New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby liokault on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:01 am

junglist wrote:Well, THAT'S the reason why he wants a private forum. He is NOT suggesting people to close their minds and to not question, you are free to do in the public forum.


Look at the Shenfa thread, what Dan wants is to set the definition of IP. I don't see him wanting open discussion, I see him looking for more people who are prepared to listen to him.
liokault
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:00 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Sean on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:14 am

So, junglist, how do you determine who has knowledge and skill in this area? Who decides this and based upon what criteria?
Sean
Wuji
 
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Lille, France

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Dmitri on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:16 am

liokault wrote:what Dan wants is to set the definition of IP. I don't see him wanting open discussion, I see him looking for more people who are prepared to listen to him.

The core of Dan's problem is that these open discussions are participated in by EVERYONE. Imagine someone who never sparred but read a lot about it would start arguing online with you about finer points of sparring... would you not get annoyed at some point, IF you wanted a serious discussion? Then they might accuse you of "wanting to set the definition of sparring", not wanting an "open discussion", etc. And then a couple years later you meet in person, and they can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag, and then suddenly EVERYTHING is crystal clear to everyone and there are no more arguments (unless they're on some serious denial trip...) So then another guy like that comes on into another online discussion with you about sparring -- and the two of you go same route. After many such experiences, would you not start to get tired and cautious of some complete strangers online talking, very probably, out of their ass about something they don't actually DO? See the parallel, the point I'm trying to make here?

I'm not saying a subforum on RSF is a good (fair to the mods) idea -- UNLESS the admins here, like Fong, who are keeping this place, lest we forget, free of ads and free to all, are directly interested in doing so/in such "indoors" discussions. But I do understand the logic/where Dan comes from, in that sense, as I mentioned above. Hope what I'm saying here makes some sense. He never said he was afraid of disagreement or not willing to argue/discuss -- he's just tired of all the noise. From personal experience (and this was before he got so famous, with seminars and all :)) -- he's an extremely open-minded guy and if he sees something of actual VALUE, he will at least look into it, with a possibility, if it's worth it, of incorporating it into his teaching or even training. Maybe all this international fame and glory ;D changed him, -- it's possible I guess, as it's been a couple years now, but I very strongly doubt that.
Last edited by Dmitri on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dmitri
Great Old One
 
Posts: 9518
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA (USA)

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby liokault on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:19 am

Sean wrote:So, junglist, how do you determine who has knowledge and skill in this area? Who decides this and based upon what criteria?


Thats easy, the ones that agree with Dan have the skill silly.
liokault
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:00 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby ashe on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:25 am

chud wrote: Or got banned. I can think of 3 right off the top of my head.


anyone who got banned seldom contributed anything of worth to the overall discussion, sometimes for months before they got hammered.

during my tenure as a mod i can attest to the fact that there was always careful deliberation among six or more members of the mod staff before anyone got hammered. in the old days don bido wielded the ban hammer with an iron fist and struck like lightning, and that was when the forum was probably at it's peak in terms of quality of discussion.

the mods have been VERY hands off for at least the last two years. in some cases asleep at the wheel even, so i hardly would agree that over moderation via banning knowledgeable members has been the problem.
discipline, concentration & wisdom
----------------------------------------
http://iliqchuan.com/
Twitter @luoyegongfu
Facebook Page
User avatar
ashe
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:08 pm
Location: phoenix, az

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby RobP2 on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:25 am

junglist wrote:
But if you want to discuss some details about the process of learning bodyskill that's different from what modern Western athletics in an effort to progress, I also wouldn't want someone coming in with no knowledge or no skill to say "d00d, w3 d3w d4t in MMA cl4ss!".


Is that how MMA guys speak? I never knew

Would Mike sigman be allowed in?

To be honest I'd rather anyone who wants to know about the stuff I do just come and train with me or with any of the main guys, there is hardly a lack of opportunity. Getting involved in lengthy debates about ground paths, jins, is your leg bone connected to your hip bone and all the rest of it is not something I'd be interested in, even less so as a "private club" (ref Groucho Marx).

I'm happy to post clips / blogs and If anyone has a question about what I do I'll answer where I have the time - but for me this stuff is about feeling and doing not debating. Sharing information is one thing, anything you can do I can do better is something else
Last edited by RobP2 on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
"If your life seems dull and boring - it is" - Derek & Clive
http://www.systemauk.com/
User avatar
RobP2
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3152
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:05 am
Location: UK

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Pandrews1982 on Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:53 am

Why not simply split the forum so that there is a place for ontopic "internal" discussion and somewhere for "external" discussion.

Even if the classification of what is internal and what is external isn't clear it may reduce some of the "Isn't BJJ fabulous, especially those figure hugging gis!" in the "Isn't Tai-chi simply splendid, especially in those revealing silk pajamas!" threads and visa versa.

I say why doesn't Dan just put up a single short video of a demonstration of what he would describe as IP, or provide us with some examples of other people in videos demonstrating what he woud describe as IP and why this is so. If he puts up his own video then he can disallow comments on the uploaded site (youtube whatever) and let the forum guys say what they will, forum discussions fade into the past and the video itself will have no negative attachements on the source site (youtube) and can even be pulled down after a set time. At least then people will have a benchmark which will allow people unfamiliar with Dan's methods to begin a discussion on his terms, whether they agree with them or not.
Pandrews1982
Great Old One
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:04 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby SteveBonzak on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:02 am

I am all for a subsection like that as well. I think it would do a lot to help people develop along a certain line of thought without being distracted by people who just want to talk shit.

-Steve
SteveBonzak
Anjing
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:23 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby chud on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:11 am

ashe wrote:
anyone who got banned seldom contributed anything of worth to the overall discussion, sometimes for months before they got hammered.


Well I would respectfully disagree. The three I am thinking of all contributed useful training information to the forum.

ashe wrote: in the old days don bido wielded the ban hammer with an iron fist and struck like lightning, and that was when the forum was probably at it's peak in terms of quality of discussion.



I agree, Felipe did a great job.
User avatar
chud
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 7:42 am
Location: Alamo City, Lone Star State

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Patrick on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:15 am

So how must we talk of things, that they qualify as IMA-worthy?

Yesterday I kicked him in the nuts.
Yesterday I carefully used my Yi to guide the Qi to my foot, and then disturbed the flow of energy of my oponents jing production center.
http://www.dhyana-fitness.at- The philosophy and practice of a healthy life
User avatar
Patrick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 3:52 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Bodywork on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:22 am

liokault wrote:
junglist wrote:Well, THAT'S the reason why he wants a private forum. He is NOT suggesting people to close their minds and to not question, you are free to do in the public forum.


Look at the Shenfa thread, what Dan wants is to set the definition of IP. I don't see him wanting open discussion, I see him looking for more people who are prepared to listen to him.

While I appreciate the insult along with the other slam from some others about those "wanting to discuss internals in and internal forum as elitists" and having big ego's, they still do not address the underlying reality.
The majority of those posting don't have a clue about internal strength and it is obvious.
They are mixing up techniques and principles of movement with IP.

As for wanting to have people just agree with me...no I really don't. For years I came to the original EF and then RSF and read, learned, shared and discussed. Fortunately there were people writing substantive material back then. It's all but been drowned out.

Now I will ask you some questions
1. Do you think you are equal in skill and knowledge to certain people here?
2. Do you supposed there are things you have no clue how to do?

I know were I to attend a BJJ seminar with Rickson Gracie I would shut up and learn.
I have met and sparred with five Systema teachers. Although I dominated them all, in the process I got an education about what they do why they do it and how they do it. Why? Because I shut up and listened. Outside of one on one combatives--I walked away with a very high opinion of Systema.
I also know from fighting/ sparring / training with everyone from men with establised BJJ and MMA records, Shihan and many ICMA people...it was time for them to listen.. and some of the knowledgeable ones, shared.
It isn't about ego. The arts are above us all. We all are learning. But sir we are not all equal in skill, not by a long shot. If you think your voice and your opinions are equal to some serious heavy hitters here; both on the internal and external side then I suggest the ego problem.....is your own.
Dan
Last edited by Bodywork on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bodywork

 

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby junglist on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:23 am

Sean wrote:So, junglist, how do you determine who has knowledge and skill in this area? Who decides this and based upon what criteria?


Good question. I guess meet-ups are necessary and then we decide who has skill or not. People meet each other and they vouch for people they have met. Dan has been vouched for by many people that I consider reliable and sincere. I have personally felt Akuzawa, Rob John, and Vlad, and the people that have met Dan and admitted his real skill have met the same three (who have similar and related skills) I have mentioned. So in my books, Dan's words are worth considering and not "debating". He is pointing to a skill in his body that he wants to share and does share with others, and words may not suffice, but to "debate" him as if to suggest that he has no skill or that there is no such thing as internal skill or that he has no special skill that set him apart from other athletic people is meaningless in my eyes. To debate him on the merit of his words is pretty stupid, especially if you yourself do not have the skill or have not encountered it.

This is martial arts, not academics. We learn these skills not so we can wave arms and feel mystical about ourselves but to learn how to kick ass. We learn these skills not so we can "debate" them on an internet forum. For me, discussion is for pure progress not for "debate", which is why I hardly post here. I would rather post on the Aunkai facebook group. We are not talking about postmodernism here, but discussing real skills. If you want to debate, debate hands on. The debate's verdict will be decided there. If not, I think it's best and respectful that we shut our mouths about what we dont know.
Last edited by junglist on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
junglist
Anjing
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:42 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby junglist on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:32 am

RobP2 wrote:
junglist wrote:
But if you want to discuss some details about the process of learning bodyskill that's different from what modern Western athletics in an effort to progress, I also wouldn't want someone coming in with no knowledge or no skill to say "d00d, w3 d3w d4t in MMA cl4ss!".


Is that how MMA guys speak? I never knew

Would Mike sigman be allowed in?

To be honest I'd rather anyone who wants to know about the stuff I do just come and train with me or with any of the main guys, there is hardly a lack of opportunity. Getting involved in lengthy debates about ground paths, jins, is your leg bone connected to your hip bone and all the rest of it is not something I'd be interested in, even less so as a "private club" (ref Groucho Marx).

I'm happy to post clips / blogs and If anyone has a question about what I do I'll answer where I have the time - but for me this stuff is about feeling and doing not debating. Sharing information is one thing, anything you can do I can do better is something else


No, but Im starting to see a lot of these former kung fu guys now doing MMA and saying that what they do in MMA is what they do in kung fu/tai chi whatever. It's very misleading even after felt "athletic" type of MMA guys and feeling someone like Vlad or Akuzawa. Totally different training approaches.

I personally dont like lengthy debates about terminology and such..for the most part, I engage in "discussion" so that I can progress in skill. The words people say point to a "reality" about a precise skill that we have to practise and drill.
junglist
Anjing
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:42 am

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Bodywork on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:33 am

Dmitri wrote:
liokault wrote:what Dan wants is to set the definition of IP. I don't see him wanting open discussion, I see him looking for more people who are prepared to listen to him.

The core of Dan's problem is that these open discussions are participated in by EVERYONE. Imagine someone who never sparred but read a lot about it would start arguing online with you about finer points of sparring... would you not get annoyed at some point, IF you wanted a serious discussion? Then they might accuse you of "wanting to set the definition of sparring", not wanting an "open discussion", etc. And then a couple years later you meet in person, and they can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag, and then suddenly EVERYTHING is crystal clear to everyone and there are no more arguments (unless they're on some serious denial trip...) So then another guy like that comes on into another online discussion with you about sparring -- and the two of you go same route. After many such experiences, would you not start to get tired and cautious of some complete strangers online talking, very probably, out of their ass about something they don't actually DO? See the parallel, the point I'm trying to make here?

I'm not saying a subforum on RSF is a good (fair to the mods) idea -- UNLESS the admins here, like Fong, who are keeping this place, lest we forget, free of ads and free to all, are directly interested in doing so/in such "indoors" discussions.But I do understand the logic/where Dan comes from, in that sense, as I mentioned above. Hope what I'm saying here makes some sense. He never said he was afraid of disagreement or not willing to argue/discuss -- he's just tired of all the noise.


Exactly. I don't have anything to add to that! ;)

From personal experience (and this was before he got so famous, with seminars and all :)) -- he's an extremely open-minded guy and if he sees something of actual VALUE, he will at least look into it, with a possibility, if it's worth it, of incorporating it into his teaching or even training. Maybe all this international fame and glory ;D changed him, -- it's possible I guess, as it's been a couple years now, but I very strongly doubt that.

Fame and Glory? Where?
Unless you count all of us in a room making fun of each other and realizing that no one but us gives a shit about this stuff...as our glory! ::)
No dude I haven't changed...but like when we met; I still like hearing other takes on IP/aiki and testing them, me and it, to see what is good and what is shit. In the end it makes us all better!

Wait..one thing did change. I had my eyes opened! After years of debating certain types of people with certain markers in their discussion, then meeting them around the world and realizing they had shit and you could wak through them, I now know the type of talking points people just like them raise and what it says about their skills. Now I know better who to avoid talking to.
Dan
Last edited by Bodywork on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bodywork

 

Re: New private sub-section for internal power discussions

Postby Dmitri on Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:43 am

Bodywork wrote:Fame and Glory? Where?
Unless you count all of us in a room making fun of each other and realizing that no one but us gives a shit about this stuff...as our glory! ::)

I was being sarcastic of course... hence the smiley.

In the end it makes us all better!

+42
User avatar
Dmitri
Great Old One
 
Posts: 9518
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA (USA)

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest