, because the fight automatically then becomes a contest of comparative speed, power, and technique.

I learned long ago that any opponent can be faster or stronger than I am, and some may be both, or may use techniques which are unfamiliar to me! Thus, I prefer to avoid a stationary comparison of these factors as much as possible.

Instead, I prefer to train myself to maintain the correct feeling of optimum structural alignment and power generation capability in every stance used while actively moving around, as suggested in the form sets. Additionally, I depend on proper footwork to deny the opponent's use of an effective reach when I am defending, while conversely also using proper footwork to insure my most effective range when I am attacking. In so doing, most of the stance issues debated here are moot points for me.

I think you are spot on in your view of this but IME you have to develop the structural alignment and power generation from a stationary position before you can really learn how to move and maintain it. I feel like I am really starting to do this and a big part of doing this for me has been all of the sitting qigong my teacher has been having us do lately.

[johnwang]

In the beginning stage, you try to borrow the counter force from the ground for your power generation. After you have mastered that, you start to borrow your body momentum for your power generation. Since mobility has more value in combat than stationary, the mobility Fajin training is considered to be more advanced.

It's easy to seen from 0.59 to 1.02 that Adam did 4 continuous Fajin while his body was moving.

[bailewen]

Reviving this thread because I stumbled onto a video that clearly demonstrates my point about heel pivots adding power and ball pivots robbing it. The guy also sums up my larger view on the issue in a way that i felt was not being understood on this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4qCJ7NW ... ture=feedu

[cdobe]

That doesn't represent the body mechanics I was referring to. I think this discussion can't be resolved online.

[NoSword]

Uh...not terribly agreed with the gent in the last video.

I don't agree that turning the body in the direction of a strike necessarily 'adds power.' It does if you are purely using what the YSB people would call 'shun li.' You can also strike using 'ni li', and many combinations are possible.

Here's my own experience: There are an infinite number of ways to deliver power in striking. Two points constitute a line; three points, a plane; four, a solid. As long as two points are moving in opposite directions from one another, compressing or expanding, there will be real power. If all the points are moving in the same direction, the result is what you'd call 'double heavy.' You might land a knockout punch like that, but you're betting the farm.

At the most basic level, you have to learn to disconnect the hip from the hand. But that's not the end of the story. I can, for instance, move my hip and my hand in the same direction, while adding a third dimension of rising or sinking. So there are no hard and fast rules, besides that you have to move three-dimensionally.

Once you've played with the mechanism a bit, though, there's no need to think about it in these terms. You just hit stuff when you see it.

AK