Is "internal" real that important?

[Strange]

i should refrain from being presumptuous
but to my understanding, would need to be able to neutralise and withstand incoming attacks first.
I think many do not understand this point, that's why many say that
cima trg methods do not work, cima do not work, cima cannot be used in real fight etc etc...

but John, you and i both know that the chinese have been fighting for all our history
both among ourselves and other ppl
to me it become a funny situation when some ppl come to say that cma do not work heh
enough dead to stain the rivers red....

but correct me if i'm wrong, John
you did say before that you have taiji lineage, correct?

[johnwang]

you did say before that you have taiji lineage, correct?

Yes! I do.

This is why I try to add leg skill such as:

- shin bite into Peng.
- leg spring into Lu,
- outer hook into Ji,
- inner hook into An,
- foot sweep into cloud hand,
- …

I still remember that Mo-Ling used to say that those leg skill are already exist in Taiji.

Here is Taiji An + inner hook (push + leg skill = throw).

[Strange]

John, please allow me to disagree with you on this point
i personally do not think taiji need any leg hooking

but i can understand that personal character, aptitude, disposition
may attract a person to one art over another, and use particular techniques more
but it does not mean that other techniques are inferior.

and i don't think DDV created this gathering in forum for participants to put out negative
energies.

Thanks for sharing John, cheers and Happy New Year of the Rat

[cloudz]

Heavy weights few repetitions with exhaustion vs light weights many repetitions with focus on keeping it going?

I have always worked on my weight equipment with 60 reps. I have never done and don't believe in few reps.

Practising a move 20 times intensely vs 1000 carefully?

I have suggested to drill XY Pi Quan 1,000 times non-stop within 45 minutes. When I do foot sweep. I drill it at least 100 times non-stop.

Training hard with a partner intensely then when the body is sore training to recuperate yet still keep learning by doing it slowly?

I have always believed you should only spent 75% of your energy in training. You feel you want to do more, but you force yourself not to, so you will expect next day training.

Throwing someone by picking them up vs. luring and tripping them?

Even "internal" guy will need to develop lifting ability in case he has to do some hard labor to make a living.

A: Sweet heart, you need to take the garbage can out tonight.
B: That garbage can is too heavy. I'm not suppose to use brute force to lift that garbage can. It's against my "internal" believe.
A:

The point was to be aware of spectrum of training and to acknowledge it goes to two extremes - hence the description internal vs. external.

I think that awareness & training at both ends is what provides a much greater ability.

Say your garbage is 200kg. If you've never done a 200kg lift then it will be a problem.
But you might also be called on by your wife to carry 200 1kg bags one at a time.

Aside from divorcing her training at both ends of the spectrum means being able to do them. This is the point of awareness of internal/external and the way it can be used to describe motion vs. stillness, intense cardio vs. controlled limited oxygen intake and many other areas, building one limb vs. coordinating the whole body etc. etc.

Looking at your points - guess what - you're more of an internal guy than you like to accept. Again it just depends on the view of internal vs. external but on a spectrum you are 2/3 of the way in the internal realm than the external with so much repetition. Sure you might refuse to do standing posture but you are definitely not gassing yourself to push your cardio to a sport specific 3-5 minute rounds as intensely as possible. You are building through controlled repetition.

hey,

Because, not even the legendary JW can stave of ageing and death.
Age slowly but surely forces all martial artists to open up to less external methodology, and of course all "external" arts contain the mundane internal aspects.
however there is no one without the other, but all physical technique is "external"

JW will not get that through his skull and give it a rest though ...
too much mental conditioning and misunderstanding probably.

to co exist, which they must do for us involved in tcma ultimately, there needs to be some semantic distinction - that distinction is not reality, that is a carve up of it.
reality is holistic, as there is no physicality in of itself. One term cannot rule them all, internal included.

but for all intents and purposes (discussion and training imo) external is all the physicality that we can see and understand, intuitively.
and that last one, intuition, is an internal skill for sure

[cloudz]

if you're talking any kind of physical technique however refined, you're barking up the wrong tree.
internal and external is analogous to esoteric and exoteric in western vernacular … And, it stands on its own, it's (internal/esoteric) cultivation.
it doesn't need martial arts..

If you train how to fight such as … do you really care about whether you are training is "internal" or not?

My question is not whether "internal" needs MA or not. My question is whether MA needs "internal" or not.

the answer for you is obviously no
duh

unless it isn't
for that you would need to open your mind to some different understanding that you have displayed for too long already.

empty your cup, or are you just too old and proud to do that

[cloudz]

My question is whether MA needs "internal" or not.

It doesn't

it's a bit like that song from the lion king

change "he lives in you" for "it lives in you"

where the fuck does martial arts really exist anyway - inside the people that practice it
not in books, videos and RSF webpages!

"it" doesn't need shit
we need what we need.

so for john, from his perspective it's a no.

unless i ultimately succeed in hypnotising and taking control of his mind remotely that is

[cloudz]

Like I already mentioned in a previous post, there are many way to be non-telegraphing, and not all are created equal. While external styles may achieve it through timing, distancing, and speed, IMA focuses on "abnormal" movements and muscle recruitment that change the way you maintain balance, shift weight, and generate power.

Master Chen Zhonghua of practical method Taiji has many good clips that illustrate how these abnormal movements can be applied in stand-up grappling. (I saw one years ago where he shows how to do a foot sweep by moving only one foot while the rest of the stays still, but can't seem to find it anymore.)

you know, there is traction to the whole non-standard body skill movement thing.
you can't develop it without a slice of mind (yi) integration.

but that's one part of internal..

that guy is good at sharing the technicalities, no one else tries to the extent he does; to show what's under the hood of internal technique, so to speak.

but you know.. so what. you either dig it or not.
you don't need it, necessarily to do or integrate other aspects of internal.
and you don't need it to kick ass or defend yourself and or loved ones

CMA is full of funky body method in comparison to typical, natural movement mechanics.
obviously pointing to numerous so called chinese external arts!

whilst i respect you and all this body skill/ method etc, i think your'e kinda missing the bigger truth of this..
yes the internals can and do develop certain qualities and conditions; with the body.
but for me anyway it's now more than a little besides the point and the the fact external arts of chinese origin do that too regardless, is testament enough for me to stick to that view.

regards

[D_Glenn]

In China, I’m pretty sure all the good, fighty Internal Martial Arts schools also practice Shuai Jiao. I did some SJ with my teacher. In Beijing his Bagua students cross train SJ at a school that has the facilities to practice it.

I learned some SJ from Luo Dexiu.

Maybe that’s what this thread is about

[cloudz]

yes D_Glenn lol



regards

[johnwang]

In China, I’m pretty sure all the good, fighty Internal Martial Arts schools also practice Shuai Jiao. I did some SJ with my teacher. In Beijing his Bagua students cross train SJ at a school that has the facilities to practice it.

I learned some SJ from Luo Dexiu.

Maybe that’s what this thread is about

IMO, all the "internal" principles have been applied in SC already.

In the following clip,

- He uses left arm to under hook and lift his opponent's right shoulder .
- His opponent resists.
- He borrows his opponent's force, change upward lift into downward pull along with other hand upward push.

Can "internal" principle be able to add more "borrow force" into this?



Can "internal" principle be able to add more "Kua usage" into this?

[cloudz]

there's no such things as internal principles
there are only principles as applied to technique

silly

[johnwang]

there's no such things as internal principles
there are only principles as applied to technique

silly

I agree that there is no such thing as "internal principle". There is only the right principle that apply to the right technique.

But many people assume that soft, sticky, yield, follow, sink, borrow force, body unification, … are defined as "internal" principle and external guys don't understand it, or don't use it. I just try to point out that all those principles are in SC already.

[cloudz]

not just your beloved SC either
or chinese martial arts for that matter

[dspyrido]

But many people assume that soft, sticky, yield, follow, sink, borrow force, body unification, … are defined as "internal" principle and external guys don't understand it, or use it. I just try to point out that all those principles are in SC already.

Sounds like this is the problem - squishy soft TC vs rough hard SC. I think for 99.9% of TC I will go with SC but let's also note that many people don't do TC for fighting. Just as a nice branded form of chi/nei/feel-better gung. Have to admit if it helps them then fine but the confusion would have been less of it wasn't called TC.

But are the principles of TC and SC comparative? Is the Ting Jin of a master TC person the same as the grab and take balance of a SC person?

Many who follow the ideal of TC have a view that to deflect an incoming punch the opponent feels nothing but balance lost. At that point the opponent tries to recover but something strange happens. They can't get balance and either sent flying or a limb is split. This is the ideal. Very yin & I'd say relies on a crazy level of technique, body awareness and training.

I don't have this level of skill. Just highlighting what is the ideal. I doubt SC refines "internal" at this level but focuses on other fun stuff.

[Ian C. Kuzushi]

As has been pointed out, there are many definitions of internal. I will say this in response to JW's question: my taijiquan training, which was rather rough, but certainly internal by the definitions before people like Sigman and Harden started trying to tell everyone that only they had the internals, absolutely improved my jujitsu and judo, including in competition. Listening, following, moving from full to empty were all very easy to translate to judo, sumo, and even the little bit of boxing I was doing.

I don't think that the taijiquan was more important than my job (digging with a breaker bar and phd, mixing concrete by hand, and wrenching on playgrounds and park structures), but it was just as important. Really, I thought it was the perfect mix. Ruthless manual labor, taijiquan, and continuing with my first arts of judo, jj, and sumo.