Please define uprooting?

[Merryprankster]

Could somebody help me out here? I assumed that uprooting meant leaving your stance and coming off balance on somebody else's terms, but I just don't know now.

The reason I don't know is because I have seen a couple of posts floating around about how it took "x" number of people to uproot somebody.

How do multiple people attempt to uproot in these tests? Is it anything like the parlor trick of the Shaolin Monk show, where several people all line up and "push" on each other with the final guy in the chain pushing on the "rooted" individual? I use the terms in quotations not as an insult but a question--person's lined up in that way contribute very little in the way of final force on the rooted individual. So it looks impressive, but it's hardly that difficult.

Anyway, I know that's a lot of info requested all at once, I'm just curious to try and obtain a definition of this.

[Xebsball]

i think uprooting means literaly lifting someone from the ground - making their feet leave touch with the floor.

the ways of doing it are many i think.

[IronFist]

So naive, so innocent
Thrust in a world too intense
Flesh is weak but the soul is strong
And you will bleed but you'll carry on

Xebsball, rock on!!! Steve Vai!

That's twice I've seen lyrics from awesome songs in your signature (the other one I recognized was Metropolis by Dream Theater).

IronFist

[Xebsball]

:D

Thats right, we have the best music taste on the forum :D

[Polaris]

It just means to unbalance/make them unstable. Your
assumption was correct.

[IronFist]

Hell yeah! :D

IronFist

[diego]

IronFist its just an assumption; no need to get excited:p

[Wu-Xing]

its more than just making them unstable. xebsball def is right and yeah, there are many ways of doing it.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Could somebody help me out here? I assumed that uprooting meant leaving your stance and coming off balance on somebody else's terms, but I just don't know now.

I would say this is accurate. You could uproot yourself though, in order to move in a certain way, but even then, a floating stance does not have to be uprooted.


The reason I don't know is because I have seen a couple of posts floating around about how it took "x" number of people to uproot somebody.

I would say these posts were quite uprooted (or is that unbalanced?:rolleyes:!)... because...


How do multiple people attempt to uproot in these tests? Is it anything like the parlor trick of the Shaolin Monk show, where several people all line up and "push" on each other with the final guy in the chain pushing on the "rooted" individual? ... So it looks impressive, but it's hardly that difficult.

... it is usually just that, a parlour trick.

I've seen and attempted standing demonstrations of this, and frankly, I don't believe it. Most of the time there are only two 'pushers'.

Usually the pushers aren't pushing with anything like their potential ability or power. I've seen similar demos with people trying to pull or lift other people, and through my own practice this would seem for some reason to be easier to resist. And I've seen and practised the same kind of demo (oh, Korea are through on penalty shoot-out!) with the rooter sitting in seiza which seems to work much better; logicly enough, as the centre of balance is much lower and in a more stable position. Strangely this doesn't seem to work as well with a cross legged position...

Merry: what are 'multiple people'? Are these people with more than the requisite amount of body parts, people with Multiple Personality Disorder, or very mixed martial artists??!:D

[HuangKaiVun]

When I studied Taijiquan under Jiang Jianye, we did push hands.

Once, a classmate of mine was able to get his hands around my lower midsection and send me FLYING. He did so not by muscling me, but by coiling his jing downwards and then stepping forward. In essence, he performed "Roll Back, Push" on me.

When he did that, I was propelled through the air. Granted, I'm very easy to send flying because I'm just 5'4" and 135 lbs. But the way he did it was very impressive - and he never got me like that again.

So THAT is what I think of when people mention "uprooting". I can imagine how a master like Cheng Man Ching could send all sorts of guys flying this way.

[Mr Punch]

Huang: is that not just another example of a method of uprooting?

it's a good one, but surely that kind of tai chi equips you to give better definitions than many other arts? just a thought...:)

[Polaris]

I disagree with the people saying that it means to make a
person's feet leave the ground. Though I may be incorrect.

To be "rooted" is to have a firm connection to the ground, so
therefore to "uproot" would be to cause them to lose that
connection. You don't need to knock them off their feet to
do so.

[Mr Punch]

Agreed.

Losing my handle on rooting now though!

[Wu-Xing]

To be "rooted" is to have a firm connection to the ground, so
therefore to "uproot" would be to cause them to lose that
connection. You don't need to knock them off their feet to
do so.

they can only fully loose that connection if their feet leave the ground, otherwise its like pulling up a tree most of the way and some of the roots still being in the ground, would you say that tree was fully up rooted? no, because you can obviously see some of its root cling to the soil.its the same with a person, their root must be severd completely, otherwise you are just breaking their balance and not uprooting them.

[CanadianBadAss]

i think this is what u mean right? rooted (http://www.tstvingtsun.bc.ca/Gallery06.html)

i Have it on video, and he's standing on a scale, on one foot, i think it goes up a couple hundred pounds with the guy pushing. He taught my sifu in hong kong and i've seen my teacher throw around guys who come in off the street to find out what our WC is about, guys who r much bigger and stronger.

He can do this because he is rooted, and a part of him being rooted is that his spine is straight and has perfect structure, that way, when he is pushed on he stays relaxed, and the force just goes into the ground. People who dont have that structure, will need to use muscle to push back and balance it, and won't be rooted.

[rogue]

That picture is funny, especially the two pushers.

[CanadianBadAss]

ya, and your face is funny.

I think it would be better if u just didnt talk.

[Braden]

rofl

[TjD]

one can be off the ground and still "rooted"

being uprooted is more losing your balance

i've been sent flying backwards more than a few times; and as long as i stay relaxed and focused on my root, when i land its still there for me; because i kept balanced the whole time

peace
travis

[Braden]

FWIW I throw my vote in with what the BadAss said.

[Merryprankster]

Braden--

Hook me up....

[Braden]

Whassup, G?

[Merryprankster]

I need your definition of rooting. You usually seem to make sense.

[Braden]

Really? I'll have to try harder then... ;p

What CBA said is what I've been taught / experienced. Although of course the pic he showed is just an isolation demo - like flexing your arm to show how strong you are. It's not a parlor trick in the sense that it takes skill (or at least, it can - sometimes people DO use parlor tricks to emulate this thing), but it's not directly martial in the sense that you'd never actually do that.

Being rooted means that you're doing a particular thing with your body that causes incoming force to be transmitted into the ground pseudo-passively, by which I mean, without bracing yourself against the ground and tensing your muscles to oppose the force the way an average joe might do. It's a similar thing, but a different mechanic. We've spoken about it before, and you compared it to relaxing into your structure against someone clinching with you. I'm not sure if this is exactly what CMA people mean by rooting. If you're not springloading yourself (ie. if you wouldn't 'bounce back' suddenly if the force were removed) then it certainly sounds very similar.

To do this requires a variety of things. First you have to be relaxed - freakishly relaxed. Secondly you have to have a particular structure, which in a nutshell involves stretching out your body all over. And, for whatever it's worth and whatever it implies, if you 'imagine' a certain energy rising in your body, for some reason it really increases your ability to do this, at least in my experience. You also don't have to be trying to do it, to do it. Paradoxically, I've found I'm much better at doing this if I'm suddenly distracted (provided of course my body is still doing the mechanic), and it's much more difficult to do if you know you're supposed to do it - for example, when practicing it in isolation, it's much harder when you can see the person pushing on you.

This particular mechanic does not require lowering your body overtly and bracing your posture the way you'd tend to think of it. For instance, I've found this mechanic works best off of one leg.

So what good is this? As I've been taught, rooting isn't something that, functionally, you would do in isolation - rather, it's a skill which powers other, functionally useful, things which you might do. So, analogously, it's closer to modern conditioning in 'application' than do a 'martial skill' the way people think of them. Alot of CMA people (at least online) talk about 'rooting' against takedowns. If by this they mean explicitly and in isolation, resisting a takedown via this mechanic; then this doesn't corrospond at all with my understanding. Even if you're a master who really can root someone twice your size pushing with all their might (which is probably remarkable - I have trouble rooting my younger brother pushing ballistically, or with real intent to push me over, although I pretty much suck, but still), all they would have to do to 'uproot' you is cause you to "raise your chi" (as some people artically describe it) for instance by smacking you (which they're liable to be doing anyway), applying some attack against your joints (ie. grappling / which they're liable to be doing anyway), etc.

The first 'extraction' of rooting I've been taught (which brings it closer to being functional) would be yielding. With this mechanic, you root in exactly the same way described, only instead of exactly putting all the force into the ground, you take some of it to move your body (think of your body as a set of gears, and rooting as the ability to set up the order and size of each gear; so here you just set them up to spiral each joint a certain way). So, simply put, your body moves in the direction you're being pushed. Wow, right? Well, it's a bit different than yielding in the normal sense, in that it's perfectly reactive, and feels very deceptive to your attacker - there's none of the usual little signals that betray what you're doing... in a sense, you can fool the reflexes of your attacker, and even doing this a little bit, if you're good and your attacker is stiff, you can take his balance quite easily. Spectacular? Not really. Just a useful little mechanic.

Another 'extraction' of rooting, I don't really have a word for. In bagua sometimes it's called drilling or piercing. But basically if I thrust my arm at you, I would be trying to maintain this feeling throughout the movement. This is one of bagua's approaches to 'blocking' - imagine two foils being thrusted at one another in a fencing match, and the particular angle (and if the fencer is really good, a slight spiral motion of the wrist) of one foil causes the other to slide past it - and you've got the general idea. Again, spectacular? Not really. But when you get good at it, it's pretty neat. Basically, when you do this against someone, even though the motion is ballistic like a strike, you feel their body all the way down to their feet, as if they were pushing you instead of striking you. For instance, when I do this against my teacher, if we were to start of facing each other and pierce directly at each other, my arm and often entire body would be rotated to the side and his palm would be pointing at my noggin. If I'm really stiff and having a particularly sucky day, but I'm still trying to do this mechanic, sometimes instead of having my body rotated aside, or my arm jammed up (as might happen if I were simply tossing a normal punch without structure), I actually feel the force get tied up at my feet (where I'm trying to put it into the ground) and I stumble.

So what's the point of doing these things? It's a way of getting strength all over your body. So again, I think calling it conditioning is accurate, even though it's a skill. When you can root the way shown in that picture, you can bring that mechanic up into your strikes and into your yielding as described. The point of all of it is to take your opponent's balance as soon as you touch him (and then smack him really hard). A very good bagua stylist will do this, and it looks magical - they raise their arms to block your strike like anyone would, but when they touch you, you would feel all coiled up. Very simply, it's a way to get past your arms and keep you offbalance for the second needed to get in and hit. It's also one of the key elements bagua practitioners use to get behind a person, or just generally into a superior position.

There are, I am sure, analogs to all this stuff in every martial teaching. This is just a certain approach to developing it. Reading all this, I'm sure you're thinking - yeah, we do all that. I think this is both true and not true. It's hard to convey with words why this is different than simply doing the applications I've described the way someone with no standing training would. You really have to feel it. But I really think it's different. On the other hand, it's not freakishly different. It's just a certain approach to doing what are universally useful martial things (ie. what most martial artists have their own approaches to doing). Oh yeah... and course it's not all-or-nothing. It's something you train and get better at progressively, and the effects it has on your martial ability improve progessively - again, just like conditioning. I felt the benefit of this connection after my first serious standing session. Last time we spoke about this I said the standing training impacted my martial skill more than anything else, and you asked what I meant. This is what I was getting at.

[Merryprankster]

Braden,

It would take a LOT to convince me that something fundamentally different is being done.

However, I will go so far as to say that the way it is thought about, and the way it is trained, along with the way it's approached might be fundamentally different.

[Braden]

"the way it is thought about, and the way it is trained, along with the way it's approached might be fundamentally different."

If it sounds like a duck, looks like a duck, and smells like a duck...

Can you feel "pushing-like connection to the ground" at any and every point in the trajectory of a thrown punch? You've answered no to this question in the past. This would seem to me like a remarkable difference.

If you're going to push something (eg. you're in a wrestler-style clinch) are you adopting the same posture / body mechanics as you do in every point along the trajectory of a thrown punch? This would seem to me like a remarkable difference.

Do you 'block' by wedging your arms straight forward at your opponent like a fencer's sword? Do you yield better when caught by surprise?

So... the training is different, the application is different, the concept is different, the body mechanics are different... what was the same, again? :P

I suppose what's the same is that you're trying to take someone's balance and structure in order to control them to execute a martial technique. But since it is inconcievable that this aspect of the two things could be different, their sameness in this regard is meaningless.

[Merryprankster]

Ah, but if the end result is similar or identical...Politics are a circle--the philosophy of Fascism and Russian Socialism were quite different but they produced an uncannily similar end result---


Hmm--did I really answer that way in the past? I shall have to think about that because my answer would have been mistaken. It's not fair to keep changing my mind, I know. How about if I try explaining it this way-- I don't recognize the rigid structure created by my punch until I contact something--but that might be due to lack of experience on my part. However, I am concious of a push against the ground and with every punch I throw, regardless of contact or no.

[Braden]

Heavily updated with a variety of other points and a deep challenge to the concept of "yes, but the end result is the same."

Of course you feel pushing against the ground - Newton's laws apply to all of us. The question is, if The Invisible Man put his palm into your fist to jam your punch at 25% of it's trajectory, would he feel a solid line down to the ground, or would he have jammed your structure? If you're not sure, stand up and put your arm in the position it's in the split second after it's launched for a strike, and have someone push head-on at it. Is your ground path solid, or does it 'ground out' at your shoulder?

[Merryprankster]

Braden--I tell you what--I'll try that and get back to you! :)

See--guys like you make me think that I might be wrong. And that's a GOOD thing

[PaulLin]

MP,

In Chinese, it says "Chi gon yu jaio, fa yu tui, chu tsai yu yao, shin yu shou." In Taichi. It basically says that the roots are in your feets, the power(physical) created by legs, mastered(directed) by waist, shapping(outlet) by hands.

There are some requirements you have to preconditioned before you can successfully experience your rooting forces like what Braden has said.

Is your center firm? Is it the master of the whole body? Can your waist trasfer all the forces form one end of your limp to another without leaking? (when leaking forces, you will know, cause it will go off the line, like Braden said gound out of the shoulder is an example of leaking forces, incomplete transfer.)

Does the path form your limp to the waist all direct without folds(collapse) or chokes(too tense)?

There are 3 types of joins you must maintain its funtional conditions:1. Ball joins, as in shoulders and hips, must be able to move freely in arc, they transfer forces. 2. straight joins, like elbows and knees, they are only stong in one angle, avoid twist them in any other angle. They pass on forces. 3. multi-joins. like your hands and feets. they should be relaxed and weighted all the time. they copy all shapes they come to attach, they stick to surface. they also outlet forces(although in higher level, forces can be outlet form any part of body, we trained the outlet form hands and feets first).

All the above precondition is ready, then you can perform rooted force successfully. That is what I know. That is what internal arts are all doing.

By the way, Braden, that was a great writting you have there.:)

[No_Know]

There seems to be a thing called rooting. It relates to standing. It seem to be staying standing when pushed/pressed/knocked...

The link called rooted shows a method of pushing that is theoretically used for qi transferrance but for showing up rooting...The example I saw had several men push on the instructor Don Ahn. The thing is the pressing is at solar plexus-stomach-waist level. Breathing is supposed to be utilized to enhance stayability. The person supposedly transfer the force of the pushing into the floor.

I am uncomfortable with this, basically. Even-so, I tried this. I was holding a kicking shield. I would inhale when they kicked or while they were kicking and think the breath low, towards my feet (imagery). Undetermined if it was that or something else but I noticed that when the angle was greater than zero, I lost connection with the floor. Sometimes even having my foot lifted up instead of merely moved back.

[Frank Exchange]

Regarding the photo of TST and the scales, I was there, it was real, the guys were pushing hard. The big guy at the front was a strooooonnnggg MF. And the photo does look a bit funny, but it was a light hearted demonstration.

Having said that, it didnt particularly impress me, much as I respect TST. The point of the demonstration was to show how strong TSTs stance was, and up to a point it does, but it shows more how strong his legs are, particularly for an elderly gentleman.

The force of the people who were pushing him was directed horizontally. Due to the angle of his arms receiving the force, as long as he kept his structure fairly well, and his bum tucked in, the force had no choice but to go down into his legs, or leg in that case. Anyone can do this. Simple physics. His skill lay in maintaining this structure even under a lot of force. But, it was still horizontal force.

If the "pushers" had directed their force even slightly upwards, it would have been a very different story. That would be uprooting. Its not as if he can make himself heavier than he is!
The big guy was strong enough to lift him with one arm, probably, so it is just a question of the direction that the force is being applied.

So when you see these hogwash pictures of someone with multiple students around him all trying to push him over, you can bet your as$ that none of them are pushing upwards, or the guy would be over quicker than a cheap bj.

[scotty1]

Braden - what type of standing training did you/do you do?

Is it standing post type Zhan Zhuang?

I do the tree-hugging posture in Zhan Zhuang, that is supposed to build relaxed strength and good root, I think that is because it trains the structure you were talking about.

I may not have exactly the right terms, but do you know what I'm banging on about?

Because if you do I have a question for you!

[Merryprankster]

Frank,

Exactly--this is why I choose not to be impressed by such things.

PaulLin--By your words alone, and I am not insulting them, Internal is doing nothing different than any other art. A boxer uses the same principles you describe to get power in his/her punch.

I prefer Braden's definition of Internal Arts as being a specific Subset of CMA that all have particular training focii in common.

[red5angel]

MP - you can approach root from several different angles but you description in your initial post is correct. Its your ability to keep you balance and structure. Alot of CMA stances and such are designed to develope this by making you line up 3 different points on your body. The top point is the top of your head. The middle point is your dan tien, and the bottom part is a spot that lies between your bubbling well cavities on your feet. The bubbling well lies roughly right behind the ball of the foot. Some believe that your Qi can help you with this. Some believe that it is just muscle developement from doing these odd stances for hours ata t ime each day!
We have a rooting excersise we do in class where we get in our stance, and then holding an arm out in front of us we let the other person in the drill push on our arm, increasing intesnity until our structure breaks and our root gives.

[pvwingchun]

I believe this whole discussion started while discussing the power of the WC stance. When properly rooted in your stance and force is applied to your centerline it is very powerful, very difficult to "uproot" even with upward force because when upward force comes in you simply shift it off. The trick is to keep that force coming in on your center. If the opponent does not take that line then they don't take your balance. No balance no power. I reallly does not matter how the opponent comes at you as long as you maintain the center. I have had people press on my hands and chest in drills applying different types of pressure and there are definately times when it is not as strong but if you hold the center I have had as many as 4 people at once try. And of course as soon as they shift there angle of force you lose the center and your balance.

We have tried this with students who once studied other arts and there stances where not as strong they were more easily toppled over (although we have not tried this with every stance from every art). And size does not really matter to a certain extent. Of course there is a point where it does. But even then the much larger student can still feel the strength of the smaller lighter student if the stance is proper.

[Merryprankster]

Red5--It seems that way, yes.

CMA's and the particular training you undergo in CMA, do not have a monopoly on this concept, however. Nor is it inherently superior. Good training develops this skill/attribute, period.

Show me a wrestler or Judoka without good rooting and I'll show you somebody who loses a lot :) I tend to think of this concept as making myself heavy, so I can't be moved. It's VERY different from pushing back.

Semantics? Yup. Yet again semantics are a crux when trying to talk about similar concepts from art to art.

pvwingchun--I'm assuming you can read my posts now :D.... so I've got a couple of questions for you:

When you say as many as 4 people try pushing at you, in what way were they arranged?

When you talk about "shifting off" upward force, what exactly do you mean?

[pvwingchun]

MP

I think that we agree to disagree and since you seem to be an integral part of this discussion we can get along and I need to read your post :) and I must admit that curiosity got the better of me and had to read it :D I will try and be more open minded about your future comments. Hard for me to do very hard headed, my wife thinks it is made of solid block sometimes.

I have had them in a line and side by side pushing straight in on my center. WC shifts from a frontal to an advancing or fighting stance from which we can shift out of without picking up our feet. You shift from side to side. From a side stance, which really isn't a side stance you are actually shifted to one side with the bulk (90%+) of your weight on the rear leg, body square to your opponent. In frontal stance your body weight is 50-50. Kind of hard to explain I will try and find a link that shows it if you would like. As you feel the incoming pressure, no matter the direction (up, down, or to the side) move off of your centerline, you simply shift that direction thereby allowing those pushing to go that direction and you can then capture their center and take their balance. So if that forward pressure is upwards or downward you can shift the direction most comportable or more appropriately advantageous to your attack.

I have been amazed at how hard someone has pushed and yet it seems that you or whoever you are pushing on use very little force to maintain my balance. We have a young lady who I outweigh by 50 to 70 lbs and it is very difficult for me to take her balance when she is properly rooted in her stance.

Hope this explains it, rather difficult concept to explain easier to understand if you can see it.

[pvwingchun]

WC is all about sensitivity the slightest change in pressure causes you to act. It can be very difficult to learn.

[red5angel]

MP - exactly, mostly semantics. I think CMA more directly addresses this where more modern or western arts apply it more in concept along with thier training. This doesnt make either way superior by any means, just two different ways of approaching the same thing
I think for most people in the arts it should occurr to them naturally at some point in thier trianing that being grounded and more balanced is an advantage.

[Merryprankster]

pvwingchun--

Nope, I understand perfectly--analagous to wrestling. I was wondering about the upwards force though--I'm approaching it from the standpoint that somebody has just shot in on you in a wrestling type takedown. I think discussion of shifting to remove the force is probably too simplistic for that situation. Sensitivity is a big part of any art that involves prolonged (ie, greater than instantaneous like a punch or kick) contact.

Just for the record, western arts tend to call this "taking the angle." For instance, if I sprawl on a takedown, I want to get the opponent OFF my center so I can angle their head and shoulders into the ground by making them support my weight--the big forwards and upwards explosion of the takedown is greatly mitigated by me sprawling off at an angle.

Red--I believe you are correct. Nobody ever talked to me about rooting. I'm fairly certain I probably do something either analagous or exactly like it, however.

[pvwingchun]

I'm approaching it from the standpoint that somebody has just shot in on you in a wrestling type takedown.

As a WC man I would try to not allow that to happen (not saying it wouldn't). Although I have never tried it in this instance we do something similar with kickers. We have a few ex TKD guys who are very good kickers. What we do is either stay plenty outside of their range or get inside so they cannot kick effectively. If I know that you are going to shoot in on me or have that feeling I would attempt to stay out of range, or get in close enough where I can negate your ability to get down on me and shoot in. I would attempt to get as close as possible so that we can make contact for without that ability I cannot feel you move. If we cannot touch we cannot fight in the WC world. In a self defense situation I am going to stay out of range of any possible attack until unavoidable then I am going to close the gap to prevent any of the above, which is the standpoint that I come from (sparring would be different). When it becomes obvious to me that I cannot talk or back my way out I am going to get in your face so I can put my weapons into play. I am going to atttempt to dominate the line, take the center and take you before you can take me (which should be everyones goal).


I think discussion of shifting to remove the force is probably too simplistic for that situation.
Exactly it would not work in this situation, someone to shoot in. I think you could still shift but it would be different (some type of dissipation move to redirect the incoming force) and you would have to apply other techniques to thwart the attack. I am going to have to try this in class now.

[Merryprankster]

pv,

If you've not sparred with a grappler of some type, I urge you VERY STRONGLY to go do this. It's a big hole in your game. Kinda like me and weapons. :)

re: shooting--there's well out of range, and there's "not really able to shoot, but well able to clinch." In other words, if you're too close for me to shoot, you're close enough for me to clinch, which, depending on your skills and level of experience may be just as bad.

Here's a mantra I like--"Attend to your balance FIRST, worry about the rest later." In other words, if somebody has hold of your leg, don't try hitting them, eye-gouges, etc. Pay attention to the fact that you are about to get dumped on your back before you do anything else. Once you are stable, you can worry about other things.

[pvwingchun]

We do practice ground fighting skills. Being dumped and getting up. Although not nearly enough.

For you to clinch you would have to open up your arms and I would begin a relentless attack upon your face, throat and other vital points on your head (self defense situation) and hopefully throw you off your attack. We are big beleivers in speed over power. And if you are close enough to clinch elbows come into play as weapons. As soon as I think it is going to happen I attack, this is WC way. All of this is speculation until it is battle tested. Not saying it is not going to happen but I hopefully am not going to let it, or I am going to attempt to prevent it. Just trying to give you some idea of WC mindset. Plus for every attack there is a counter and for every counter there is a counter as I am sure you know.


Good mantra we attempt to do that.

[Merryprankster]

No, I understand the premise, but I do urge you to spar a grappler.

You have or are currently in school for a graduate degree, right? What university?

[pvwingchun]

BS :D North Dakota State University in Natural Resource Mgmt from College of Ag Range Sciences Dept., after stints at Clark County Community and UNLV. Three years post grad work at NDSU in invasive species. Project involved applying herbicies to endangered plant species to determine whether or not the herbicides had action on the endangered plants. Still righting thesis hopefully someday I will finish it am currently a household engineer (PC for house husband). Now live in AZ.

[Merryprankster]

Ah--I was going to suggest that you find a wrestler or two to play with on campus.

I think Cristophe Leninger has a Judo dojo in AZ somewhere. He and his school are no slouches, and would be more than happy, probably to engage in a friendly sparring match.

[pvwingchun]

Thanks for the info and advice.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by Merryprankster

PaulLin--By your words alone, and I am not insulting them, Internal is doing nothing different than any other art. A boxer uses the same principles you describe to get power in his/her punch.

I prefer Braden's definition of Internal Arts as being a specific Subset of CMA that all have particular training focii in common.

Maybe I am not good to express myself in writing, but I have not seen any boxer out there that are doing what I known. Their elbows not behaive correctly, the spine structure is off for correct linking, the feets not really stick to the ground, the sinking and relaxing pattern not fit, hands moves not link correctly.............Maybe I missed some points that should be brought up:confused:

[Braden]

PaulLin - Thanks. Wish I was any good at it. ;)

Frank Exchange - I can root upward forces, so I would be surprised if that individual cannot. It is much harder though.

scotty1 - I do know what you're talking about. My standing practice begins and ends in 'quiet standing posture' and has eight upper body positions all using the lower body horse stance. We use the stance you're talking about as a 'neutral' stance, or transition stance between the eight upper body positions.

[HuangKaiVun]

And yet Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson just FLATTEN GUYS - as would any pro boxer out there.

I'd correct my OWN kung fu before saying that "Their elbows not behaive correctly, the spine structure is off for correct linking, the feets not really stick to the ground, the sinking and relaxing pattern not fit, hands moves not link correctly".

[scotty1]

"scotty1 - I do know what you're talking about. My standing practice begins and ends in 'quiet standing posture' and has eight upper body positions all using the lower body horse stance. We use the stance you're talking about as a 'neutral' stance, or transition stance between the eight upper body positions."

What do you find to be the benefits of this stance? not the other positions, just that stance?

And how do you find that translates into fighting?

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
And yet Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson just FLATTEN GUYS - as would any pro boxer out there.

I'd correct my OWN kung fu before saying that "Their elbows not behaive correctly, the spine structure is off for correct linking, the feets not really stick to the ground, the sinking and relaxing pattern not fit, hands moves not link correctly".

Oh forget more, the foot has the sole land forst with toes pointed up is a big sign of not sticking to the ground(although many Taichi people do that in their stance, I don't do that in my Taichi practicing)

Sinking was on the hip, they have it too high.

If you do breath hard after you train, you are not relaxed enough.

We don't swing fists with elblow up. Our spine has no natural curves. (but I have to gave Tyson the neck credit for his neck fits the spine requirements of internal.)

I don'd see the sticking-break in-follow up pattern.

Some boxers may natually done one or few of the requirements, but they are the minority.

And don't tell me boxers also understand and apply with meridiums in the strikes too, that will be too scary:eek:

[HuangKaiVun]

The problem with you, PaulLin, is that you haven't been in enough physical confrontations to know that boxing WORKS.

Just because it doesn't do what you do doesn't mean it won't knock you down. Try sparring against a boxer full contact - you'll see how good you REALLY are.

Your lack of respect for boxing - indeed, for any arts other than your own - is SICKENING.

Already I know you wouldn't last two seconds against one. Don't think that they don't know their internal strikes either. If they get you in the clinch and start doing body blows, you'll be amazed at how hard they hit.

These guys don't need meridians to knock the likes of you down.

[Merryprankster]

PaulLin--

Boxers are supposed to move on the balls of their feet. Sometimes it doesn't happen, but ideally, that's how it's supposed to be done.

As far as meridians--no. Boxers do not speak of meridians. On the other hand, certain targets, such as the liver, the heart, the solar plexus, the floating ribs, and the kidneys probably correspond to something.

[Braden]

scotty1 - All of the stuff I mentioned in my post applies. If you're interested in developing these skills though, you really should seek out competent instruction in the internal martial arts. It's more than just having someone check your structure - it's drills to help you figure out what's going on, drills to make the skills martial, techniques to take advantage of the skills you develop, etc. Just holding that stance without any other training, assuming you're doing it right, should still add to your connectedness martially (feeling planted but mobile, and coordinated in offensive and defensive movements) as well as improve your relaxation and breathing (if/when you choose to develop that a bit).

Re: Boxing. I think people are confusing 'proper in general' with 'proper for a specific context.' Boxers clearly are 'poor' or 'inadequate' at neijia principles, just as neijists are poor/inadequate according to boxing principles.

[Merryprankster]

NO! Boxers are MASTERS of Neijia!!!

Ummm... ok... really, more what Braden said :)

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
The problem with you, PaulLin, is that you haven't been in enough physical confrontations to know that boxing WORKS.

Just because it doesn't do what you do doesn't mean it won't knock you down. Try sparring against a boxer full contact - you'll see how good you REALLY are.

Your lack of respect for boxing - indeed, for any arts other than your own - is SICKENING.

Already I know you wouldn't last two seconds against one. Don't think that they don't know their internal strikes either. If they get you in the clinch and start doing body blows, you'll be amazed at how hard they hit.

These guys don't need meridians to knock the likes of you down.

I don't know where you have got the idea that I have no respect for boxing and I think boxing don't work, I don't recalled I have ever say such things. All I have metioned is that MP think the Boxing were doing the internal method and I was trying to say that they are not the same.

I have never met any of these top boxers, so I won't assume the result of sparing with one. Have you spar with any of these famouse boxers?

[Merryprankster]

PaulLin--

I didn't say that. What I said was BASED ON YOUR WORDS, boxers would be internal.

I don't necessarily think boxing is internal. :)

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
NO! Boxers are MASTERS of Neijia!!!

Ummm... ok... really, more what Braden said :)

Some of them come pretty close though. You are not that far off.

For example, you ball of foot landing of boxing, since the focus on ball, it will be different than internal way.

Internal way used feet like a suction cups, the weight and pressure alwasy applied to the "Yung Chuan" center of feets. The feet must relaxed to a degree that will stick to the floor. All parts of foot, would be aviliable to use after you land with the foot.

I do think boxers can do that with boxing, just don't see any one done that yet.:)

Some times people relate donkey kicks as external and camel kicks as internal. And they both are deadly.

[PaulLin]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
PaulLin--

Boxers are supposed to move on the balls of their feet. Sometimes it doesn't happen, but ideally, that's how it's supposed to be done.

As far as meridians--no. Boxers do not speak of meridians. On the other hand, certain targets, such as the liver, the heart, the solar plexus, the floating ribs, and the kidneys probably correspond to something.

And this focus on the targets you can say that has internal aspects in it. You are correct on this:)

[JusticeZero]

You can be "uprooted" and still have your feet and/or hands on the ground. The important part is that you are not in control of your center of mass.
For instance, when my teacher demonstrates vingativa on me, there is a distinct moment when his thigh rolls under my center of mass when although both feet are on the floor and supporting weight, i'm helpless because I cannot generate leverage against anything that is under my control, and my only option is to drop backward into the walkover.

[dezhen2001]

JZ: that sounds cool :)

So is uprooting a momentary loss of your centre, when you are helpless? Do you have to be off the ground or can you still be in contact?

Personally i all to well know the feeling of being helpless and theres nothing i can do, happens to me all the time when i play chi sau with my seniors :D Sometimes i am still standing, often i am flying and then get hit with the hardest thing possible: the ground :D

david

[PaulLin]

1. the ability of base on some thing(for force) as gound. 2. the total controll of one's center to all body parts.

uproot, I think it is to lost both of the above.

[JusticeZero]

Originally posted by dezhen2001
So is uprooting a momentary loss of your centre, when you are helpless? Do you have to be off the ground or can you still be in contact? In the example I gave above, when it is done to me in demonstration, both of my feet are still on the ground and in fact, sometimes he can even get in low enough that both my heels are touching the ground. It doesn't matter, because my stance is broken on his structure and he has taken my center into his own control.