Likes Likes:  0
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 76

Thread: What actually makes an art 'internal'?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    114
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default Frame the question

    Chris,
    What question? You asked me the practical value. I told you. Nontelegraphic movement. For me, as a guy who is mostly concerned with sport fighting, this is a good thing.

    I posted videos of people doing it, i.e. shifting their weight without leaning. How is that nebulous? Can't you tell the difference between a person who leans to shift their weight, and one who doesn't? What is nebulous about that? Here's a nonnebulous test for you: stand in a front stance. Without leaning back, pick up your front leg and step forward. Certainly you can see the advantage of doing that without leaning back right? Non telegraphic kicks? Or moving forward to punch without first telegraphing? That sure makes a difference in the outcome. If you telegraph, then that punch or kick doesn't land because the opponent sees it coming. If you don't telegraph, then the opponent isn't ready for the kick/punch and then they eat the strike. What's hard to understand about that?

    You've seen Arakaki's book, "Secrets of Okinawan Karate" right? He goes _in depth_ on this.

    I have answered your questions, and all you can do is stick your fingers in your ears and claim I'm not answering.

    I explained it. You ignore me. Fine. It's almost like you have a vested reason in ignoring my points. If you cannot engage my points, then we are done talking. Because there is no conversation here, just me answering your questions, and you claiming I am not answering them.

    Go back to doing what you were doing. These are not the droids you are looking for.
    Last edited by edg176; 8th November 2006 at 17:21.
    Tim Fong

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    Mark

    Actually no, it really does not.

    In the first place, those are mostly "what if" kind of thing that can be spun in pretty much any direction a person wishs.

    2nd it makes assumptions that are not based upon facts.
    There is no evidence to suggest that a punch using "internal" power is any less damaging than a punch using "hard" external power.

    Having been hit by both---I can assure you that FEEL in NO way different--they BOTH hurt

    Options are good.

    BTW--exactly where and how did I give you the impression that I DON'T think that options are good??????
    Last edited by cxt; 8th November 2006 at 17:28.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    edge

    Are we having the same conversation here?

    What I asked/we were talking about were about the EFFECTS of the blow.

    NOT/NOTHING about "telegraphing" etc.

    It was about "hows" of a blow being generated being are much less important than the "results" of said blow---IMO.

    Tell you what--you quote back to me the exact section of my post where I asked you about "telagraphing" and I'll ship you the entre Box Set of Star Wars.

    (since you like the quotes--and seem to enjoy dealing with the Force )

    Your bringing alot of dead weight into this discussion that I never placed there.
    My statements deal directly and specifcally with RESULTS.
    Never said ANYTHING about "telegraphing" at all---that ALL YOU bro.

    But as long as were on the subject---what about speed??
    I could "telegraph" all day long and if your not fast enough to respond--then it matters zero.
    Or what if your not aware enough to notice the "telegraph?"
    Or what if I'm faking the "telegraph?"
    Or what if I'm strong enough/hit hard enough that you simply can't block/deflect it enough to save you?

    I can play "what if's" as well.
    Last edited by cxt; 8th November 2006 at 17:31.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  4. #19
    Mark Murray Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cxt
    Mark

    Actually no, it really does not.

    In the first place, those are mostly "what if" kind of thing that can be spun in pretty much any direction a person wishs.

    2nd it makes assumptions that are not based upon facts.
    There is no evidence to suggest that a punch using "internal" power is any less damaging than a punch using "hard" external power.

    Having been hit by both---I can assure you that FEEL in NO way different--they BOTH hurt

    Options are good.

    BTW--exactly where and how did I give you the impression that I DON'T think that options are good??????
    Chris,
    Guess we have different experiences. I've been hit with blows using external muscle and with internal power. They were very different to me. But, as the saying goes, your mileage may vary.

    It's a matter of perspective, I guess. To me, I view the blows as having separate aspects. Therefore, IMO, if someone views them as being the same, then they don't have the same view of amount of options that I have. Never said you didn't think that options aren't good, just explaining my view of there being multiple options. You've got a different view of things. Got no problems with that.

    Now, back to the subject ... What actually does make an art "internal"?

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    Mark

    I respectfully disagree.

    You seem to be talking about "options" as multiple ways to generate power.

    Have no problem with that at all.

    But I'm talking about the results/application of that power--so I see no reason why that would "limit" me in the slightest.

    If I could come up with an "across the board" pithy way to define/explain "internal" power, that most folks would accept--and I could work the proofs for---I'd do it.

    But how much fun would that be---if everyone agreed??
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Outside of Phila.
    Posts
    1,494
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    In the mean time, you don't mind if the others here who DO find value in it continue to discuss? Correct?

    Best,
    Ron

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    Ron

    "In the meantime you don't mind if the others that DO find value in it continue to discuss, correct?"

    What???

    I have no clue what your being sarcastic about.

    Have I made any statements here that I find "no value" in internal arts??

    Considering that I freely admitted that I recived quite a arse-kicking from a internal stylist--which would rather broadly suggest that I DO "find value" in its study.
    Exactly what statements did I make that leads you to the conculsion that I find "no value" in the study of internal arts?

    What the heck is wrong with people today?????

    You want to bag on me--its a free country.

    But at least do me the kindness of doing so for what I actually have said---and not what you "think" your hearing.

    Sounds like you and edge are both having seriously different conversations than the one I'm having.

    "Best"
    Chris
    Last edited by cxt; 8th November 2006 at 18:38.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    557
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    What does it matter to the poor person ko'd how he was put down?

    Many top taiji players used to be strong, even top, hard style fighters...Chen Zhonghua included.

    They were attracted to the internal styles because of their invisible subtleties causing the "How did he do that?" curiousity. They stayed because they found a system that they felt was superior or it suited their personl makeup better.

    Seldom would you be ko'd by a n internal stylist who used silk reeling but you may have your elbow twisted until it is so broken it will never work properly again. Or your knee or ankle.

    Chen Zhonghua has said that the Chen practical method is superior for a small framed person like himself to deal with the power and strength of a large person than his old hard style skills, skills which we all know fail all to often under the weight of a very large, strong person. In the Chen practical method, it doesn't matter how large your opponent is (how fast he is may be a different matter) superior training will defeat larger size, because the power of the rotation is stronger than any body part of even a very strong person.

    So the answer would be: it matters to the loser if his joints are destroyed and it matters to the winner if he is more efficient at handling tougher opponents. This implies that your question is seeking an answer you already believe in but by asking it, you forget there are other questions that have valuable answers.
    "Fear, not compassion, restrains the wicked."

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    114
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default Weight transfer

    Ted,

    I noticed you were in Canada, as is Chen Zhonghua. What's been your experience with the whole weight shifting thing I was discussing? Very curious.
    Tim Fong

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    Sochin

    Nope.

    That is what you infer, not what I implied.

    The reason I asked the question was to nip in the bud the entire assumptive discussion as to "which art is better."

    In this case, external vs internal.

    I hate those pointless, endless, circle jerks kind of things.

    (grappling vs strikeing, "modern" JJ vs "traditional" JJ, karate vs kung-fu, MMA vs "traditonal" external arts vs internal, crane vs tiger, Taji vs Hsing-I, take your pick)

    By focusing on results, we can at least establish that any number of methods and approachs (depending on the skill of the user of course ) may be equally effective in terms of result--a "KO" a broken nose, a lock, a unbalenceing of an oppt--whatever.

    Thus we can then talk about the methods themselves without having to mess around with all the claims about which is "better."

    Because the "best" art/method etc is the one that works when you need it.

    No matter what that art/method might be.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    edg

    Still waiting for you to post exactly where I asked/was talking about "telegraphing" in my posts.

    The proper response when you accuse someone of something that they didn't actually do, or make unfounded assumptions about ones posts is to say "I'm sorry" and/or "Oops."

    Perhaps instead of worrying so much about "weight shifting" and "telegraphing" a tiny bit of courtesy would not be a bad thing to train in??

    That is after all one of the claimed virtues--esp in CMA.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  12. #27
    Mark Murray Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cxt
    Sochin

    Nope.

    That is what you infer, not what I implied.

    The reason I asked the question was to nip in the bud the entire assumptive discussion as to "which art is better."

    In this case, external vs internal.

    I hate those pointless, endless, circle jerks kind of things.

    (grappling vs strikeing, "modern" JJ vs "traditional" JJ, karate vs kung-fu, MMA vs "traditonal" external arts vs internal, crane vs tiger, Taji vs Hsing-I, take your pick)

    By focusing on results, we can at least establish that any number of methods and approachs (depending on the skill of the user of course ) may be equally effective in terms of result--a "KO" a broken nose, a lock, a unbalenceing of an oppt--whatever.

    Thus we can then talk about the methods themselves without having to mess around with all the claims about which is "better."

    Because the "best" art/method etc is the one that works when you need it.

    No matter what that art/method might be.
    But all of that is off topic. The question is what actually makes an art "internal". Do you have any ideas on that?

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    Mark

    "Heavy sigh" actually no, its a direct response to direct statements made by others to me.
    My responding to them is not "off topic."
    Unless of course you wish to lecture them as well---if so--please direct your comments to everyone that has posted "off topic."

    Also pretty sure that I have delt with the topic, directly, multiple times.

    Just don't have an accurate guess as to what exactly makes an art "internal" and what/where/whom that line is drawn.

    Like I said, Taji, Hsing-I, Bua Gua all take different approachs to training--yet all are seen as being "internal."

    Maybe a good place to start is what each of them have in common and what each of them do differently.
    Last edited by cxt; 8th November 2006 at 19:38.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    557
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    taiji:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUDNr8v7eRI
    Chen Zhonghua shows that even though he's in a deep horse stance, his _weight_ is mostly on one leg.
    We are asked to rotate in the qua and shift the weight from front to back to front leg while rotating. This must be accomplished without swaying, or, in positive terms, while staying centered in the dang or the arch of the legs, unless the rotation pulls you into a step.

    "Mostly on one leg" would not be agreeable to him I think, in the rear or front qua would be better but I can't speak for him!

    Chris: I was implying that I was implying the obvious...not you.
    "Fear, not compassion, restrains the wicked."

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,392
    Likes (received)
    83

    Default

    Sochin

    Sorry Sochin, my mistake.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •