Chiba - rough Aikido

[jaime_g]

Thanks LaoDan , nice post! I think we share similar points.

I'll try to explain our material

We have 8 basic blade control methods, called atajos, they evolve into
four helicoidal main techniques, named Line in Cross (clockwise spiral
keeping contactl), Narrowing(counterclockwise spiral keeping contact),
Weak over Strong (spiral leaving contact from above), and Weak under
Strong (spiral leaving contact from below).

I think our first atajo is a good explanation of our blade contact mechanics.

It starts from an upright body, stretched limbs position. Torso turned
45º degrees, blade arm parallel to the floor, weight in the middle.
Our rapier grip aligns pommel with the center of the wrist. Initial
hand position is neutral, neither pronated nor supinated, stretched
arm, body not commiting any direction. Against another sword on
contact, we start bending the limbs, rear knee goes down, front knee
goes up, front elbow sinks. The hand does a vertical rotation, hilt
going down from shoulder height until waist height, tip going up
from shoulder height until crown height, final arm position is elbow
down 45 degrees, forearm parallel to the floor, wrist up 45 degrees,
it appears an inverted isosceles trapezoid . Sword initially only
rotates in a vertical plane, no side pushing, no press on the other
sword, just sliding. Doing that we are closing low lines and avoiding
an easy disengage. Now, without changing point of contact we supinate
the hand 45 degrees, that allows us control his sword with our edge.
Now front knee goes down, rear knee goes up and we step circularly
with the rear foot to the left, keeping blade contact. Waist turns
clockwise, rear knee foes down, front knee goes up, sword hilt closes
an imaginary left triangle (far shoulder- near shoulder- sword hand),
sword goes down vertically until parallel or near parallel to the
floor, hands pronates 45 degrees to recover neutral position. From
this position you can attack with a thrust or advance safely going for a disarm.

[jaime_g]

Some pictures

[D_Glenn]

I've been arguing with Bao about this since around 2005. That's why he thinks we practice a "Hard External" style.

That's a lie. I have never said that Yin bagua is external or even that your lineage is external. What I have said is ...

Didn't want to go off on a wild tangent here, so I replied to your post on this thread: http://www.rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=23227

.

[Bao]

Good judgement. Let's not derail this one-man show further.
And thanks 4 yr rply.

[amor]

...


As a final remark. Though I do things in one way, which I believe to be different to what Dan has alluded to in this thread, there are similarities in what I practice. I don't use lower dantien but focus on the upper waist (zhongwan area) for example. Even so I know a number of people who are exceptional fighters which do not use these concepts at all and don't care either. I know some people who are extra-ordinary in their ability to move (dancers, acrobats etc.) but who cannot fight. You must have a focus on why you do these things and what you as an individual respond best to. If you work in an external model and it works really well for you then what will spending years developing movement from the dantien add to your practice, is it worth it? Maybe it is? There are some ways which are better than others no doubt but I don't think there is one ultimate way or one single way of expressing internal principles either.

+1 Great post.
For me personally I just went straight into it thinking that doing dantien driven movement would quite possibly be the best way to optimize the body for posture, breathing, movement etc. fighting ability didn't really factor in too much initially. And although it took a while to figure out how to actually put that into practice though still not quite there yet. But it starts to make sense when you consider the idea of large and small frames. For large movements from a taichi perspective it's not going to be possible to acquaint yourself with the idea of a dantien or rotating ball in your center because the movements of the hands and feet will always go along for the ride so in large movements it makes sense not to think in terms of a rotating ball at your center but instead spinal alignment.
The rotating ball ball approach at your center factors in well though when you consider small frame movements because the movements of the limbs would be negligible due to micro movement approach; and then one can appreciate how effective this would be for martial purpose even though it takes further time to really develop it.

But a zhongwan vs dantien approach from an energetic perspective at least would probably be a subject that deserves a thread of its own. An interesting note that one teacher mentioned to me was that dantien is good for storage of energy whereas zhongwan capability for storage is poor but it has better ability at projecting energy which might make more sense to you than me, from your xingyi perspective . But i'll bet there is a style out there that has made use of both areas for optimum fighting capability!

[Bodywork]

As most know from my previous writing; I don't bring fighting into the equation. Why? It is a separate issue and there are too many variables
We have on the table:
1. The means to generate balance and power
2. The means to deliver it.
We can discuss the fact that most of us know guys who can kick the shit out of most martial artists using external power and technique. Add to that externals are easier to attain and train. So why bother training the harder stuff? That being-internals?
Here is where I might be disagreeing with many here.
1. I don't think the majority of martial artists really know and have experience in....fighting with skill in the first place. *Note* I am a fan of the many guys who, like me and people I know, put in the hours and the damage learning to actually use their skills. I am simply addressing the majority of budo tourists who never really got dirty and who's gong fu is in their mouths and type writers.
That said
If we separate out the deliverables- *fighting skills real and whole and guys who can deliver* and focus on the power behind them, we can have a rational discussion of ways and means to produce the balance and power BEHIND the deliverables.

Paul (Pandrews) makes good points about differences and like me, about separating fighting skills from shen fa.

Testing the body behind the agreed or even questionable fighting skills - reveals a different discussion potential:
The method that I use to judge and test is to test someones body-is without allowing fighting skills to enter into it at all.
1. Balance
It stands to reason that any human who can present a physical structure that remains stable against load in and out and is hard to throw has an advantage over a tight -and hence light- and easier to throw structure.
2. Neutralization
Ability to absorb and redirect force without techniques, just movement. It is obvious that a human who can do this has advantages in both time and entry in combatives.
3. Power
Many external guys can hit, so how do we talk about advantages to power delivery? The mechanics behind them. External power requires windups, weight shifts and extensions that are far more readable and a result can be avoided easier. Secondly, they typically require two stage movement. Internal power delivery on the other hand is much more difficult to read, or feel, require no wind-up and can be delivered repeatedly inside someones guard or time loop.
4.Timing
The ability to neutralize and be in all the time provided incremental fractions of time advantage and by default most people find themselves on a reactive loop even when they try to strike and or feint and enter. I have not seen an external guy be able to produce the effect.
5. Gassing
Using less force to do actual and meaningful things, provides more air over the long haul. this comes to the fore in grappling and in wielding weapons. I think internal training provides an advantage their as well.
My opinion is that all things being equal internal movement is a superior delivery system.

That said, I can't help but agree that:
a) no one really gets into many fights anymore
b) a decent external fighter will rule of over the untrained public anyway
c) So, why would all that training for internal really matter?
Answer?
It probable doesn't.
For me, it is a great game, I think it has health benefits far past external training, and your power will grow and last longer. On the whole? I think it is just rocking good fun.

[GrahamB]

If an 'externalist' can strike with zero windup, is he then an 'internalist'?

[vadaga]

the opposite of deja vu

Vu deja ?

jamais vu

[Dmitri]

If an 'externalist' can strike with zero windup, is he then an 'internalist'?

If a plumber can fix an outlet, is he then an electrician?
To me, "an internalist" or "an externalist" is determined by what they train regularly. On a very rare occasion, I've felt some of the "internal" stuff from "external" people, but...

[Bodywork]

If an 'externalist' can strike with zero windup, is he then an 'internalist'?

Not to you personally Graham... but the general "you."
If you cannot definitively and in detail explain both training paradigms...
Do you know the difference anyway?
Do you really care, anyway?
Do you need to?

And that's fine.
But then, and I am sympathetic to the externalists continually meeting " so- calld internal guys" who ended up having nothing....
Shouldn't externalists and internalists alike, just shut up about something they really know nothing about?
It just might leave room for actual credibility to come back into the traditional arts.

[Bodywork]

If an 'externalist' can strike with zero windup, is he then an 'internalist'?

If a plumber can fix an outlet, is he then an electrician?
To me, "an internalist" or "an externalist" is determined by what they train regularly. On a very rare occasion, I've felt some of the "internal" stuff from "external" people, but...

+100
I first leaned about "soft wrestling" from Greco Roman guys in the 70's
I I first learned some aspects about internal whole body connection from my father pitching hay and swinging a sickle when I was twelve.
He and later in life, me.... outworked many people with less effort.

[GrahamB]

If an 'externalist' can strike with zero windup, is he then an 'internalist'?

Not to you personally Graham... but the general "you."
If you cannot definitively and in detail explain both training paradigms...
Do you know the difference anyway?
Do you really care, anyway?
Do you need to?

And that's fine.
But then, and I am sympathetic to the externalists continually meeting " so- calld internal guys" who ended up having nothing....
Shouldn't externalists and internalists alike, just shut up about something they really know nothing about?
It just might leave room for actual credibility to come back into the traditional arts.

I don't really understand what you're talking about/asking here.

My point is that there's more than one way to skin a cat. I know Paul, I've trained with him lots. He can certainly knock you through get week with no wind up. I'm also pretty sure you wouldn't call it 'internal' because while there's layers of cross over, I don't think he uses your particular method, from what you've written here.

And because I know the method base he's using, I know it's definitely not the normal kick punch model. It's full of powerful sophistication, and it's absolutely rooted in the martial - the 'Shen fa' is the martial method and is not separate. And it makes the classics make sense, etc...

I just think there's room in the world for many methods. He explains some of it above - the zhongwen - and it know for a fact that if anybody from this forum meets him they'll come away with a lot more than 'nothing', even if it's not about creating a dantien.

[Taste of Death]

If an 'externalist' can strike with zero windup, is he then an 'internalist'?

Not to you personally Graham... but the general "you."
If you cannot definitively and in detail explain both training paradigms...
Do you know the difference anyway?
Do you really care, anyway?
Do you need to?

And that's fine.
But then, and I am sympathetic to the externalists continually meeting " so- calld internal guys" who ended up having nothing....
Shouldn't externalists and internalists alike, just shut up about something they really know nothing about?
It just might leave room for actual credibility to come back into the traditional arts.

I don't really understand what you're talking about/asking here.

My point is that there's more than one way to skin a cat. I know Paul, I've trained with him lots. He can certainly knock you through get week with no wind up. I'm also pretty sure you wouldn't call it 'internal' because while there's layers of cross over, I don't think he uses your particular method, from what you've written here.

And because I know the method base he's using, I know it's definitely not the normal kick punch model. It's full of powerful sophistication, and it's absolutely rooted in the martial - the 'Shen fa' is the martial method and is not separate. And it makes the classics make sense, etc...

I just think there's room in the world for many methods. He explains some of it above - the zhongwen - and it know for a fact that if anybody from this forum meets him they'll come away with a lot more than 'nothing', even if it's not about creating a dantien.

There are many ways to generate "internal power." In Chinese, they are called from the bones, from the tendons, and from Qi. None is superior, but most disagreement arise from not understanding these differences.

[slowEdie]

richardman wrote:There are many ways to generate "internal power." In Chinese, they are called from the bones, from the tendons, and from Qi. None is superior, but most disagreement arise from not understanding these differences.

Can't agree with that one, but am not in a position to postulate the most superior way.
It depends on what you're trying to achieve, fast martial prowess, longevity, softness sensitivness, etc

[Taste of Death]

richardman wrote:There are many ways to generate "internal power." In Chinese, they are called from the bones, from the tendons, and from Qi. None is superior, but most disagreement arise from not understanding these differences.

Can't agree with that one, but am not in a position to posulate the most superior way.
It depends on what you're trying to achieve, fast martial prowess, longevity, softness sensitivness, etc

...most disagreement arise from not understanding these differences.