IT/IS

[klonk]

Well, Shawn, it's been a while since a yiquan thread. I guess this'll have to do.

[shawnsegler]

Well, Shawn, it's been a while since a yiquan thread. I guess this'll have to do.

Oh yeah...I almost forgot. Fuck, Mike Cherril too.

[Muad'dib]

Someone asked me to "lay off", so I will.

[klonk]

I think we should all be open to being told a better way of doing things. But it must be better. There is the thing that hangs up many intended advances.

[dps]

Here is an explanation of how the skeleton and connective tissue are kept in dynamic tension.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajowL0T4bM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNPgqS3EfRw

David

[Ian]

Hi Bruce,

IT jams force vectors from external sources at their origin by entering the structure of that source and connecting said structure via one's IT response.

Isn't this simply 'cutting the force'? As far as I understand, it's a tactic that can be used whether or not a person has any internal training.

Ian, I'm not sure I know what 'cutting the force' is.

Well one example is when someone's about to throw a punch, you punch them in the pec/shoulder which cuts the force at its inception. Or even earlier, looking for movement cues and different signs of intention. Would that fall under 'jamming the force vector', in your opinion?

It's spontaneous, but completely unreliable without the internal investigations that lead to it being understood well enough that it can be cultivated in a systematic manner.

Got it. That's something I can definitely agree with. Thanks.

[johnwang]

I can't believe we have 6 pages of discussion on the subject "It is ...". When my high school English teacher (he gradulated from Oxford, England) published a book "72 different ways to use the word OF", I thought he might have nothing better to do with his free time.

Can we just remove the word "internal" from Internal training, internal structure, internal power, internation connection, internal awardness, ... and assume all training, structure, power, connection, awardness, ... are "internal"? I assume if we can destroy the word "external" then the word "internal" will no longer be needed.

A friend told me that I'll go to heaven for sure. I asked him why, he told me that he paid a lot of money to buy all the property in hell. Since he is the solo hell owner, he won't allow anybody to come to hell without his permission, and also since he is my friend, no matter how bad that I behave in my life, I'll have no place to go but heaven.

If the word "external" doesn't exist, everything exist on this planet will be "internal" by default. We will have internal boxing, internal MMA, internal BJJ, internal MT, internal Judo, ...We may see some good internal, average internal, or bad internal but everything are all internal. The world will be a much peaceful place to live after that.

[shawnsegler]

Thanks, DPS.

[D_Glenn]

There are a lot of Internal arts with different 'body-methods': Bajiquan, Tongbei, Xingyi, Xin Yi, Bagua, Taiji, Aikijutsu etc. and they do share similar aspects but they don't all work in exactly the same way, with people studying these different styles and trying to get everyone to agree on the same thing is like hammering the square peg into the round hole. Instead of trying to force 1 body-method into every different style wouldn't it be more fruitful to figure out what style everyone is doing and then understand why they are different? They are different for a reason and understanding of the differences helps to show what each art excels at.

Interloper and bodywork's comments have been helpful to myself to understand how those arts work and what their counterpart is in CMA and how one such counterpart is in Baguazhang's Dragon form, the similarity doesn't come from any cross-influence or mingling of cultures but rather I personally believe it comes from the weapon the arts are/were trained with and the empty-hand work that went along with that weapon. Baguazhang has other forms- different types of weapons and the corresponding empty-hand material that don't have the same body requirements or body-methods because the attacking techniques are different and the end goal of the fight is different. Another one of Baguazhang's is a 'body-method' that seeks no power coming from the ground and the lower half of the body is used more like a table top for the upper body to spin on- all the power coming from the waist and upperbody. This body-method exists in complete contradiction to Interlopers definition's and many others. (Note: that me saying 'power coming from the waist' doesn't mean that I think other arts don't or to the exclusion of another art. Hopefully save someone a post there. )

The differences between body-methods are, in description, very subtle but the process of ingraining one is long and arduous, so understanding can be an easy thing but application of that understanding is difficult.



.

[NoSword]

Here is an explanation of how the skeleton and connective tissue are kept in dynamic tension.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajowL0T4bM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNPgqS3EfRw

David

Thank you, these videos are awesome.

[I-mon]

Jesus Christ!

People are arguing about fascia and they don't know what it means.

The point is not that muscles are not important. The point is that muscles work within a continuous matrix of connective tissue. Connective tissue fibers grow and change structure according to the forces applied to them. the tendons at the ends of muscles are thickenings of the connective tissue bags which wrap the muscles, not separate structures. these layers of connective tissues do not end at the "origin" or "insertion" points where tendons attach to bones, but are actually continuous across the joints. the muscles don't pull on the bones to create movement, they pull on their connective tissue bags which pull on the bones.

again: connective tissue structures (including bones) develop according to the forces applied to them. they get thicker, but also the fibers line up in the direction of the force moving through them. if we can spread force smoothly through our whole body from feet to head or feet to hands, foot on one side through the spine and core to the hand on the other side, tailbone through the spine to the top of the head, etc, then over time the connective tissue fibers along these lines of force will naturally line up and these elastic connective tissue structures will function in a more cohesive manner. "efficient skeletal transmission of force" is made possible by cohesive, well aligned fibers in the connective tissues which wrap the bones and the muscles throughout the body.

injuries, sickness, physical and emotional habits, all create different "holding patterns" in our bodies where our muscles become contracted and pull bones out of alignment, and over time this also causes the connective tissues to harden and become stuck, and the fibers in the connective tissue will also become warped and knotted instead of being smoothly aligned. changing the movement patterns so that forces are not getting stuck in these problem areas or bypassing them them entirely will gradually cause the tissues to reshape themselves accordingly.

Obviously the nervous system is also intimately involved in every part of this process.

Outstanding pioneers of myofascial bodywork are Ida Rolf and her students.

If you don't know but are interested in understanding how these things work I would suggest starting with one of three books:

"Rolfing" by Ida Rolf
"The Endless Web - Fascial Anatomy and Physical Reality" by R. Louis Schultz and Rosemary Feitis
"Anatomy Trains" by Thomas Meyers


It is not new material. All of these methods are contained in traditional IMA, yoga, pilates, etc already.

[BruceP]

Well one example is when someone's about to throw a punch, you punch them in the pec/shoulder which cuts the force at its inception. Or even earlier, looking for movement cues and different signs of intention. Would that fall under 'jamming the force vector', in your opinion?

Yeah, Ian. What you said about the mind/intent interplay, moreso than tactics and intelligent fighting.

[klonk]

It depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Okay, that's not original.

[Bhassler]

Shooter, you may (apparently) be the only person on the planet who can answer my question:

Is it possible to structue a movement scenario whereby a person with no previous experience of IT could experience it for themselves, without having it demonstrated or approved by someone who already has IT? I'm not talking about developing a viable combat skill, just a glimpse of what IT feels like that one could build on and explore on their own.

Coming back to this mess for a bit.

Brian, despite how simple your request may seem, it was very challenging to work up a movement scenario that would give you a glimpse of IT. Anyway, here goes.

I've worked construction more than half my life as a carpenter, scaffolder, structural welder etc. A few of us used to play a game whenever we were working at height where we'd walk out onto a beam (5 or 6 inches wide) and then stand still (with no safety line) and look straight up into the sky. With clouds moving overhead and no peripheral features to orient with, one had to be sunk, relaxed, and centered. Just to one-up the others, some of us would close our eyes. Doing something similar is a simple exercise you can do to glimpse the primer.

You don't have to be thirty feet off the ground to explore the exercise - eight feet or less will do. As long as it is enough to put you on alert, it'll contain the requisite internal functionings that I've found to be present in the meditative practice I mentioned earlier. I went outside this morning and stood on one of my sawhorses which has a 2x6 top plate and listened for the frequency just to make sure it was an accurate equivalent of the 'state' I've learned to work within in the stationary ball drill. It was, and then some. It's best to do the exercise outdoors and to be high enough that there are no peripheral features (trees, buildings etc) to visually orient yourself. The sky can be cloudy or clear...doesn't matter.

Find a long, narrow, elevated surface (five or six inches wide) and stand one foot in front of the other so your feet are centered. Slowly tilt your head back and center your gaze. Instead of using the usual tug of war of agonistic/antagonist, focus on your 'dantien' movement as a stabilizer. Roll it in whatever direction you feel necessary to stay centered. I wiggle it so as not to get too much 'momentum'. Listen for right or left weightedness. Right-weightedness is too much thinking or dialogue. Left-weightedness is to much physical activity. The opposite may be true for you so you'll have to work that out in your own exploration. It's a mere glimpse of the equilibrium and internal balance of core tension, and neutrality of mind that primes the movement, but it doesn't take the center outside of yourself so it fails to emulate IT on even a basic level. The stationary ball drill puts the center outside, between the hands. With the primer in place and the center contained in the ball (or beyond the ball), you're playing with power.

Focus on the tension that creeps up your core as your head tilts back. That's the balance and invigoration that primes IT. That uneasiness in your gut is 'dantien' that naturally disperses when the frequency is off. If you can find the internal mechanism/response/sequence to consolidate 'dantien' before it disperses into your thoughts and hyperactivity on the initial lockdown of looking up, you're halfway there.

If you can close your eyes, you'll get a completely different experience again, and it might help to give you more than just a glimpse of the primer.
Bruce

That's absolutely brilliant, Shooter. I've been taught IT a number of different ways, and just that little bit-- and the fact that that's what you would come up with as a "first step" towards IT-- gives me a much clearer perspective on your approach and what you consider to be the essential elements upon which everything else is based. What I felt was not anything I would consider really new, but it was definitely a different take and opens some avenues for exploration I had missed before.

To me, that's the kind of thing we should be looking for in discussion-- stuff that can be played with and used to enrich what hopefully are already reasonably functional training approaches that many of us have arrived at through years of our own practice.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

IT = Information Technology (technologist)

IS= Information Systems

that was easy!

*dusts off hands and walks away*