PDA

View Full Version : In old china would western boxing be considered a internal martial art?



Black Jack
11-07-2003, 08:45 AM
To ponder in your grey mush.

In old china would western boxing....aka the sweet science...be considered a internal martial art?

Discuss

lkfmdc
11-07-2003, 08:57 AM
I know a lot of Hsing Yi people find western boxing when done correctly has many if not all of the same body mechanics, and William CC Chen says he finds a strong link between it and tai chi...

Chang Style Novice
11-07-2003, 09:00 AM
I still don't really know what the hell 'internal' is supposed to mean anyway.

And I'm a taiji hippy.

David Jamieson
11-07-2003, 09:11 AM
internal?

lkfmdc
11-07-2003, 09:17 AM
I've seen some quite good "internal" over the years and my estimation is that it is simply the study of how to most efficiently use the body to generate force and complete tasks, nothing mystical about it at all...

the chi freaks just ruin it for everyone :p

Meat Shake
11-07-2003, 09:18 AM
Im a super freak! Super freak! Im super freaky...

Starchaser107
11-07-2003, 09:25 AM
wheras meatshake ruins it for everybody.:p

Chinwoo-er
11-07-2003, 09:25 AM
~study of how to most efficiently use the body to generate force and complete tasks~


As oppose to which style of TCMA ??

Chang Style Novice
11-07-2003, 09:30 AM
PRC wushu

lkfmdc
11-07-2003, 09:47 AM
some would say all kung fu is internal, all kung fu is external, but of course you'd have to be talking about real kung fu...

an interesting read is Tim Cartmell's intro to Sun Lu Tang's Hsing Yi book where he talks about where the term "Nei Jia" or "internal" came from and how it is basicly a fraud

there, that should add some controversy to what is an extremely mild post for me :D

count
11-07-2003, 09:52 AM
I can't speak from old China but it seems to me that it's training methods and practitioners that are internal or external and arts is a subjective term. So in my opinion even if there are some similarities in some of the mechanics and power generation, boxing would not be considered internal martial arts. Some boxers may fight with internal qualities but I doubt the training that got them there can be considered internal.

Shooter
11-07-2003, 10:11 AM
Black Jack, being that 'internal' is a relatively recent designation for certain methodologies, and everyone has a different set of criteria for what constitutes an internal MA, boxing would be 'judged' on its training methods rather than its practicality. JMO of course.

Personally, I'd make the comparison between boxing and my understanding of TCC.

1)-Does the training start the beginner with standing postures?

2)-Does it have an integrated breath-work component?

3)-Do its tactical theories and ideas carry over to everdyday life?

4)-Are its tactical and strategic applications predicated off of the opponent's intent?

5)-How readily does its fighting method move from the ring to the real in addressing a wider range of attacks and situations?

GunnedDownAtrocity
11-07-2003, 10:18 AM
i think
Some boxers may fight with internal qualities but I doubt the training that got them there can be considered internal.

what about the ends and the means and all that? i mean, how you got there is more important to defining how you fight as opposed to where you got?

personally i try not to mess with the internal/external labeling, but i sure do like the way my wudan and boxing flows togeather.

Fu-Pow
11-07-2003, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by lkfmdc
some would say all kung fu is internal, all kung fu is external, but of course you'd have to be talking about real kung fu...

an interesting read is Tim Cartmell's intro to Sun Lu Tang's Hsing Yi book where he talks about where the term "Nei Jia" or "internal" came from and how it is basicly a fraud

there, that should add some controversy to what is an extremely mild post for me :D


I think the concept "internal" was ruined for me when I saw Chen Xiao Wang doing a move almost exactly like "Mummy steals the corpse" from Hung Gar in the latest edition of "Journal of Asian Martial Arts." There are distinctions between "internal" and "external" but they are not as disparate as people make them out to be.

count
11-07-2003, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by GunnedDownAtrocity
i think

what about the ends and the means and all that? i mean, how you got there is more important to defining how you fight as opposed to where you got?

personally i try not to mess with the internal/external labeling, but i sure do like the way my wudan and boxing flows togeather.
Don't worry about the ends GDA, I'm sure your sometimes morbid curiosity has already led you to the conclusion that the end are the same for all of us. Some of us face a messier one though.

Boxing blends with any fighting art. Good sport too. :p

Rockwood
11-07-2003, 11:18 AM
In my small experience it seems like Boxing is a sport not a martial art.

Both are concerned with fighting, but it's apples and oranges. You eat both but you can't have a taste test really. It's not much use to compare baseball versus basketball.

Whether boxing uses some of the same movement principles as IMA is another question. I think they do share a lot of things. The mindset is worlds apart.

One thing they share is using small movements to produce big results.

Another thing is that they both train one's reactions to be very natural and immediate.

-Jess O

GunnedDownAtrocity
11-07-2003, 11:19 AM
Some of us face a messier one though.

the lucky ones.
:mad:

GunnedDownAtrocity
11-07-2003, 11:22 AM
In my small experience it seems like Boxing is a sport not a martial art.

ill get you a fire extinguisher buddy.

lkfmdc
11-07-2003, 11:33 AM
Boxing is a tradition, and an often misunderstood one at that. Aside from the big business of boxing, we need to look at its history, where the men who boxed also fenced (ie swords), used canes, wrestled and taught physical education. I suggest you read something like Elliott Gorn's book the Manly Art or Poliakoff book on ancient greek combat sports...

Black Jack
11-07-2003, 11:38 AM
Interesting and gentle replys to the playfull topic gents.

I have heard a number of past references from reading and different teachers of the comparison between hsing-I and old bare knuckle boxing mechanics and I know a chen tai chi player and boxer who made me think of this post topic.

To me I am a simple man, call it what you will as long as it can help me train to produce well-executed movements under stress, and give my short part irish/part german/part french/part american indian arse some condition of readiness in a world gone mad with killer cyborg ninja warriors and undead judoka.;)

SevenStar
11-07-2003, 11:49 AM
careful, the undead judoka lurk on kfo,k as do the astral spies...

SevenStar
11-07-2003, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by Rockwood
In my small experience it seems like Boxing is a sport not a martial art.



trying..... to....... fight.........urge..........

Water Dragon
11-07-2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Rockwood
In my small experience it seems like Boxing is a sport not a martial art.


What's the difference? What is training in a martial art going to give you that boxing wont?

CrippledAvenger
11-07-2003, 11:53 AM
Judoka are undead? I thought they just had some bad gi-funk. ;)

LKFMDC has hit the nail straight on the head with his recommendation of Eliot J. Gorn's work. Gorn is one of the most interesting researchers of American combative sports, IMO.

As for boxing being a sport and therefore, not a martial art, I gotta ask-- what makes most kung-fu martial these days? You're not out gutting people with spears anymore, nor are you guys actually killing people with your bare hands.

So, what distinguishes kung-fu from boxing (where the aim is to phyiscally incapacitate your opponent)? Just an honest question.

Water Dragon
11-07-2003, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by CrippledAvenger
nor are you guys actually killing people with your bare hands.
.

Unless of course he's a Shuai Chiao guy. Hey! we're shooting video tomorrow. So bring yo gloves.

CrippledAvenger
11-07-2003, 11:57 AM
YAY! An arsekicking on camera!

It's like a hockey game!

Judge Pen
11-07-2003, 12:00 PM
I have heard it argued that the difference between "External" CMA and "Internal" CMA is primarily one of geography and not methodology. Internal meanig it's root origins were pure Chinese and External arts, like shaolin, supposedly came through Da Mo and have Indian roots. Has anyone heard of this before?

FatherDog
11-07-2003, 10:22 PM
Last time we had a thread about what the exact definition of Internal and External were, it lasted five months and no one agreed.

Since you can't say whether or not Boxing is Internal without a handle on what Internal is, I don't see this thread coming to any satisfactory conclusion either.

old jong
11-07-2003, 10:45 PM
It would depend on the boxers personnal styles.
Somebody like Ali would be like JKD.
Somebody like Tyson would be like Choi Lai Fut.
Joe Louis would be like WC
Dempsey...Hung Gar
Lewis....Chen TC
Marciano ...Chow Gar
Roy Jones...White Eyebrow
Butterbean...well!....
;)

yu shan
11-07-2003, 10:57 PM
yin=bob and weave, footwork
yang=jab, hook, punch,uppercut etc.

western terms

Kristoffer
11-08-2003, 04:22 AM
Unless of course he's a Shuai Chiao guy. Hey! we're shooting video tomorrow. So bring yo gloves.

shuai chiao video? Feel free to post it

Christopher M
11-08-2003, 02:56 PM
No. The internal label began as a recognition of similar training methods and principles between a small group of martial artists, such as the development of a body mechanic called peng, principally using standing postures. Since boxing doesn't have this, it would be difficult to argue it would fall under the label.

But that doesn't mean it would be grouped with the external arts; as this classification refers to two groups of cultural transmission within the chinese martial arts, which boxing is not. Historically we know that when boxing was brought to Beijing, many of the internal practitioners there saw something in it's methods which distinguished it from most of what they were used to, and shared tactical similarities with what they were doing.

jun_erh
11-09-2003, 10:18 AM
to parapphrase winona ryder: I can't exactly define it but I know it when I see it.

Did anyone (everyone) see the thrilla in manilla with Ali? He had a totally different strategy from his opponent. It was very much about getting into Fraziers rythm. Anyone whose seen it knows what I mean

Water Dragon
11-09-2003, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by Kristoffer


shuai chiao video? Feel free to post it

We will. I want to get some more tape though. I accidentally pulled Crips groin with a Forward March to Inner Leg Hook, so we got cut short yesterday.

CrippledAvenger
11-09-2003, 12:43 PM
Actually, it was my hamstring, but it was still a beautiful throw. :D

Kristoffer
11-09-2003, 12:48 PM
Oh too bad, hope he's aight. Lookin forward to them


edit: heh, well then that's just cool ;)

Repulsive Monkey
11-10-2003, 03:40 AM
Term cat and pidgeon here when I say:
Western Boxing in Old China would definitely NOT of been considered Internal, because it just isn't. Fact is forget the idea of old china just rephrase the question as would an internalist consider it internal and the majority would quite rightly, and correctly still say no, because it isn't in it's intrinsic nature.
Sure could incorporate internal elements into it, but in it's original format it's plainly external, it doesn't develop internal Jin or Qi for it's mobilisation and it relies on muscular tension to apply it's moves. It relies on a lot of upper body muscle resistsance, and brute strength to execute attacks etc.

There are so many areas however within it that start to approach certain key areas within other arts such as distance appreciation, being rooted (although Western boxing does it in a different way), timing, yielding etc but all these are done mostly in different ways to an internal martial art, however it doesn't mean that one in boxing terms could not translate internal knowledge across the divide and make their boxing internal, because they certainly can.
But not many do.

CrippledAvenger
11-10-2003, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by Repulsive Monkey
...and it relies on muscular tension to apply it's moves. It relies on a lot of upper body muscle resistsance, and brute strength to execute attacks etc.


*sigh*

Have you ever boxed, Repulsive Monkey? Hell, for the matter, have any kung-fu guys who claim that boxing is all "muscle resistance and brute strength" even stepped foot inside a boxing gym?

Simply put, because I have an interview to prepare for, boxing uses as much relaxation as the various forms of gung-fu I've tasted. It is also highly focused on using the waist to whip attacks, and emphasizes "dropping" your bodyweight into punches. It's not all that different than kung-fu, believe it or not. :rolleyes:

Meat Shake
11-10-2003, 07:50 AM
touch hands with a golden gloves if you can find one. That will teach you to respeganize the mad boxing skillz. ;)

Ray Pina
11-10-2003, 09:25 AM
I would question how much real, actual internal training those who say "external" and "internal" styles are the same or similiar have. Not read a few books or articles, not watched the multitude of Shaw Brother films, but actually trained with a skilled Ba Gua or Hsing-I master.

Also, I consider tennis a sport. Two men beating each other in a confined area seems less sporty that waving wushu steal swords for a 7.5.

While I enjoy boxing (hell, I'm Cuban) and respect them tremendously, things to consider on both ends: Their striking mechanics are great. They know about breath, exhaling, not inhaling. BUT what about the ming men? The reinforcing of the spine? Chi?

Silly argument actually. They have the tools for their job and they do it well. The thing with internal for me, is that I want to be able to do the job well into my 60s. My master has fought a lot of fights in his day -- still does -- and is in remarkable health at 62. Can't say the same for some of my favorite boxers ... or many externalists that I know (also know there is an exception to every rule).

Meat Shake
11-10-2003, 09:37 AM
Is the infragable Meat Shake!

Water Dragon
11-10-2003, 10:01 AM
hmmm, All 4 heads of the ACSCA are still doing Shuai Chiao, and they are all in their 60's. Most of their contemporaries are too. Chang Tung Sheng was known to play in his 70's. Does that make SC internal, or just one helluva huge exception?

Meat Shake
11-10-2003, 10:10 AM
****... Master lin still looks like hes only in his 30s. Still increadibly quick and powerful as well. Kinda scary.
:eek:

Ray Pina
11-10-2003, 10:18 AM
Well, if those gentlemen are in there 60's and still free fighting skilled men in their 30's, I'd have to say they know something... and God bless them. They have truly embodied MA and have my full respect.

I'd also guess they are not blocking full powered, intent to hurt round house kicks thrown by 240lbs young men with their shins ... there must be some good technique involved.

SevenStar
11-10-2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by Water Dragon
hmmm, All 4 heads of the ACSCA are still doing Shuai Chiao, and they are all in their 60's. Most of their contemporaries are too. Chang Tung Sheng was known to play in his 70's. Does that make SC internal, or just one helluva huge exception?

My judo coach is 73 and still plays with us younger guys.

SevenStar
11-10-2003, 10:36 AM
WD, MSToo and I know a guy who competed in a thai match for his 50th birthday.