Discoveries to share, if you are the type

[PaulLin]

I have just discover that in the Western tournaments, the ground/stage is bouncing type. To an internal CMA, all strikes are rooted in feet. And that bouncing ground would cancel about 80% of the rooted force. Without rooted forces, the only 2 skills that will be on the top are submissive holdings and swing strikes. Which are all external types.

Another things is that all fighter I have seen in tournaments mainly used muscle force. No one can use tendon force effectively. Muscles are better in holding and tendons are better to spring with force. And yet, no one used Qi. There are different styles trained in favorite of using muscle, tendons, or Qi. The internal type would focusing on tendons and Qi, the external would focus on muscle, some time tendons too.

The above catagories are just what I orginized to help me train and recognize the others. They has been used by many TCMArtists in the past. I hope some one can find it useful.

[respectmankind]

that got me thinking. all of my training has been based in external. i have never known what people ment by.... penetrating power... ect. well, not that i didn't know, but more of i just never conected it the way you just did for me. thanks

[PaulLin]

Thanks. Forgot about the Qi type. Qi is good for after you contect opponet. In another word, do you know what forces you have sent in your opponent's body? Can you feel what the forces were doing in it? Before you can using Qi out there, you must be able to kown what types of Qi and feel what are they doing inside of your own body.

In theory, above that in internal is the electro-magnetic forces and mind forces. I have no experiences in them and they seems to be legend as for now, no one really has them. Many people out there would fake to claim they achieved these levels but in fact, they can't even show they achieved the tendon or Qi level.

Ps.
Does CIA also monitor us?

[diego]

Hello PaulLin, Would you break down the working differance between muscle strike and tendon/bonestrentgh strike.
Im not totally clear onthese so i dont know how to word this, i guess would you write the biological differances and maybe give an example thru similar applications.

And then i am curious you wrote can you read the forces you sent, in your lineage what sort of forces are we talking about?.:cool:

[HuangKaiVun]

When in tournaments, do as the judges expect if you intend to win.

[rogue]

"Does CIA also monitor us?"

If they don't, some of us here will. Anyway it's usually the NSA that handles that kind of thing.

Attn: Black Jack, spin up the black copter, we'll pick up JWT and Watchman on the way to California. :D

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by diego
Hello PaulLin, Would you break down the working differance between muscle strike and tendon/bonestrentgh strike.
Im not totally clear onthese so i dont know how to word this, i guess would you write the biological differances and maybe give an example thru similar applications.

And then i am curious you wrote can you read the forces you sent, in your lineage what sort of forces are we talking about?.:cool:

Generally, the pure breaking up forces--yang and the pure condencing forces--yin was stored in your body. However, when you using them, you cannot use pure yin nor yang. You will have to use a combination of them. For example, out side yin and inside yang, it would hit like bullet. Out side yang and inside yin, you will have a wave like strike. If you sent condencing force into your opponent's body, it will case extra blockage in the system that needs extra breaking up power to restore to normal. If you sent breaking up force, it will breaking up the strucktures and need a longer time to rebuild. And all strikes has a combine of both forces. Timing also matters, how much you out let the different forces in the beggining or you open with minimum and let the main force out at the end of strike. And then you have to match the forces you sent to the condition and type of your opponent's to make maximum result.

And yet, knowing don't give any, must able to feel it to make it work.

[HuangKaiVun]

After 10+ years of training, this is what I discovered about strength and rooting and all that -

either you can fight or you can't fight.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
After 10+ years of training, this is what I discovered about strength and rooting and all that -

either you can fight or you can't fight.

That is more utilitarism, it is strongly good for the 10 yard plan. I think after you more leisure times after you have achieve your goal, maybe you can try out some idealism. Just a friendly suggestion.:)

[HuangKaiVun]

Actually, what I'm doing IS idealism.

All of the things you recommend are but means to an end - and the end is the ability to fight. Isn't the reason we practice all those little drills in kung fu - to be able to handle ourselves in confrontations?

Besides, the best laid plans are torn asunder by the opponent who doesn't attack in a set pattern. The best internal or external strike doesn't mean squat if the strike doesn't connect. And even if it does, remember that you're striking at a MOVING TARGET that's trying to evade the blow.

So instead of getting too hung up in "internal this, external that", get in the ring and test the skills.

By the time one's finished worrying about the types of strikes he's going to deliver, the match will have already ended in DEFEAT.

[fa_jing]

So Paul, you were saying that the bouncy surfaces used in Western sportfighting make rootedness less attainable and less important of a concept? Just curious, have you tested this out, or is this something you've heard personally from sport-fighters? It seems like a reasonable theory.

-FJ

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun

Besides, the best laid plans are torn asunder by the opponent who doesn't attack in a set pattern. The best internal or external strike doesn't mean squat if the strike doesn't connect. And even if it does, remember that you're striking at a MOVING TARGET that's trying to evade the blow.


Of course that is moving target, that is why there are 50% of the strikes power came form your opponent. If you can not catch your opponent's moves, you will have to gave out twice as much forces to complete same level of strikes.

External and internal ways are how I organized my training, as following the TCMA's way that I adapt form the old days in China where my lineage is. I do see the shortage sides and the advantage sides of training in different ways and I think I should working on the side that is almost lost, sharping it, and add it to the MA world when ready. The purpose of sharing this is to share what I have gone though, so some one out there who interested in this way may pick up some things and make the improvement faster and benefit the MA world. A single person is limited, I want to have more people to working on it.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by fa_jing
So Paul, you were saying that the bouncy surfaces used in Western sportfighting make rootedness less attainable and less important of a concept? Just curious, have you tested this out, or is this something you've heard personally from sport-fighters? It seems like a reasonable theory.

-FJ

Bisically, a rooted force has 3 kind of power in a strike, sticking, breaking, and follow through. The hollow ground will disable the rooted breaking power. So the breaking power can only generated by swing or leaping, in which are not rooted.

[guohuen]

Actually you can root on a hollow surface.
Kai, did you really understand what PaulLin wrote?

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by guohuen
Actually you can root on a hollow surface.
Kai, did you really understand what PaulLin wrote?

How you do that:confused:

[HuangKaiVun]

I understood EXACTLY what Paul Lin wrote, having trained that stuff myself.

None of my teachers in the traditional CMAs ever classified themselves or their strikes as "internal" or "external". They just HIT HARD.

Since Paul Lin feels that he knows better than the majority of CMAs who "bounce" in tournaments, why not put the art to the TEST? Let's see how he does in competition using this stuff.

Keep in mind that Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis and Muhammad Ali and Bruce Lee all bounced. Ali even had the tongbei style leaping jing learned from Korean Tae Kwon Do in his knockout jab ("fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee").

Those guys did absolutely FINE with bouncing. And I don't think they bounced because the canvas was pliable.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by guohuen
Use yor yi to send your chi deeper and wider.

I am not going to wast my qi to repair these whatever if I ever did that. So I rather not begin it that way. I will have to take a longer way to do this.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
I understood EXACTLY what Paul Lin wrote, having trained that stuff myself.

None of my teachers in the traditional CMAs ever classified themselves or their strikes as "internal" or "external". They just HIT HARD.

Since Paul Lin feels that he knows better than the majority of CMAs who "bounce" in tournaments, why not put the art to the TEST? Let's see how he does in competition using this stuff.

Keep in mind that Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis and Muhammad Ali and Bruce Lee all bounced. Ali even had the tongbei style leaping jing learned from Korean Tae Kwon Do in his knockout jab ("fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee").

Those guys did absolutely FINE with bouncing. And I don't think they bounced because the canvas was pliable.

If you would think your internal TCMA teacher hit efficient, rather than hard, you will understand what I am saying now. The hollowness of the tournament gournd will favorit to yield in and stick the strikes, but missing the breaking in power. If bounce and swing, you will have breaking in power but the follow up power will not be avialible.

I am writing here to give all people here who were interested in practicing the true TCMA, many people's effort will be better than few alone. The true TCMA was way short of being known. You are one of the reasons that why I am so much want to pass out the info.

[Merryprankster]

PaulLin,

I generally appreciate your comments, but these are starting to fall squarely under "excuses" rather than, "reasons," especially when combined with your comments from the other thread w/regard to seeing true TCMA in action in the ring.

I do not feel TCMA or any other art has anything to prove. But if somebody feels like competing or desires to discuss these arts as they relate to ringfighting, discussing the surface of the venue hardly qualifies as a reason for success or failure.

A ring surface has been used for many years for all kinds of fighting. It does not favor any one type of attack or style of movement and attack over another.

It is equivalent, roughly, to fighting on a decent lawn. I can't imagine that any attack would be at an advantage or disadvantage on the grass.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
PaulLin,

I generally appreciate your comments, but these are starting to fall squarely under "excuses" rather than, "reasons," especially when combined with your comments from the other thread w/regard to seeing true TCMA in action in the ring.

I do not feel TCMA or any other art has anything to prove. But if somebody feels like competing or desires to discuss these arts as they relate to ringfighting, discussing the surface of the venue hardly qualifies as a reason for success or failure.

A ring surface has been used for many years for all kinds of fighting. It does not favor any one type of attack or style of movement and attack over another.

It is equivalent, roughly, to fighting on a decent lawn. I can't imagine that any attack would be at an advantage or disadvantage on the grass.

Not really excuses. It just need longer time to reatch a level that can over come such man-made unnatual environment. And to fight in tounament is not encouraged in TCMA, to fight in every day life is.

[Merryprankster]

Ok PaulLin--I don't necessarily agree with you, but now at least, I understand what you are saying :)

Have you ever moved on a ring surface? It really does feel like a lawn!

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Ok PaulLin--I don't necessarily agree with you, but now at least, I understand what you are saying :)

Have you ever moved on a ring surface? It really does feel like a lawn!

Have a lot of things needs to try out, just need a break form the American life pressure.

Howcome they are not like you, to undersand TCMA just trained different than modern or other traditional arts? I am not trying to win any matches over words, that $ucks. I am only trying to help on a new(actually very old) area of developments that I see where was not done enough? Is getting rid of blind spot must be provoking other's self-proud?

I think I am just going to stop wasting time on this kind of non-benefitial battles. I have not enough time already.

[Merryprankster]

PaulLin--

I don't necessarily agree with the TCMA approach--but then again, I don't necessarily disagree with it either.

Different doesn't necessarily mean bad. It just means different, and that applies to all of us.

What I object to is when people say things like "I can't fight in the ring because the rules are too restrictive or they favor grapplers, etc" and then turn around and say that they can beat you in the street.

In other words, I don't like excuses. You are blessedly free of them, everytime I've talked to you. We don't necessarily see eye to eye on everything, and there are times where I think you are not correct in your statements-- but you don't offer excuses.

That's why I like Shooter too--he's not a TCMA apologist--he just sends his guys out to kick butt. I don't agree with everything he says and does, but he doesn't offer a bunch of silly excuses about performance.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
PaulLin--

I don't necessarily agree with the TCMA approach--but then again, I don't necessarily disagree with it either.

Different doesn't necessarily mean bad. It just means different, and that applies to all of us.

What I object to is when people say things like "I can't fight in the ring because the rules are too restrictive or they favor grapplers, etc" and then turn around and say that they can beat you in the street.

In other words, I don't like excuses. You are blessedly free of them, everytime I've talked to you. We don't necessarily see eye to eye on everything, and there are times where I think you are not correct in your statements-- but you don't offer excuses.

That's why I like Shooter too--he's not a TCMA apologist--he just sends his guys out to kick butt. I don't agree with everything he says and does, but he doesn't offer a bunch of silly excuses about performance.

Is it legal to go out and testing your skills? Won't get sue? The way goes like this, if you have little money, you are more hesitate because you can't pay for any mistakes, and if you have totally no money, then you are fearless (in old Chinese saying).

I am not interested in saying I can kick any one's tails either. That is totally against the TCMA moral(wu de). I am only giving another way of direction for developing the arts.

[scotty1]

Hey Paul, anyother comments you can add on the Qigong forum?
:) ;) :D

I admire your intentions in starting the thread (sharing knowledge) and the fact that you ahve obviously put some thought into the issue.

[Merryprankster]

I'm sorry-- I should have been less wordy.

What I am trying to say is that the reason I don't mind your postings, even if I do not agree all the time, is because you don't offer up silly excuses about success and failure.

In other words, I don't necessarily agree with your viewpoint 100% of the time, or your reasoning 100% of the time. However, you come across your convictions honestly without making an excuse for winning or losing.

It's all meant as a compliment!

[Mr Punch]

To Paul,
thanks for the original thought.

To MP,
for once, I think you're off your chump! I don't think they're anything like lawns! Maybe a top-notch, 300-year-old stately home kind o' lawn, with occasional trimming by some well-fertilising ovines, and a nice subgrowth of semi-hardy chamomile and phagus moss... hmm, nice...:D I wanna go to the lawns you hang out on!! Do you play croquet between bouts!?

Seriously, I don't think the feel is the same though... maybe closer to traditional tatami with a canvas cover?

I see where Paul's coming from, but I can also see your point about boxers. The only thing I can directly relate it to off the top of my head, is the vibration you get back from the front foot after a kendo strike on a seasoned wood gym/dojo floor. I appreciate that may not be such a useful comparison, but you know the feel of wooden gyms...

You say there is no bounce but it is more than a static surface: wouldn't you say that a good fighter can utilise this give in the surface?

And to anyone, the less you agree, the more a reason might seem like an excuse. Vive le difference! Thanks all.

[Merryprankster]

Ah, Mat, I totally disagree--I think they feel a lot like lawns. I remember getting in the ring and thinking "hey neat! This feels a LOT like a fairway or a lawn!"

Of course, if people don't like my analogy, that's their perogative :)

[Mr Punch]

cheers!

i still disagree, but i sure wish they smelt of chamomile!!:o

so would you say there is a difference in how you use rooting in the ring to how you use it on a solid surface??

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by scotty1
Hey Paul, anyother comments you can add on the Qigong forum?
:) ;) :D

I admire your intentions in starting the thread (sharing knowledge) and the fact that you ahve obviously put some thought into the issue.

As you can see it is so busy here already. I will take my time to have more Qi talks. Especially after July 12, I should have more free time.

[HuangKaiVun]

PaulLin, do you realize that you are stating that Muhammad Ali and Tyson don't hit hard because they use that bouncing jing on a pliable surface?

Try taking a hit from either one of those guys - or a very skilled modern Tae Kwon Do bouncer. Those guys will HURT YOU with their bouncing.

YOU might not be able to get a good powerful strike by bouncing and thus prefer a more rooted methodology of striking, but there are many many people who CAN. I happen to be one of them.


Also, you are CLUELESS as to how much I (or people at KFO in general) know about TCMA.

Contrary to what you think, you are not the only American out there who has had real kung fu training. Look around you - there are people on this board who actually TRAIN.

I've had real hardcore training, and I'd be happy to show you what I learned in a friendly setting. My lineage is of the nonbouncing variety, and I have no hesitation in applying that knowledge in certain instances. Try my hands in open sparring and THEN tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about.

KNOW YOUR OPPONENT before you accuse him of ignorance.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
PaulLin, do you realize that you are stating that Muhammad Ali and Tyson don't hit hard because they use that bouncing jing on a pliable surface?

Try taking a hit from either one of those guys - or a very skilled modern Tae Kwon Do bouncer. Those guys will HURT YOU with their bouncing.

YOU might not be able to get a good powerful strike by bouncing and thus prefer a more rooted methodology of striking, but there are many many people who CAN. I happen to be one of them.


Also, you are CLUELESS as to how much I (or people at KFO in general) know about TCMA.

Contrary to what you think, you are not the only American out there who has had real kung fu training. Look around you - there are people on this board who actually TRAIN.

I've had real hardcore training, and I'd be happy to show you what I learned in a friendly setting. My lineage is of the nonbouncing variety, and I have no hesitation in applying that knowledge in certain instances. Try my hands in open sparring and THEN tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about.

KNOW YOUR OPPONENT before you accuse him of ignorance.

First of all, I don't see the idea of ignorance around. All different direction of development in training would left some blind spot due to what aspects they are focusing on and they must sacrafise/issolate the opposite in order to train in that direction. All arts has more or less of that. If you count that as ignorance, then all arts are ignorance in a way.

Tyson and Ali, they both don't have rooting strikes. Tyson have to lean towards the direction of where he is going to puch, so his force was based on his body momentum+weight, not directly form under the feet. Ali used swinging power mostly, they also jab in sping kind power, that was what they have ever come close to rooted kind, but not really is exactly.

The rooted kind forces are following right after the breaking in forces. It can strike more than one outlet, simultaneously. One must have many years of linking training until all the viborations can be passed form the center of palm to the center of feet freely without leaking any forces in the passage between them. This kind of force would appeared to be a very careful and soft strike. Being hard would stop the viboration to out let. And usually don't need much power to make this strike work. This is how I defind the term rooted power, I don't think any one out there on the show has ever done such strike.

Again, swinging and bouncing type cannot have both sticky and rooted power applied alone with, they will have only one breaking power out let per strikes.

[fa_jing]

I have never been in the ring, so I don't know what it feels like. I have been on soft grass, and felt no obstacle. However, I can imagine that ANY actual bounciness, would really mess me up, especially if I am on one leg for blocking or kicking. Maybe I would be able to adjust. Maybe foot sweeping/clipping would be an effective tactic on this surface - this is supposed to be the counter to a "bouncer." Anyone know of someone attempting to foot stomp the floor in the ring? Maybe send some shockwaves to your opponent to upset their root? Just curious.

Just wanted to clear up some apparent confusion - PauLin, the reference to Shooter sending out his students to "Kick Butt" means he's sending them for sportfighting matches, not streetfighting.

HuangVaiKun - PaulLin didn't claim those famous boxers didn't hit hard, he just said that they used swinging power and their power didn't come from their root. I think he's partially right, although a good uppercut requires a good root.

-FJ

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by fa_jing
I have never been in the ring, so I don't know what it feels like. I have been on soft grass, and felt no obstacle. However, I can imagine that ANY actual bounciness, would really mess me up, especially if I am on one leg for blocking or kicking. Maybe I would be able to adjust. Maybe foot sweeping/clipping would be an effective tactic on this surface - this is supposed to be the counter to a "bouncer." Anyone know of someone attempting to foot stomp the floor in the ring? Maybe send some shockwaves to your opponent to upset their root? Just curious.

Just wanted to clear up some apparent confusion - PauLin, the reference to Shooter sending out his students to "Kick Butt" means he's sending them for sportfighting matches, not streetfighting.

HuangVaiKun - PaulLin didn't claim those famous boxers didn't hit hard, he just said that they used swinging power and their power didn't come from their root. I think he's partially right, although a good uppercut requires a good root.

-FJ

I don't think the soft grass would be the same as a hollow floor when applying rooted force, the hollow floor would turn a shattering rooted force into a pushing force.

And yet, I forgot the hook/upper cut. That fits the rooted power, but it has only one out let/strike and doesn't come with the sticking-break in-follow up sequence.

Did Shooter said any thing about "Kick Butt'? I didn't see that. I was only replying to MP's words.

The most troubled part is the reflex move, reation, habits that was applied in the solide floor would got in the way when on a hollow floor. Wait till realize that one can be down on the count already. It needs a long time to be adjusted

[shaolinboxer]

"I don't think the soft grass would be the same as a hollow floor when applying rooted force, the hollow floor would turn a shattering rooted force into a pushing force. "

I'm not sure if that's necessarily true. If it is the floor moving that is the problem (absorbing the force), then a rexaled explosive movement should be able to over come this by moving faster then the floor can compensate.

Since adaptabilty is a hallmark of TCMA, I don't see why any surface should be a problem.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by shaolinboxer
"I don't think the soft grass would be the same as a hollow floor when applying rooted force, the hollow floor would turn a shattering rooted force into a pushing force. "

I'm not sure if that's necessarily true. If it is the floor moving that is the problem (absorbing the force), then a rexaled explosive movement should be able to over come this by moving faster then the floor can compensate.

Since adaptabilty is a hallmark of TCMA, I don't see why any surface should be a problem.

I see what you are talking about. You can have one outlet of rooting power that way. But not the simultaneous kind. Maybe a single outlet is all it needed.

Adapting is possible, just need more time.

I agree generally about what you said.