Internal and External: There is a difference....

[Fu-Pow]

There is a big difference between internal "strength" and normal strength. Notice "strength" is in quotations because it is really not strength in the normal sense of the word.

(And, BTW, I'm gonna take the word of my teacher on this who can demonstrate the difference to me in person vs. the words of people who I have never met and who's actual skill level and level of experience is unknown to me.)

Internal strength uses the internal frame, the other uses the external frame.

Internal and external frame both use muscle, ligaments, tendons and bones. The WAY they are used is fundamentally different. The difference starts in the mind (relaxed vs. excited) and translates to the body.

External frame uses muscle based strength. Internal frame does not uses muscle based strength. In fact, it refrains from using strength at all. Force is something different than muscular
strength.

You can be forceful without using muscular strength. You can have muscular strength and not able to generate significant force.

Of course, some muscle is used in Neijia or else we would not be able to move. But the muscle is not used to generate the force. In Wai Jia this is fine, this is normal strength. But for Neiji something different is used most commonly referred to as Jin.

Good coordination of the external frame is not the same thing as coordination of the internal frame. Doing "whole body" external frame exercises (like powerlifting) will not help your internal frame. In fact it may hurt the development of the internal frame if you can't not delineate the two.

Can you learn both?I believe so. That's exactly what I'm trying to do. But through my inquiry into both I realize that they are very different, even though on the surface they may look similar. If you are going to learn both you have to realize the difference and learn to switch gears.

There are a lot of Nei Jia practitioners out there who practice their art using the external frame. They tell you, there is no real difference between the two. This is incorrect...it's PC language.

Their art is weak because they can't understand the difference. They give other real Neiji players a bad name by their ineffective use of the external frame for techniques that require internal frame movement. They then have to rely on pseudo-scientific hocus pocus because the art as they practice it does not work.

There is a real tangible difference. No one on this forum can tell you the difference. You have to find a good teacher who can show you the difference.

Peace. :D

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
I'm gonna take the word of my teacher on this who can demonstrate the difference to me in person vs. the words of people who I have never met and who's actual skill level and level of experience is unknown to me

There is a real tangible difference. No one on this forum can tell you the difference.

I wonder what kind of 'discussion' one hopes to generate with such an approach?

[count]

Actually, Fu, you are using your teachers words to describe different levels of understanding and skill. Not a difference of internal and external. Many people on this forum can and have done better, using their own words and understanding. You have not done well to interpret or differentiate between frames or explain the "why's" or "how's" of your teachers assertions. For example, if internal frame is different from using muscles, than how is muscle development like various power lifting counter-productive to internal development? Do any systems strive develop one over the other? How, which, why?? Just to say "force is something different in the other" doesn't help.

Ones on this forum that have experience can say in their own words. Others just repeat what they have heard or read. All you're doing here is antagonizing forum members.:p

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by count
Actually, Fu, you are using your teachers words to describe different levels of understanding and skill. Not a difference of internal and external.

Actually no I'm not. There are arts that use an external frame that work perfectly fine. In fact I practice one of them. They don't need an understanding of "internal frame" to work. Its not a LEVEL of skill, it a totally different approach.


Many people on this forum can and have done better, using their own words and understanding.

You are entitled to your opinion.



You have not done well to interpret or differentiate between frames or explain the "why's" or "how's" of your teachers assertions.

Well I'll leave it to you to flesh that out.



For example, if internal frame is different from using muscles, than how is muscle development like various power lifting counter-productive to internal development?

Because the movement is broken and not unified as a contiguous internal frame. It may be a contiguous external frame but that will not help in Neijia because a skilled Neijia player will find that "broken" spot and exploit it. My teacher does it to me all the time.



Do any systems strive develop one over the other?

Yes.


How, which, why??

If this is such a crummy post then why is it generating so many questions for you. You must already think you have the answers or it is giving you a real mental work out.



Just to say "force is something different in the other" doesn't help.

Actually I said muscular strength is not necessary for Neijia.




Ones on this forum that have experience can say in their own words. Others just repeat what they have heard or read. All you're doing here is antagonizing forum members.:p

Actually I'm opening up a discussion based on what my teacher has taught me. Again, I don't know you, haven't met you and don't know your skill level. I have met my teachers, pushed with him and his teacher and they can demonstrate the difference.

Do I have all the answers. No I don't. Obviously learning MA's is a process.

My point is that there is a significant difference between Wai Jia and Nei Jia and its not just a question of semantics.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by unkokusai
I wonder what kind of 'discussion' one hopes to generate with such an approach?

Is that a question or a statement.

[Shaolinlueb]

um we need to make a thread to show the difference?

want to see a difference, look at tai chi, then look at nan quan. nuff said. both different ways of developing power.

[count]

Fu Pow,

I'm only pointing out that your post is creating more questions than it's answering. And you are antagonizing others by stating, "Their art is weak because they can't understand the difference." and "No one on this forum can tell you the difference."

But while you are debating the issue with yourself, I'm sure you'll find some clarity. For example, Shaolinlueb has already pointed out that there are differences in the way power is developed or refined. I'm sure we can all agree that a complete method which incorporates all wei, nei and qi gongs is the best approach to refining power. Ones that isolate one or the other take longer to get results. But to say that "muscular strength is not necessary for Neijia" is false. I agree that over development of certain muscle groups can inhibit the opening and closing of specific areas critical to power issues in the so called internal arts. But I don't understand why this might create some sort of break in the structure.:confused:

[Tak]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Because the movement is broken and not unified as a contiguous internal frame. It may be a contiguous external frame but that will not help in Neijia because a skilled Neijia player will find that "broken" spot and exploit it. My teacher does it to me all the time.

If the external frame is contiguous, then there isn't a broken spot. By definition. Although it's silly anyway to say contiguous in this context.

[Becca]

This is a good topic. I know I have a hard time putting into words the difference between external and internal energy, as well. But I can tell the difference in my performance , and other's, when it is not being used. Or not used well.

The difference is like an open mic night at my favorite coffee shop. Some play well but there is no sizzle in the performance. But then this one lady comes up and just sings, no back-up or anything. It is so beutiful you want to cry.

The difference in my kung fu is just as easy to spot, once I learned to look for it. When I'm using internal energy effieceantly, everything feels almost effortless. Horse-stance stays low without draining me. I don't get muscle cramps after holding a possition for a few minutes. There is an almost sureal feeling of completion when I do my forms. It feels more like I'm floating than fighting durring sparring matches. My body almost moves itself with little or no concious thought from my brain.

[Ray Pina]

Can you explain the "Three Connections" for us?

Can you explain the relationship between the hand and foot; elbow and knee; and shoulder and hip (ming man)?

I just need to see someone move and check their "three connections" and I know right away.

[Ray Pina]

The pic below was taken at my last fight. I'm in the very bottom photo and on the right.

My back is pretty straight (compare to other guy) and I have a pushing angle. My knee is wedging the guy out while going in but my elbow should be plaining, too.

The hand touches and automatically it is backed by the entire body driven by the foot. Then the elbows plains in using the upper back/shoulder but fueled by the foot and whole body. At this time you are so close the knee should be used.

I need a lot of work on this. I do it well in line drills but as you can see, pulling it off in combat naturally is so, so. I'd give myself a c+ in that photo.... just like my school days. Enough to pull off what I'm doing but not quite enough. I wound up gassing out in the 2nd round:mad:

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Shaolinlueb
um we need to make a thread to show the difference?

want to see a difference, look at tai chi, then look at nan quan. nuff said. both different ways of developing power.

No, I made a thread.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by count
Fu Pow,

I'm only pointing out that your post is creating more questions than it's answering. And you are antagonizing others by stating, "Their art is weak because they can't understand the difference." and "No one on this forum can tell you the difference."

Who am I antagonizing? You? Why? If you think I am wrong then state it. No need to make it a Fu-Pow vs. The Forum issue when it is a count vs. Fu-Pow issue.

I stand by what I said. If you try to do a Neijia art in a Waijia way, you end up with something totally ineffective. It goes the other way also.

If I'm antagonizing those people that propagate a junk art then so be it. They deserve it.



But while you are debating the issue with yourself, I'm sure you'll find some clarity. For example, Shaolinlueb has already pointed out that there are differences in the way power is developed or refined.

Please post a link.



I'm sure we can all agree that a complete method which incorporates all wei, nei and qi gongs is the best approach to refining power.

No, I don't agree with that.


Ones that isolate one or the other take longer to get results. But to say that "muscular strength is not necessary for Neijia" is false.

Disagree.



I agree that over development of certain muscle groups can inhibit the opening and closing of specific areas critical to power issues in the so called internal arts. But I don't understand why this might create some sort of break in the structure.:confused:

It's not so much creating a break in the structure as it is a creating a place that cannot change and therefore can have a force applied to it. A good Neiji pracitioner will find the place that cannot change and will use against you.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Tak
If the external frame is contiguous, then there isn't a broken spot. By definition. Although it's silly anyway to say contiguous in this context.

Please read my response to count for clarification.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
Can you explain the "Three Connections" for us?

Can you explain the relationship between the hand and foot; elbow and knee; and shoulder and hip (ming man)?

I just need to see someone move and check their "three connections" and I know right away.

Are you seriously asking me or are you trying to prove some kind of point?

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
The pic below was taken at my last fight. I'm in the very bottom photo and on the right.

My back is pretty straight (compare to other guy) and I have a pushing angle. My knee is wedging the guy out while going in but my elbow should be plaining, too.

The hand touches and automatically it is backed by the entire body driven by the foot. Then the elbows plains in using the upper back/shoulder but fueled by the foot and whole body. At this time you are so close the knee should be used.

I need a lot of work on this. I do it well in line drills but as you can see, pulling it off in combat naturally is so, so. I'd give myself a c+ in that photo.... just like my school days. Enough to pull off what I'm doing but not quite enough. I wound up gassing out in the 2nd round:mad:

What does this have to do with this thread?:confused:

[Ray Pina]

Yes, I am asking you ... that's why I put the (?) in there. I know what the three connections mean to me, I was curious as to what it means to you.

I don't know what's up with you lately but your attitude has been **** poor. Granted, I don't look to have my MA wold turned upside when I come here, but I do get some links to good articles and interesting perspectives and hell, even got involved in a San Da league now through this site.

If you don't like the site, don't post. If you don't like other's to disagree with you don't post something you are not secure about. I have folks disagree with me all the time. You know what? That's fine. I won't post about a technique, aproach, situation that I aven't used, tested or been in. If someone doesn't see the value, fine, I put my treasure back in my pocket .... who loses out? Not everyone sees things the same way.

I can understand that you respect your teacher. But if you're posting we need to hear from you. We need to know the hows and whys of the matter.... footage is always apreciated.

At 6'7 and 200-something+ pounds you don't need martial arts anyway ... forget external vs internal. But most of all, chill out man. You're becoming a crank and a bore. Every time I turn around you're crying about something.

[Ray Pina]

PS

Just saw your last post.

In the bottom pic the guy on the left is an external stylist. The guy on the right an internal stylists. Is there a difference in structure (check the spine). Is there a difference in pushing angles?

Isn't this what we are talking about?

[Merryprankster]

Oh heck. This one's EASY.

"Internal is what I do so it's better. External is what you do, so it sucks."

Chris M's definition is much better though.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
Yes, I am asking you ... that's why I put the (?) in there. I know what the three connections mean to me, I was curious as to what it means to you.

That was a serious question. The three external connections are just an external representation of whats going on inside. There is not always a direct correlation either. The models is just a general tool to teach beginners.




I don't know what's up with you lately but your attitude has been **** poor. Granted, I don't look to have my MA wold turned upside when I come here, but I do get some links to good articles and interesting perspectives and hell, even got involved in a San Da league now through this site.

I admit I have not been as "logical" as I usually am. I was just "mirroring" the hostility shown to me by some posters on this site. That is going to change. In fact I'm gonna tear anything anyone writes down until they don't know what the f they are saying anymore. I let too much slide by in the past. Now its time to get down to hard logic and rhetoric.


If you don't like the site, don't post. If you don't like other's to disagree with you don't post something you are not secure about. I have folks disagree with me all the time. You know what? That's fine. I won't post about a technique, aproach, situation that I aven't used, tested or been in. If someone doesn't see the value, fine, I put my treasure back in my pocket .... who loses out? Not everyone sees things the same way.

When I post to this site I am writing little essays. Little thoughts and ideas that have been going through my head. I don't claim to be the authority on anything as some people have claimed. I'm a competent and forceful writer. Some people take this to mean I am claiming to be an expert. I don't understand that. This forum is a dialectic. We challenge each other back and forth until we come to some understanding. Most for what passes as "well reasoned" logic is full of holes and inconsistencies. It basically boils down to who can bully who and make the other feel bad. That needs to change and it starts with me.




I can understand that you respect your teacher. But if you're posting we need to hear from you. We need to know the hows and whys of the matter.... footage is always apreciated.

Both of my teachers kick ass. One teaches internal frame, the other external frame. That's how I know there is a difference. People immediately fall into the "either/or" trap. If I'm saying something good about "internal frame" martial arts then I'm automatically saying someing bad about "external frame" martial arts or whatever. That is an example of poor reasoning. Its so symptamatic of our PC culture. If you are saying something is "different" then one must be "better" or "worse."


At 6'7 and 200-something+ pounds you don't need martial arts anyway

That is faulty reasoning. I could make the same argument to you. Why do you do martial arts when you could just buy a gun. The quick answer is that we all have reasons we do martial arts and most of them, in this day and age, have little to do with self-defense.


... forget external vs internal.

It's a important distinction and that's what I'm getting at.


But most of all, chill out man. You're becoming a crank and a bore.

Sorry you FEEL that way.


Every time I turn around you're crying about something.

I don't "cry" and I don't "*****." And the first guy that says either of those to my face gets popped. :mad: ;) :p

[Becca]

ROFLAO!!! Someone would think you've been around for some of these "discussions" Merry. :D

I was kinda hopping for a good thread, though. This is something I have been working on quite a bit lately, and would like some insite from others.

I know what internal engergy is and, to some degree, how to find it inside myself. But last Saturdy my sifu suggested I not rank-test, because I laked the type of smoothness I needed to pass. (my low stances aren't all the good do to a past injury). He did tell me that effective use of internal power would help my flow, but I'm not sure how to do this. I thought I was doing what he was discribing.

I guess what I'm asking is this: Can this please be a serious thread so's I can pick y'alls brains in hope of figuring out what I need to effectively use this technique?





Please?

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Oh heck. This one's EASY.

"Internal is what I do so it's better. External is what you do, so it sucks."

Not sure what your point is but I do both "internal" and "external frame" martial arts, so if your argument is that I'm an "internal frame" martial artist saying "external frame" martial arts suck it really wouldn't make any sense.




Chris M's definition is much better though.

Haven't read it.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
I admit I have not been as "logical" as I usually am. I was just "mirroring" the hostility shown to me by some posters on this site. That is going to change. In fact I'm gonna tear anything anyone writes down until they don't know what the f they are saying anymore. I let too much slide by in the past. Now its time to get down to hard logic and rhetoric.




Hahahahahahaaa

Good one!:D

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Becca
ROFLAO!!! Someone would think you've been around for some of these "discussions" Merry. :D

I was kinda hopping for a good thread, though. This is something I have been working on quite a bit lately, and would like some insite from others.

I know what internal engergy is and, to some degree, how to find it inside myself. But last Saturdy my sifu suggested I not rank-test, because I laked the type of smoothness I needed to pass. (my low stances aren't all the good do to a past injury). He did tell me that effective use of internal power would help my flow, but I'm not sure how to do this. I thought I was doing what he was discribing.

I guess what I'm asking is this: Can this please be a serious thread so's I can pick y'alls brains in hope of figuring out what I need to effectively use this technique?

Please?


Energy and "frame" are different things. Although, when you use "internal frame" your "energy" will flow more smoothly.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
I'm a competent and forceful writer. Most for what passes as "well reasoned" logic is full of holes and inconsistencies. It basically boils down to who can bully who and make the other feel bad. That needs to change and it starts with me.




Too funny! You are on a roll! :D

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Both of my teachers kick ass.


Hmmmmm

Technique seems limited, but as long as it works!

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by unkokusai
Too funny! You are on a roll! :D

I glad you think I'm so funny. BTW, unkokusai tell us a little bit about the style you do. I'm curious. Japanese? Chinese?

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
I glad you think I'm so funny. BTW, unkokusai tell us a little bit about the style you do. I'm curious. Japanese? Chinese?


http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=487672#post487672

[Becca]

Ok, Fu. Explain more about this frame consept.

[Fu-Pow]

Not that it makes me an expert on terminology, as I've seen that it may vary from place to place, but I have more than 20 years experience wrestling, coaching, and just rollin' whenever I can. 5 of those years were Div. 1 NCAA Wrestling, for whatever that's worth. And thisthatandtheotherthing. The point is, I found it unexpected that you would consider one finish or another to be the 'standard' as the finish would usually be dictated by a number of factors that you would not necessarily control.


So that is Greco-Roman wrestling then? Is there somewhere we can look up your record, etc. or do wish to remain anonymous?

Also, I'm wondering why the japanese name if you are a Greco-Roman wrestler?

[Merryprankster]

Becca,

I'm going to throw something out there that will not set will with people who want to emphasize differences, lineage and engage in true believerism.

I've seen clips of "good" Tai Chi push hands, Bagua, Shooter's tai chi and Tim Cartmell's work.

All of them - ALL of them displayed a sense of unity and fluidity of movement that I identify most closely with the grappling arts. Tim Cartmell - who is also a BJJ brown belt, has commented in the past that the principles are all the same.

Lets put it this way. I UNDERSTOOD what they were doing. It was clear to me, even (especially!) at full speed.

The thing is (and this is where I will get into trouble with the true believers), that this understanding of fluidity, unity, timing, etc... isn't unique to any art, but rather the practicioner. The skills can be cultivated anywhere, and depend entirely on how you train and how hard you work.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Hello,

My understanding is that you cannot strain in Taiji. But that does not mean alot of effort isn't used. But no strain, totally relaxed.

I'm not for sure what fu pow means by internal frame, he may be speaking at a higher level than me. My understandin is the internal frame is the dantien, and center of gravity. You must not strain to be able to use it, a needle wrapped in cotton, right? And if the dantien is not the originator of the moves there will be strain, which then will force you to lock your shoulder, or collapse a knee or hip. I am sure a high level IMAist will win out that way, and force the opponent to strain and break the structure. All Taiji needs for a shuai jiao throw, is the opponent to have a little tension in one hip, and can shuai jiao them by simply turning the dantien, and whole body coordinated.

But my main understanding is that basically, you use the dantien to to redirect the opponents force back on top of himself, but, it can be done WITH NO visible external movement. People will say,, oh yeah, we do that in Judo and aikido, but I am not so sure they have the internal always. Maybe I haven't been exposed to the high level of those arts, but when they throw someone it appears to not be the dantien literally doing it.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
So that is Greco-Roman wrestling then? Is there somewhere we can look up your record, etc. or do wish to remain anonymous?

Folkstyle.

I do wish to remain anonymous, but if you really must I suppose you could look up my record.

Might be simpler to just ask me though.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

And like I said, there's alot of shua jiao being promoted as internal these days

[Merryprankster]

Maybe I haven't been exposed to the high level of those arts, but when they throw someone it appears to not be the dantien literally doing it.

It's clear to me that you aren't experienced on this issue. ALL throws and takedowns are about the dantien.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Also, I'm wondering why the japanese name if you are a Greco-Roman wrestler?

Again, not Greco.

As for the name, mostly just goofin'. I did live in China for about 2 years back in the early 90's, then Japan for almost three after that. I guess I have an interest in the region. I know what you are thinking and yes, I did have a chance to study some stuff while I was there (although I always hunted down the local wrestling clubs first). I can't really claim to have become proficient in any of the many things I encountered. Just sampling and getting a workout, learning something about the culture and all that. Havin' fun.




How's that? Enough?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Lol at Tim Cartmell being good at push hands. Nuetralizing one side, and then attacking the other side, is not the internal. It all has to be one, and hardly visible. That is not returning the opponents force to him

Link (http://homepage.mac.com/mancheta/iMovieTheater22.html)


Hey Fu Pow. I don't have any problem with you, and I don't think you're nutriding your teacher. In fact, I'd be very interested in anything your teacher has to say. Not sure what this beef is about that you have with Shooter though. :confused:

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Well , MP, I hane not ever seen someone from those arts, throw someone AT LEAST into one sommersault, with hardly any visible movement, and no trip or sweep.

I did some Pankratoin with Judo/wrestling as well as Muay Thai. No internal. I have also seen IMAists without the internal. ( Tim Cartmell, for one)

[count]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Who am I antagonizing? You? Why? If you think I am wrong then state it. No need to make it a Fu-Pow vs. The Forum issue when it is a count vs. Fu-Pow issue.
Wow, seems like you're debating almost everyone here. Not just me.


I stand by what I said. If you try to do a Neijia art in a Waijia way, you end up with something totally ineffective. It goes the other way also

Maybe, maybe not. There is no logical proof either way.


If I'm antagonizing those people that propagate a junk art then so be it. They deserve it.
That may be so, still, you're antagonizing everyone, not just a few you disagree with.

Please post a link.

I would, but you just quoted him in your post, so why bother?


About complete methods:

No, I don't agree with that.
Clearly, killing three birds with one stone is better than knocking them off one at a time. Why would you even debate this point except to argue?

About needing muscle for internal martial arts:

Disagree.
Test out your theory. If you think muscle isn't required for so called internal martial arts. Test it against your so called external teacher. To many people learning the so called internal martial arts think relaxing one muscle requires relaxing all of them. This is a misconception that results in no power and no structure. But hey, maybe you can hold up your skeleton with just tendons alone.

It's not so much creating a break in the structure as it is a creating a place that cannot change and therefore can have a force applied to it. A good Neiji pracitioner will find the place that cannot change and will use against you.Good that you clarified or corrected this point. Not having "contiguous" body parts was confusing me. :p

[Merryprankster]

I was talking about the sort of push hands where people are actually trying to do something to each other, not an exercise.

As for the rest of it, you're living in a fantasy land, and this conversation is over on my end. I've learned not to argue about this type of stuff around here with true believers.

Cheers.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
All of them - ALL of them displayed a sense of unity and fluidity of movement that I identify most closely with the grappling arts.

Funny; I don't think I've heard you say that before! Cartmell is a black belt now, I think.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Alright, who did you see doing push hands? Either the internal is there, or it isn't. If I'm a "true beleiver" why don't I beleive Tim Cartmell has it?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

MP, does the technique of grappling change, because you are not sparring, from when you are sparring?

[Merryprankster]

Because you don't know what you're looking for. Secondly, you can't tell jack from a demo exercise. Third, if I knew the names I'd give them. But I don't remember. They made an impression enough for me to remember. But it wasn't unique, not hardly.

Chris M, remember the Bagua clips you sent me? Good stuff.

Looked suspiciously like some other stuff I'm familiar with ;)

[Merryprankster]

Sorry. I really am done. I stated my viewpoint about these types of arguments and I'm not going to to this. I spent two years doing it and I'm tired of it.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Well, I'm telling you, there is no internal in Tim Cartmell's push hands. It's gonna count in an alive situation, violently. And I've studied with WAy better IMAists. He may be good on the ground.

Chen Fa Ke style has it. Does anyone know Tim Cartmell's style of Taiji? I favor Al COlangelo's Chen Fa Ke style, and power.

But the fact is, it really does no good to argue over the internet, and sites like the Emptyflower REALLY don't want anything to happen for real, so yeah, the internet has been rendered useless.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Becca,

I'm going to throw something out there that will not set will with people who want to emphasize differences, lineage and engage in true believerism.


Calling me a "believer" is a lame try at a thinly veiled insult. I don't have to have "faith" in what I'm saying, I've experienced it first hand.



I've seen clips of "good" Tai Chi push hands, Bagua, Shooter's tai chi and Tim Cartmell's work.

All of them - ALL of them displayed a sense of unity and fluidity of movement that I identify most closely with the grappling arts.



I haven't met or pushed with Shooter or Tim Cartmell so I can't speak to their knowledge or skill level. AND I haven't met you so I can't speak to your knowledge or skill level.

However, "external frame" martial arts have unity and fluidity but that still makes them different than "internal frame."



Tim Cartmell - who is also a BJJ brown belt, has commented in the past that the principles are all the same.

Again..maybe Tim know's his stuff. Maybe not. I'd have to meet him to know for sure. Or maybe have my teacher meet with him.





As I understand it you are not a IMA practitioner so what qualifies you to know the difference?

[QUOTE}The thing is (and this is where I will get into trouble with the true believers), that this understanding of fluidity, unity, timing, etc... isn't unique to any art

And who said it was? You can have all those things and still be "external frame."


, but rather the practicioner. The skills can be cultivated anywhere, and depend entirely on how you train and how hard you work.

Totally wrong. The creation of IMA was a set of unique historical events that only occured in China. It was the fusion of Taoist self-cultivation techniques and Chinese martial arts both which reached a high level of development in the Tang dynasty.

Internal skill is not something you just "pick up."

Now, if you work hard and train hard you can become a good fighter. Most likely...in fact totally likely.....utilizing an "external frame" skill set. External frame = normal strength. If you accentuate what you already have you can become a very proficient fighter. (In fact I practice a style that is based around "working man" movements...ie swinging an axe or hammer. )

With that I won't disagree. But you are not going to reach any level of internal skill without a qualified teacher.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Does wrestling have triangle chokes? Maybe it does.:eek:

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Just view the internal as another technique, either you have it or you don't. It can be used all by itself, without any technique. But I'm telling you guys, it DOES NOT mean efficient body movement, and all that nonsense.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla



Hey Fu Pow. I don't have any problem with you, and I don't think you're nutriding your teacher. In fact, I'd be very interested in anything your teacher has to say. Not sure what this beef is about that you have with Shooter though. :confused:

Cool,

I noticed further down the thread you were intrested in Chen Fake's style. Well my teacher is a disciple of Feng Zhiquiang, who was a disciple (and chief defender of the style) for Chen Fake.
My point is not to name drop but I'm just saying that I'm not learning from some slouch. :D

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I do Chen Zhoukui style myself.

[Fu-Pow]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Who am I antagonizing? You? Why? If you think I am wrong then state it. No need to make it a Fu-Pow vs. The Forum issue when it is a count vs. Fu-Pow issue.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Wow, seems like you're debating almost everyone here. Not just me.

I'm just getting sick of hearing "hey Fu-Pow why are you debating the whole forum?" I'm not, I'm debating several people. Most probably agree with me or have no opinion.




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I stand by what I said. If you try to do a Neijia art in a Waijia way, you end up with something totally ineffective. It goes the other way also

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Maybe, maybe not. There is no logical proof either way.


What kind of "proof" are you talking about.



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If I'm antagonizing those people that propagate a junk art then so be it. They deserve it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That may be so, still, you're antagonizing everyone, not just a few you disagree with.



I think that's just your opinion.




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About needing muscle for internal martial arts:

Disagree.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Test out your theory. If you think muscle isn't required for so called internal martial arts. Test it against your so called external teacher.

I don't think I'll be challenging either of my teachers anytime soon.




quote:

To many people learning the so called internal martial arts think relaxing one muscle requires relaxing all of them. This is a misconception that results in no power and no structure. But hey, maybe you can hold up your skeleton with just tendons alone.

I'm not saying one should be totally soft, I never stated that. It is hard within soft.




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not so much creating a break in the structure as it is a creating a place that cannot change and therefore can have a force applied to it. A good Neiji pracitioner will find the place that cannot change and will use against you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good that you clarified or corrected this point. Not having "contiguous" body parts was confusing me.

LOL!

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
[B]I was talking about the sort of push hands where people are actually trying to do something to each other, not an exercise.

That's not push hands that's called sparring or in Taiji practice "Duan Shou" or separated hands.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
I do Chen Zhoukui style myself.

Nice! Chen Zhoukui and Feng Zhiquiang were friends and training partners. I bet their styles are somewhat similar. Differences might arise, however, from the fact that Master Feng did Xing Yi before Taiji.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by unkokusai
Again, not Greco.

As for the name, mostly just goofin'. I did live in China for about 2 years back in the early 90's, then Japan for almost three after that. I guess I have an interest in the region. I know what you are thinking and yes, I did have a chance to study some stuff while I was there (although I always hunted down the local wrestling clubs first). I can't really claim to have become proficient in any of the many things I encountered. Just sampling and getting a workout, learning something about the culture and all that. Havin' fun.




How's that? Enough?


Thanks for the info.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

If people are getting antagonized, what does it say about their confidence in their training? Fu Pow is the most antagonized, and he's still here, no need to PM moderators, no need to make teams, or set up baited questions. Maybe he oversimplifies things, or is wrong sometimes, everyone is sometimes. I know that what I say has an effect to the forums I go to, so all the insults in the world don't mean **** to me.

Actually, this is a very good forum with a variety of styles and the similarities should be emphasised, but differences are required to be understood too.

Mainly though, this forum has alot of people who wouldn't know the difference between TKD and CMA, let alone internal/external. And alot of people who take themselves SO seriously, that they THINK Ralek is harassing them, when he in fact, actually WOULD beat many of them. And Ralek is not the only one in the world who thinks gongfu is a joke! Wake up!

[Fu-Pow]

I'm not for sure what fu pow means by internal frame, he may be speaking at a higher level than me. My understandin is the internal frame is the dantien, and center of gravity.

Internal frame is whatever is holding you up when all your external muscles are relaxed.


All Taiji needs for a shuai jiao throw, is the opponent to have a little tension in one hip, and can shuai jiao them by simply turning the dantien, and whole body coordinated.

But my main understanding is that basically, you use the dantien to to redirect the opponents force back on top of himself, but, it can be done WITH NO visible external movement.

Exactly!

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Actually Fu Pow, I think some people here, are just trying to impress the very people who don't know the difference between CMA and TKD. There was a guy, Earthdragon, who exposed someone for that in a flame war.

[count]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
What kind of "proof" are you talking about.
I'm just saying that one might still have some skills practicing an internal art with a focus on wei gong methods. There's no proof you can't still be effective.


I don't think I'll be challenging either of my teachers anytime soon.
LOL! Too bad though, a teacher should always be approachable to test such theories.

I'm not saying one should be totally soft, I never stated that. It is hard within soft.
They say tai chi is hard within soft. But they also say Hsing-I is soft within hard. Isn't Hsing-i internal by your definition?
[/QUOTE]
Hey Fu Pow, I wasn't at all antagonized. I'm just testing your theories. I think you can still think this through a bit. There are different approaches in training methods. But I don't believe one interfers with the others. They all support the same things.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
That's not push hands that's called sparring or in Taiji practice 'Duan Shou' or separated hands.

This could be the case in your school, but many taijiquan practitioners practice a style of push hands which can vary along a continuum of permitted techniques: from fixed to moving-steps, from single to double-hands, from four to eight- (da lu) methods, and in every case then incorporating application work in the push hands frame, and varying it from soft to hard resistance.

You can consult Old Frame Chen Family Taijiquan (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/155643488X/qid=1088550755/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-0510415-4280928?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) by Mark Chen for this, Chapter 6.2: Push Hands Applications.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

The strange thing is, I have found hard external training to actually IMPROVE my sung! Go figure! Of course I don't really do anything hard quite like most people would.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

The point of push hands is that the patterns become freestyle, according to the opponents attacks, but I wouldn't quite call it sparring. Maybe you can have sparring/push hands.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Internal qi, means energy, that was developed by the monks, at the temple, and manipulated, internally, that means the musculature, the vagus nerve, you must understand that kind of vocabulary in order to understand internal energy. Al Colangelo has taught it to beginners, and if you've seen it, you saw them, ( the ones with experience in other grappling styles anyways) take on 2 grapplers , simultaneously, they made it look easy. Al Colangelo is 51 years old( in 1996), he does not even belong on the same floor physically with those men, it would be impossible for him to even stay standing.

http://www.mindboxing.com

On those blacktaoist guys site, they used to have videos on there of their master sending much larger people flying backwards, or even involuntarily running, with no visible movement. Can't find those on their site anymore. I have seen similar things, like corkscrew sommersault shuai jiao throws, and people running involuntarily, and instantly. You could run someone into a wall and hurt them. But most importantly you can effortlessly send them the opposite direction in the middle of it.

Anyways, my back is actually feeling a bit better than usual today and I'm feeling stronger, I may just go back to the external and fight, but my goal is not titles or decisions, but simly to be as violent as I possibly can.

My loyalty is to qigong, before martial arts, personally

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Hey! What happened to Buddy Tripp? He ran away? He said he would fly to fight me. Well, if he wants to die , I'm game. I will fight him, GaryR, or Marcus Brinkman.

[count]

LOL!:D What is this? A conversation with yourself? Is it, how many consecutive misconceptions can you write in a row? :rolleyes: You're earning your screen name for sure.:p

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Like what misconceptions?

[Christopher M]

Actually, he's talked me into it. Where do I send my money to get this kind of power?

[count]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
Internal qi, means energy, that was developed by the monks, at the temple, and manipulated, internally, that means the musculature, the vagus nerve, you must understand that kind of vocabulary in order to understand internal energy. Al Colangelo has taught it to beginners, and if you've seen it, you saw them, ( the ones with experience in other grappling styles anyways) take on 2 grapplers , simultaneously, they made it look easy. Al Colangelo is 51 years old( in 1996), he does not even belong on the same floor physically with those men, it would be impossible for him to even stay standing.

http://www.mindboxing.com

On those blacktaoist guys site, they used to have videos on there of their master sending much larger people flying backwards, or even involuntarily running, with no visible movement. Can't find those on their site anymore. I have seen similar things, like corkscrew sommersault shuai jiao throws, and people running involuntarily, and instantly. You could run someone into a wall and hurt them. But most importantly you can effortlessly send them the opposite direction in the middle of it.

Anyways, my back is actually feeling a bit better than usual today and I'm feeling stronger, I may just go back to the external and fight, but my goal is not titles or decisions, but simly to be as violent as I possibly can.

My loyalty is to qigong, before martial arts, personally
I was going to pick a few choice ones but this whole post for starters.

[count]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
Hey! What happened to Buddy Tripp? He ran away? He said he would fly to fight me. Well, if he wants to die , I'm game. I will fight him, GaryR, or Marcus Brinkman.
And this LOL!. :D

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Would you like to explain?

[count]

Qi is not a simple a concept as you think it is and for now, let's just say I know most of the people you referenced and their skills as well as their concepts of martial arts, and it's kind of funny what you say.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

What you say is funny, because you're not saying anything. Also, I never said anything really about the definition of qi. It is universal energy.

And those guys are sticky hands guys. I won't put pictures of myself up, because people will think I'm some GaryR sticky hands guy, no, I can put my structure on the opponent on contact

[Christopher M]

Whoa. Let's keep this PG-13, guys.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Oh, sorry, I thought I was. I am not the one who ever starts flaming, it's just some people take my opinion as flames, and proceed to insult me.

If I say I think Fedor is better than Noguera am I a troll?

If I say Chen stylists are better than Yang stylists I'm a troll?

If I say Gao is worse than Yin Fu?

If I say MMA is better than TMA?

If I say someone is not showing the internal I'm a troll?

No, let's get rid of the MMA nutriders, and wannabe IMA experts

[count]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
What you say is funny, because you're not saying anything. Also, I never said anything really about the definition of qi. It is universal energy.

And those guys are sticky hands guys. I won't put pictures of myself up, because people will think I'm some GaryR sticky hands guy, no, I can put my structure on the opponent on contact
Maybe on the planet where you come from, but not in this galaxy. Must be the same planet where you would beat Buddy, Gary and Marcus. LOL
I think what you said was


Internal qi, means energy, that was developed by the monks, at the temple, and manipulated, internally, that means the musculature, the vagus nerve, you must understand that kind of vocabulary in order to understand internal energy.
You may experience qi as energy but energy is more the effect of qi. Qi is not universal energy either. More of a process than a thing.

Blacktaoist never post Bull**** about making people walk or moving them without moving either. ;)

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Yeah, because there used to be video on blacktaoists site of it.

I would kill those guys.

Qi is the basis of the universe, and shapeless. All the factors I quoted, " from al colangelo" are important. Qi is universal energy, the basis of the universe. If you want the real, read falun gong, it's the high level, and owns 16 part neigong

Link (http://www.sfu.ca/~falun/flg/flg_1.htm)

Beyond all the language stuff, a better way to put it is-

qi= prana , and that's the truth


Actually, I have gotten too serious, and should tone it down, pg-13. But everyone good! I'm dissing you, Ralek's dissing you, everyone's dissing you, don't you see? No wannabe experts!

[cerebus]

Hey Third Rate Backbreaker, or whatever your name is, don't you know that snorting modelling glue while practicing Falun Gong Atlantis Chi Gong is not making your posts any less laughable? Buddy Tripp would take you apart, so would Black Taoist. But hey, it's YOUR fantasy, play it however you like. :p :p :p

[scotty1]

OMG, LOL @ this thread.

FU POW:

"In fact I'm gonna tear anything anyone writes down until they don't know what the f they are saying anymore. I let too much slide by in the past. Now its time to get down to hard logic and rhetoric."

Yeah, rhetoric would be right!

"I'm a competent and forceful writer."

No you're not. You just wind everyone up.

"I don't "cry" and I don't "*****." And the first guy that says either of those to my face gets popped."

Making threats over the internet that can never be proven or disproven, nice way to come off like a blow-hard.

Dude you need to calm down. Saying people's art is weak if they don't agree with you is ****ty. You're argumentative and antagonistic. I can't believe you're three years older than me, your debating skills are those of a 13 year year old.

If you believe you know the difference between internal/external, don't start a thread about it ramming it down our throats. If you're that secure in your knowledge, keep it to yourself, or see if you can open it up for discussion in a civil manner.

BACKBREAKER -

"I know that what I say has an effect to the forums I go to"

yeah, everyone thinks "oh sht, here come's BB again.."

"Wake up!"

**** off.

The above comments were written with respect to RTB's recent request for civility on the forum. Man it was hard.

CHRIS M -

Would you mind sending me those Bagua clips that MP referenced?

Personally, I couldn't care less about internal/external.

Its just training, I know what I do is working ie. making me a better fighter, so I don't mind if I'm doing tai chi internally, externally, or inside out.

****, I don't even know what the difference is, or even if there is one, and I don't have time in my life to find out.

[cerebus]

It's just hilarious that 3rdrateIMAkilla, better known as buttscratcher, uh I mean rumphumper, no wait... backbreaker, yeah that's it, is such a sad, pathetic little Golem-like troll that he keeps coming back here with new names.

The simple fact that he'll act all tough & talk smack about Tim Cartmell, Buddy Tripp, Novell Bell and others who could literally dismember him with their bare hands (if they were even bored enough to waste any time on him) shows that his dementia has progressed even further than before.

And rumpjumper, you might wanna remember that several months ago when I actually was wasting time trying to show you how illogical you were being, you sent me your location (you're in Canada). I still have the address. I doubt you'd want some of the guys you're talking tough about to receive that info. Better just Shuddup and do your looney tooney Falun Gong- Show Atlantis space alien chi gung.

[scotty1]

That would be a video I think we'd all like to see.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I'll fight Buddy Tripp and win period, and he mightt not survive. I'll fight him, with no ref, in a field, like he himself wants.

I never said anything about blacktaoist, he seems pretty ****ing tough, really good, and his master is incredible from the short videos I've see. But if he wants to come here, and talk **** to me, I welcome it, and wouldn't rule out fighting their students. He's not a sticky hands guy. He has the internal.

And Lol, at people thinking their low level martial qigong is as legit as Falun Gong. Wake the **** up! Get out of the past, and realize the internal , and qi, are the way to go, and the future.

Marcus Brinkman and Gary Romel, just suck. I's just true, and not a flame.

So yeah, they're in a category below Gin Soon.

I can beat them, and Al COlangelo would destroy them. NO MORE MMA NUTRIDRS< AND WANNABE IMA EXPERTS. Why do wanna look like an expert, if your fighting sucks? It's not me that's good, it's the art that's good, and I will risk injury and death, but I'm not really worried.

Type Kwan into search, to find my location. But I won't fight just anybody, I can do that here (http://www.wellbeingnetwork.ca)

Not training here at the moment, but just might go back soon. Currently, we'll have to street fight, you guys think it means so much more anyways (http://www.pridegym.ca)

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
I'll fight Buddy Tripp and win period, and he mightt not survive. I'll fight him, with no ref, in a field, like he himself wants.

I never said anything about blacktaoist, he seems pretty ****ing tough, really good, and his master is incredible from the short videos I've see. But if he wants to come here, and talk **** to me, I welcome it, and wouldn't rule out fighting their students. He's not a sticky hands guy.

And Lol, at people thinking their low level martial qigong is as legit as Falun Gong. Wake the **** up! Get out of the past, and realize the internal , and qi, are the way to go, and the future.

Marcus Brinkman and Gary Romel, just suck. I's just true, and not a flame.

So yeah, they're in a category below Gin Soon.

I can beat them, and Al COlangelo would destroy them. NO MORE MMA NUTRIDRS< AND WANNABE IMA EXPERTS. Why do wanna look like an expert, if your fighting sucks?

Is this nut the same guy who was trying to defend the falun gong cult before?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

STFU with your cult bs. It's real. There are alot of magicians claiming to be Qigong, so it effects the culture. Falun gong gets rid of all that.

[Christopher M]

Isn't Colangelo a rather long commute from Canada?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Yeah, I've never met him, and most likely won't. But I like him, and hearing these guys diss him, is laughable, because theiy're not even MMA, at least MMA has a reason to hate him. My main point is

1. Chen Fa KE owns

2. High level qigong own.

3. Down with MMA nutriders, and down with wannabe experts

And actually, I think Kingston Ontario, is even further, and places like Toronto Muay Thai are very Far. Like Siam number 1 Muay Thai. Has Anyone heard of Tiger Gym in Toronto? Eric Tuttle said he can and has beaten several Tiger Gym fighter at once, and some are now his students

[Christopher M]

You train with Eric Tuttle?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Yes, do you know him? He said after 3 years, a student of his can challenge anyone of any other style they want.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
STFU with your cult bs. It's real. There are alot of magicians claiming to be Qigong, so it effects the culture. Falun gong gets rid of all that.

Hang on a sec. Didn't someone already post an interview with the nut-job cult boy who started falun gong wherein he claims to be from another planet and all that sort of thing?

Are they keeping you prisoner on the compound and monitoring your posts? Is that why you are making such a fool of yourself?

[unkokusai]

http://www.time.com/time/asia/asia/magazine/1999/990510/interview1.html

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

He says these things, so that people will come in the door, then he explains why it isn't necessarily to seek supernormal abilities anymore. There are alot of magic tricks in China, Falun gong is not a group that does them though, if you actually read the teachings I linked, and not some article with a dumb interviewer. Read for yourself, falun gong is not about special powers, like so many sham qigong masters.

http://www.csicop.org/sb/9903/sima-nan.html


Also, stay away from empy force guys, like Richard Mooney, and Paul Dong. Do Falun Gong

The Fa is the teacher. Jesus Christ, ( Adam) is the top master.

[unkokusai]

Man, you're just chuggin' the koolaide by the gallon, ain't ya?

[Christopher M]

Not personally. Hands-on with a good teacher must be more rewarding than videos and books on this other stuff though.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Well, I would say it is rewarding in different ways. There are things you get out of Falun Gong, that you won't from IMA. High quality energy. Hands on is indeed very good, and just being there in person is very good, even without contact, to see the actual amount of power, hard to tell for sure on a video. I'd say the biggest advantage to learning from him, is that his styles are very content-rich. And he says there's nothing in xinyi, taiji, bagua, and luihebafa, that isn't in all of them, and he says internal martial arts are the integration of high level qigong and martial arts, which creates a high level art. AND, he says do not be concerned how soon you can fight, or how reality based your skills are, he said be only concerned with acheiving high level.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by cerebus
It's just hilarious that 3rdrateIMAkilla, better known as buttscratcher, uh I mean rumphumper, no wait... backbreaker, yeah that's it, is such a sad, pathetic little Golem-like troll that he keeps coming back here with new names.

I think you mean "Gollum-like". "Golem-like" would mean he is similar to a Jewish robot made of clay.

[Buddy]

Backbreaker you puss. Now you're just going to get your punk ass banned again. You knew better than to open your piehole on the Internal board. And Faloon Gong is spurious poop designed to fool pencilnecks like you, you wetnap.

[Christopher M]

FWIW, I think most people would recommend you focus on Mr. Tuttle's teachings for now.

I think I understand why you're negatively characterizing people as 'stickyhands' now. I assume you have heard Mr. Tuttle tell you you must take your opponent's center at immediate contact. I think this is very true, and is something which will occupy your study for countless years. However, you must know that the same skill which is teaching you to do this offensively is also teaching you how to defend against it. When you touch hands with your teacher, can you take his center immediately (other than when he gives it to you so you can learn)? I presume not - because he can defend against this.

What you're deriding as 'stickyhands' (at least when done right) is not a failure to recognize the goal of taking the opponent's center: rather, it is a training drill between two people who are in a constant dynamic of defending their own centers from such an attack, while launching the same of your own.

Of course, doing this is a more advanced skill: one has to understand simply taking an undefended center first. But we should be careful not to misunderstand the practice of our betters and then deride it, for this would mislead our own practice.

This is much like two skillful BJJ practitioners rolling as they exchange counter-for-counter and vie for superior position. A beginner might not be able to see those nuances, and feel that one or the other should 'just submit the guy!'

[Buddy]

Christopher,
If you know Eric, please tell him Buddy from Boston says hello. We met down here a few years ago and he is a gentleman and a martial artist. I hope he is not really allowing this cretin to learn his stuff.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Chris M- I really don't seperate the systems. They are all one to me, and in fact I am focusing more on the meditation. I cannot ever get Mr Tuttles center, at best I can defend mine, but he will try to go for the ripping off your shoulder, which iME is worse then trying to hold down your center. And even you, need to get out of the " better" and " expert" mentality, because there are no legitimate IMAist in fighting I know of, that mean anything to anyone

[Buddy]

I'd crush you like a used kleenex.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

You just want tn think you are better Buddy. You show you have no experience in high level qigong, obviously I know better than you, if that's what you think. You're a biotch. You think Marcus Brinkman is anything compared to Eric Tuttle. Lol. Klotz Kwan is way better than you.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

How big are you buddy? 200 pounds? I was surprided to hear how big Fu Pow is. I bet you think you can beat him too!:rolleyes:
I can indeed finish you with one strike

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Originally posted by Buddy
Christopher,
I and he is a gentleman and a martial artist.

Much unlike Buddy

[Buddy]

Yeah,
About 200 lbs. But you're just some little internet weed that thinks Falun is real. Sad.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

That's okay, I'm not concerned with afew pounds, you're just sticky hands. I hit harder than alot of 200+ pound guys, and it wouldn't matter to Eric or Al Colangelo. What's your height?

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla

I can indeed finish you with one strike

Do cults have unions?

[Buddy]

My height? What do want, a friggen date? My teacher Luo Dexiu will be here next month along with my senior George Wood. Come down and visit and we'll see. I'll drop you like a sack of wet s**t.

[Christopher M]

I tried.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

You need to quit with the ego. I don't do second hand versions. Klotz Kwan says, you think you are experts, but are not experts, like alot of people, Eric Tuttle students included. Although no Eric Tuttle student spoke to me the way you did, or talks bad about others, like you guys do about Al. I don't really care, but the internaet is sure gonna suck at this rate, if you're all we get.

Here's what Al says about you Gao guys (http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14898&highlight=Al+colangelo)

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
Klotz Kwan says, you think you are experts, but are not experts, [/URL]

Is he an alien too?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Maybe. we do BS qigong, botox substitute. Qiagra, and hmmm. other funny ones I can't remember lol

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Shiiiit, 300 views in 1 hour. This is fun stuff!

[Ray Pina]

1) Can you post some fight footage so we can get an idea of your method (have you mentioned one?) in action?

2) Interesting Chen Fake story: My master was visiting China to take part in some teaching thing going on at Shaolin and wanted to cross hands with Mr. Fake but he said he was too old. My master, though looking young, assured him that he was only a year or two younger.

Then Mr. Fake said he couldn't fight because he had a bum knee .... hhhhmmmmm, bad mechanics? ...... Nope! The taiji master .... ready .... get this ..... tripped! and fell!

Of course he was able to do a few days worth of demonstarting before this.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I have no fights E fist. That may change in the future, it's just training at times can rip the **** out of my lower back if I go in without training on my own also, which in thlast year I've slacked on.

ROFLMAO at what you say about Chen Fake. He was the ultimate ****, in martial arts. He was the best, and you teacher does not compare by 1000 classes.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by scotty1
[B]OMG, LOL @ this thread.

FU POW:

"In fact I'm gonna tear anything anyone writes down until they don't know what the f they are saying anymore. I let too much slide by in the past. Now its time to get down to hard logic and rhetoric."

Yeah, rhetoric would be right!



Rhetoric=

1 : the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b : the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2 a : skill in the effective use of speech b : a type or mode of language or speech; also : insincere or grandiloquent language
3 : verbal communication


"I'm a competent and forceful writer."

No you're not. You just wind everyone up.

Your opinion. Please see the definition of rhetoric to know what I am good at.




"I don't "cry" and I don't "*****." And the first guy that says either of those to my face gets popped."

Making threats over the internet that can never be proven or disproven,

Just saying that people are way more liberal in what they say when they can say it anonymously and from who knows how many miles away. I seriously doubt anyone would act as rudely as they do in person. If they did it would quickly lead to an altercation. And I have no problem fighting someone if their goal is to openly and publicly disrespect me to my face.



nice way to come off like a blow-hard.

Your opinion. And BTW, I'm reporting this post to the moderator. That was a direct insult.


Dude you need to calm down. Saying people's art is weak if they don't agree with you is ****ty. You're argumentative and antagonistic.

Where did I say that? I said

What I said is

" There are a lot of Nei Jia practitioners out there who practice their art using the external frame. They tell you, there is no real difference between the two. This is incorrect...it's PC language.

Their art is weak because they can't understand the difference. They give other real Neiji players a bad name by their ineffective use of the external frame for techniques that require internal frame movement. They then have to rely on pseudo-scientific hocus pocus because the art as they practice it does not work. "


If your gonna "quote" me then use "quotes." You're paraphrasing something that I never said. I never said because someones disagreed that their art was weak.


I can't believe you're three years older than me, your debating skills are those of a 13 year year old.

Actually they're way better than yours because I don't have to result to making insults and character attacks to prove my point.
Your style of argument is called "argumentum ad hominem." It is defined as the following:

The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.
There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion,
the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an
assertion the author points to the relationship between the
person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.
(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the
person notes that a person does not practise what he
preaches.



If you believe you know the difference between internal/external, don't start a thread about it ramming it down our throats. If you're that secure in your knowledge, keep it to yourself, or see if you can open it up for discussion in a civil manner.

The only thing that gets rammed down your throat is something that you let get rammed down your throat. I made a cogent argument. I'm sorry you don't have a good rebuff for my argument. I'm sorry that you have to result to personal attacks.

You've insulted me several times in this thread which has been specifically banned by the moderator. I'm reporting your post to the mod.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Myself, I don't report posts.

[Buddy]

<You need to quit with the ego. I don't do second hand versions.>

Hey Nancy, I was minding my own business until you wrote that you would fight and beat me. And I have no idea what second hand versions means.


< Klotz Kwan says, you think you are experts, but are not experts, like alot of people, Eric Tuttle students included.>

Is Klotz your little "friend"? Does he know me? Can you tell me where I reffered to myself as an expert? Can you put together a cohesive thought?

<Although no Eric Tuttle student spoke to me the way you did, or talks bad about others, like you guys do about Al.>

Cause Al's a bull**** artist.



<I don't really care, but the internaet is sure gonna suck at this rate, if you're all we get.>


Sorry, Nancy. It's all you get.

<Here's what Al says about you Gao guys>

Well, I read the whole foolish thread and interestingly enough, Gao was NEVER even mentioned you tool. It was nice to see how Gary and Chris (those EF badboys) showed Colangelo for the faker he is. And Wetzel (RIP) never learned Sera.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
[B

2) Interesting Chen Fake story: My master was visiting China to take part in some teaching thing going on at Shaolin and wanted to cross hands with Mr. Fake but he said he was too old. My master, though looking young, assured him that he was only a year or two younger.

Then Mr. Fake said he couldn't fight because he had a bum knee .... hhhhmmmmm, bad mechanics? ...... Nope! The taiji master .... ready .... get this ..... tripped! and fell!
[/B]

What was the age difference? Who is your teacher? Who can verify this story?

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
Myself, I don't report posts.

I reported you too Backbreaker.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Originally posted by Buddy
<You need to quit with the ego. I don't do second hand versions.>

Hey Nancy, I was minding my own business until you wrote that you would fight and beat me. And I have no idea what second hand versions means.



RE: You're a liar. You started making challenges in the Internal forum, yet beg for the person you're challenging to be banned





< Klotz Kwan says, you think you are experts, but are not experts, like alot of people, Eric Tuttle students included.>

Is Klotz your little "friend"? Does he know me? Can you tell me where I reffered to myself as an expert? Can you put together a cohesive thought?


Re:People like you. You think you and your EF friends are experts and know. Isn't that why you think you can talk **** to me? It's just he doesn't talk about that as much anymore cause he works for they're TCM school a bit now. But he still will tell you wid goose and falun gong are better than their TCM qigong. Anyways, for matial arts, intention boxing, or mindboxing is best.






<Although no Eric Tuttle student spoke to me the way you did, or talks bad about others, like you guys do about Al.>

Cause Al's a bull**** artist.

RE: Well, I'm telling you that in person I heard no one say that, Eric Tuttle, his tudents, they never said that he was fake. I guess Chen Fa Ke is too? In fact, the guy on his video, 285 pound, can do takedowns. Have you seen wall energy? That's worth ****ing money, that skill.

<I don't really care, but the internaet is sure gonna suck at this rate, if you're all we get.>


Sorry, Nancy. It's all you get.


Re:Yeah, caus you banned everyone good from EF.



<Here's what Al says about you Gao guys>

Well, I read the whole foolish thread and interestingly enough, Gao was NEVER even mentioned you tool. It was nice to see how Gary and Chris (those EF badboys) showed Colangelo for the faker he is. And Wetzel (RIP) never learned Sera.



Re:I don't know what you're talking about , when it comes to indonesian styles, nor do I care. ROFLMAO at the idea of GaryR or ChrisMCinly taking Al out. No Way. ROFLMAO. Gary Romel would not survive, but it's obvious Al is too smart to deal with him.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Report me? for what? I like Chen Fake style, I gave you props for doing it. Who else has done that? They all don't know what they're talking about, and think whoever fights the most is best. I know high level is what should be strived for.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow

Actually they're way better than yours because I don't have to result to making insults and character attacks to prove my point.


Hang on. Weren't you specifically warned by rubthebuddha
for doing just that recently? You dropped some real gems if I recall correctly.

I mean why would you say "Ok ...I'll cut out the insults...." if you hadn't been casting them?


Let's keep it real here.





http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=496689#post496689

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by unkokusai
Hang on. Weren't you specifically warned by rubthebuddha
for doing just that recently? You dropped some real gems if I recall correctly.

I mean why would you say "Ok ...I'll cut out the insults...." if you hadn't been casting them?


Let's keep it real here.





http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=496689#post496689

There was a PM conversation with RTB that you were not privy to. I'll leave at that. Bottom line is that if you step out of line and start attacking me personally or attacking other people and not what they say.... I will report you. I encourage you to do the same so that we can keep things on the civil.

[Golden Arms]

OK, I cant take any more of this..I hardly even bother to come on this forum anymore due to the extreme lack of anything worthwhile 9/10 times I read posts. There are some great people on here, but they are more the exceptions vs. the rule, and I am not claiming to be one of them. That being said, time to say this:

FU-POW..I have seen you fight bro...I know who you are, and I wouldnt talk so much smack if I was you just because you are big. If you you are serious about your MA, stop with the analyzing and philosophy and f@ckin practice like your life depends on it. I cant tell you HOW many questions answer themselves this way, inlcuding most of the ones you post on this forum..and I am a bit surprised you havent answered them for yourself if you have trained as long as you say you have.

One thing that is common about people that train seriously, for the most part: the egotistical attitude and constant need for validation from others tends to diminish as can be seen in guys like, just to name a few: Asia, Count, MP, EvolutionFist, etc.

/rant off

Sorry..I just couldnt be quiet anymore.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
Report me? for what? I like Chen Fake style, I gave you props for doing it. Who else has done that? They all don't know what they're talking about, and think whoever fights the most is best. I know high level is what should be strived for.

It's good you like Chen Fake style. However, telling people to STFU is not good form. Keep it on the civil.

[Ray Pina]

What type of internal is this: you hurt your back training?

And, I know it is the internet so words/accounts should be taken very lightly, but your master had the opportunity to demonstrate his MARTIAL skill and passed. It's no big deal, this sort of thing is very prevalant and only Mr. Fake knows the real reason why.

I wish you the best in your training and if you're ever in NY look me up and we can compare in a friendly manner. Someone from the board just came down from Upstate to take a look but I'm embarrassed to say I couldn't make it. I did give him my master's information and apparantly he liked what he experienced..... my master is an internalist and at 63+ is still very much hands on, standing or on the ground.

My intention is not to knock anyone down. I just want to build myself up as best I can. One thing I learned early, there is always somebody somewhere tougher/more skilled .... that goes for everyone including our masters because eventually we should be better than they are.... at least that's the goal at our school.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

E-fist- Muay Thai. Doing hundreds of full contact kicks a round and maybe left hooks.

Fu-Pow- Sorry to do that on your thread. I apologize, but if you knew me in person, you'd know it's part of my vocabulary, and I say it all the time. I have noticed it doesn't always translate well.

And I am extremely confident that Al Colangelo would dstroy 99% of MMA guys. In the ufc too. Matt hughes can't take him down if Val at 285lbs can't

There's always someone tougher........................................... ..........
unless your name is Chen Fa Ke

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
E-fist- Muay Thai. Doing hundreds of full contact kicks a round and maybe left hooks.

If you hurt your back doing muay thai, you really, really suck at it.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Yeah!!!! great post father dog. I hit hard. I didn't train anything but at class, it's hardcore. Actually, didn't Pat Miletich used to have some problem like that? Didn't he think it was from left hooks? That's why I thought that. And it's on my left side, I had to stop for a while. I was fine for years but it was gradual. Oh, and taking the force of people much larger, without training for it.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Golden Arms
FU-POW..I have seen you fight bro...

When and where? I want name of event, date and who I was competing against.



I know who you are, and I wouldnt talk so much smack if I was you just because you are big.

Haha...that's a good one. People always attribute everything to me being big. If they lose it's "because you're big." If they win the victory is that much sweeter cause I'm big. If I'm confident in my knowledge its because I'm big. Too many Napoleans running around out there.

Ok...if you know who I am....then PM me and tell me my name.

And while you're at it tell me where in this thread I talked smack? It just seems to me that people are getting hot and bothered cause they either don't have the wits or experience to refute my position.


If you you are serious about your MA

What would make think that I'm not?


, stop with the analyzing and philosophy

It's part of the process.


and f@ckin practice like your life depends on it.

Who says I don't?

I think you're trying to imply that you've seen me fight or perform and that I suck and that I need to practice. Well, seeing as I've never met you, never tested hands with you and your teacher (John Leong?) is of dubious skill I'll take your criticism with a very large grain of salt.


I cant tell you HOW many questions answer themselves this way, inlcuding most of the ones you post on this forum..and I am a bit surprised you havent answered them for yourself if you have trained as long as you say you have.

This is totally non-sensical. What are you talking about? Internal/External questions?


One thing that is common about people that train seriously, for the most part: the egotistical attitude and constant need for validation from others tends to diminish as can be seen in guys like, just to name a few: Asia, Count, MP, EvolutionFist, etc.

Your implication being what? That I need external validation? Hardly. I'm just trying to communicate a few things that I've learned from my teachers along the way.



Sorry..I just couldnt be quiet anymore. [/B]

Maybe you should until you can be more coherent.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Anyone who thinks Al COlangelo is fake, is just plain dumb, or doesn't kno anything about real fighting.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
It just seems to me that people are getting hot and bothered cause I'm on to something here and the one's that don't have access to it are getting ****ed.

Shizzle. The true reason for all flame wars and bannings.

[SifuAbel]

GA,

I think you're being too hard on FP.
He just hasn't learned to ignore people like unkookoohead(formerly chinreallyghey). Or to ignore the extreme amounts of minutia used to piece together some dubious point. I'm sure you've seen enough of this already.

see KFM mission statement below for further clarification. :D

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by SifuAbel


KFM mission statement:

" We at KFM are dedicated to provide a medium for people to argue endlessly over utter minutia, semantics and squabble over paradigm specific ideas that support the quirks of a given style. The enforcement of opinion control in order to keep the illusion of supremacy alive. This keeps certain business afloat which are based on this premise.
And finally, to provide a home for the countless teenagers that flood the forum every summer which provides martialartsmart.com with thousands of extra banner hits a day. "
:D

LOL!:D

[SifuAbel]

:D

[Buddy]

<RE: You're a liar. You started making challenges in the Internal forum, yet beg for the person you're challenging to be banned>

You said you could beat me. I said prove it. That's not a challenge.






<Re:People like you. You think you and your EF friends are experts and know.

No, You think we think that.

<Isn't that why you think you can talk **** to me?


Actually I am talking s**t to you, Nancy.



<It's just he doesn't talk about that as much anymore cause he works for they're TCM school a bit now. But he still will tell you wid goose and falun gong are better than their TCM qigong.

Falun gong is bogus fakery, like you.


<Anyways, for matial arts, intention boxing, or mindboxing is best.


Do you mean Yiquan or that bushwa Colangelo is peddling?


<RE: Well, I'm telling you that in person I heard no one say that, Eric Tuttle, his tudents, they never said that he was fake.

I doubt Eric has wasted any thought at all about it.

< I guess Chen Fa Ke is too? In fact, the guy on his video, 285 pound, can do takedowns. Have you seen wall energy? That's worth ****ing money, that skill.

Chen Fake? Did I mention him? Wall energy? are you serious?


<Re:Yeah, caus you banned everyone good from EF.

I only post there, but name one.


<Here's what Al says about you Gao guys>

Well, I read the whole foolish thread and interestingly enough, Gao was NEVER even mentioned you tool. It was nice to see how Gary and Chris (those EF badboys) showed Colangelo for the faker he is. And Wetzel (RIP) never learned Sera.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





<Re:I don't know what you're talking about , when it comes to indonesian styles, nor do I care.

Well why did you post that thread saying that Al said anything about Gao style you boob?

<ROFLMAO at the idea of GaryR or ChrisMCinly taking Al out. No Way. ROFLMAO. Gary Romel would not survive, but it's obvious Al is too smart to deal with him.


You really should take those meds. BTW I reported you too.

[Golden Arms]

Fair enough Abel. Will do.

Fu-Pow..I dont need to name an event..but I will :)
2001 or 2002 Ken Low Martial Arts Tournament Vancouver BC
You fought continuous fighting there...want more details or do you believe me? Thanks for trying to make me look like I couldnt back up what I said though ;) Always appreciated.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by 3rdrateIMAkilla
Actually, didn't Pat Miletich used to have some problem like that?


He had a back injury, incurred in training.



Didn't he think it was from left hooks?


No, not at all. Not sure where the hell you got that idea.


And it's on my left side, I had to stop for a while. I was fine for years but it was gradual.

It's either unrelated to Muay Thai, or you have extremely ****ty technique, because MT training shouldn't be even tiring your back, let alone injuring it.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
GA,

I think you're being too hard on FP.
He just hasn't learned to ignore people like unkookoohead(formerly chinreallyghey).

Don't hurt my feelings Mr. Lion!

[SifuAbel]

Originally posted by Buddy
that bushwa Colangelo is peddling?




Did you mean, bourgeois.

bour·geois ( P ) Pronunciation Key (br-zhwä, brzhwä)
n. pl. bourgeois

1. A person belonging to the middle class.
2. A person whose attitudes and behavior are marked by conformity to the standards and conventions of the middle class.
3. In Marxist theory, a member of the property-owning class; a capitalist.


adj.

1. Of, relating to, or typical of the middle class.
2. Held to be preoccupied with respectability and material values.


What does being a middle class capitalist have to do with anything?

[SifuAbel]

Hi, Mr. Ghey mouse.

Hows the cheese smelling business? Likeing your hole of anonymity? Oh how I wish you were of any real substance. Instead of an ethereal presence without a face or a name.

You need not reply.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Originally posted by FatherDog
He had a back injury, incurred in training.



No, not at all. Not sure where the hell you got that idea.


I got it off an interview with him at UFC 24. I'm not trying to compare myself to him.



It's either unrelated to Muay Thai, or you have extremely ****ty technique, because MT training shouldn't be even tiring your back, let alone injuring it. [/B]


I don't know how good my technique is, probably not too good. I hit hard. If I do , like kicking sheild with people 50 libs heavier, it just gets a shooting pain going up it after a while, like afew months. I have no clue exactly what is wrong with it, nor do I care. I don't think it can be anything but Muay Thai cause that's all I did at the time. I don't know. Thanks

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Wall energy man. You don't know what you have here.;) ;) ;)
Find out about the internal.

And , I'd want to say, I never challenged anyone on the internet ever. When I first came on the net, I posted a challenge on the behalf of my Muay Thai Kru at the time, but I no longer go there now, to that gym.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
You need not reply.

Thank you for that Mr. Lion!


So mighty! (mighty ****ing stupid :rolleyes: )

[Buddy]

<Did you mean, bourgeois.

bour·geois ( P ) Pronunciation Key (br-zhwä, brzhwä)
n. pl. bourgeois

1. A person belonging to the middle class.
2. A person whose attitudes and behavior are marked by conformity to the standards and conventions of the middle class.
3. In Marxist theory, a member of the property-owning class; a capitalist.


adj.

1. Of, relating to, or typical of the middle class.
2. Held to be preoccupied with respectability and material values.>>>>>




Mr. Abel,
Was there anything in my previous posts that would lead you to believe other than I post exactly what I mean to? Good to know you have a Webster's but I meant bushwa.

Bushwa (boosh' wa; boozh'-) n [[ probably altered from <BULLSH*T]] {Slang} nonsense.

<<What does being a middle class capitalist have to do with anything?>>>

See above.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

For someone who disses falun gong for not enough emphasis on internal connection, and the like, you'd think you'd love al colangelo's style, and internal manipulations.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Golden Arms
Fair enough Abel. Will do.

Fu-Pow..I dont need to name an event..but I will :)

What are you talking about? If you make such a bold statement and you get called out then you've got to back it up or you lose all credibility. You had no choice but to name the event.



2001 or 2002 Ken Low Martial Arts Tournament Vancouver BC
You fought continuous fighting there...want more details or do you believe me?

I believe because I was there and I fought.


Thanks for trying to make me look like I couldnt back up what I said though ;) Always appreciated. [/B]

You did it to yourself by not giving the details to begin with.

-------------------------------------------------------

The result of that fight was what?

I lost by a decision of 2 to 1.

But what that result doesn't tell you is that I also sent that guy on his a$$ about five times when I trapped his side kick and pushed him back.

Had it been a San Shou fight (or a street fight for that matter) I would have creamed him.

So I don't know what you proved by bringing that up other than letting everyone know that I know how to toss people on their a$$ when they can't retract their kicks fast enough.

That was 3 years ago....so now not only do I know how to toss people, I know a lot of other stuff and I'm in great shape.

Will you be attending our tournament on Aug 21st so you can show us YOUR skill?

[Buddy]

<<Wall energy man. You don't know what you have here.
Find out about the internal.



Wall energy...sheeesh.


<<And , I'd want to say, I never challenged anyone on the internet ever. When I first came on the net, I posted a challenge on the behalf of my Muay Thai Kru at the time, but I no longer go there now, to that gym.


Really Nancy? What about this?

"I'll fight Buddy Tripp and win period, and he mightt not survive. I'll fight him, with no ref, in a field, like he himself wants."

That was just today, Mary.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Yeah, don't beleive TKD or Karate or San shou decisions. Believe what you see with your own eyes, that's all.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

And in the internal forum, you challenged me many times, afew months ago, for sayin EF was lame

[Buddy]

<For someone who disses falun gong for not enough emphasis on internal connection, and the like, you'd think you'd love al colangelo's style, and internal manipulations>>

I dissed it because its a cult. Because it's crap. Like Al Colangelos material.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

:rolleyes: It's hardly even a group.

[Buddy]

<<And in the internal forum, you challenged me many times, afew months ago, for sayin EF was lame>>

Show me.

[Golden Arms]

Fu-Pow: I WATCHED your fight..you can say whatever you want..I like that you got in there..but have never seen you since..and I didnt see you in the sanshou at all..although to your credit there may have not been anyone in your weight division. Yep..I fought in Sanshou and Continuous, so you might as well try some other tactic to try and defame me..maybe making fun of John Leong some more will do it..I am sure you could take him and most of the other sifu's in seattle too :o

Ok..I am done being an @ss

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Show you for what reason? (http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29653&perpage=15&highlight=ching%20gung&pagenumber=3)

Many of the original threads were deleted

[SifuAbel]

I'm sure somebody invented the slang from a misuse of the word.

Can someone break out a microscope so we can see what the point here is............

On a side note, its funny to me how a guy/girl/whoknows like chingei/unkokusai can be known as a total dip by the entire board, be banned from the borad once already and still come on here like his words mean anything at all.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

BAN WARS THREAD!

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I truly wanted to be friends with everyone.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Come on guys, this place is soooooooooooooo much funner than Bullshido

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Golden Arms
Fu-Pow: I WATCHED your fight..you can say whatever you want..

Are you saying what I'm saying is not true? I'm not making anything up.



I like that you got in there..but have never seen you since..


Like where?



and I didnt see you in the sanshou at all..although to your credit there may have not been anyone in your weight division.

I didn't fight San Shou. The major problem I have with fighting San Shou is that I haven't practiced San Shou style throws enough. Working on it though.


Yep..I fought in Sanshou and Continuous, so you might as well try some other tactic to try and defame me..

Well I don't remember you. I do remember some of John Leong's guys being there.

BTW,

Defame means:

1 archaic : DISGRACE
2 : to harm the reputation of by libel or slander
3 archaic : ACCUSE

I think you have to have a reputation first before I can hurt it.






maybe making fun of John Leong some more will do it..

Didn't make fun of him simply stated that his skill level is "dubious."

Dubious=

1 : giving rise to uncertainty: as a : of doubtful promise or outcome <a dubious plan> b : questionable or suspect as to true nature or quality


I've seen his form many times in person and it looks awful. Maybe his fighting ability is better, who knows? It's dubious.....



I am sure you could take him and most of the other sifu's in seattle too :o

You said that not me.


Ok..I am done being an @ss [/B]

You said that TOO, not me.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Originally posted by Buddy



<Anyways, for matial arts, intention boxing, or mindboxing is best.


Do you mean Yiquan or that bushwa Colangelo is peddling?

Re: I mean the kind of the Tao School.


I doubt Eric has wasted any thought


He said with his style of Taiji, I can do that stuff too. And that He will get out of any hold, Kumar Franztiz student, or Silat master, or grappler.

[Buddy]

<<I'd knock you out, like any IMA chasing hands guy.>>

Of the post you quoted, this is the first example of a challenge. Not me, you. So when and when, Mary?

<<He said with his style of Taiji, I can do that stuff too. And that He will get out of any hold, Kumar Franztiz student, or Silat master, or grappler.>>

Really? I doubt that. But if so tell him to call me. Liar.


Abel,

<<I'm sure somebody invented the slang from a misuse of the word.


Well sure but not the word you assumed. I'll give you a free link to the OED if you like.

<<Can someone break out a microscope so we can see what the point here is............

You brought it up and were wrong. No big deal but for the semantics.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

That is not a challenge, I said I'd. Theoretically. Maybe I'll look for the thread where you volunteer to take Bai He's place, who challenged me to a parking lot brawl in a deleted thread. Whatever, this has been going on since last year, but you try to make it look like it's some new thing. I put where you can find me here already, I will post no more about myself publically.

Eric Tuttle said all of that. Either in class, or to me personally. Aren't there any students of his around on the internet anymore? Before I was banned from emptyflower, I saw Kevin Wallbride posting there, I'd want to see if he's still around, and look into learning xinyi luihe and Yin bagua

[Buddy]

<<That is not a challenge, I said I'd. Theoretically. Maybe I'll look for the thread where you volunteer to take Bai He's place, who challenged me to a parking lot brawl in a deleted thread. Whatever, this has been going on since last year, but you try to make it look like it's some new thing. I put where you can find me here already, I will post no more about myself publically.>>

<<Eric Tuttle said all of that. Either in class, or to me personally>>

You said today you would fight me and would win. Did you not think that someone would alert me to this? I don't give a rat's ass about you. You posted your picture somewhere and I saw it. I'm your dad's age and 75 pounds heavier than you. I have 15 years more skill than you. Shut the fu*k up. Did I follow you here when you spout your complete ignorance to real internal martial arts? Do yourself a favor. Ignore this post and leave me out of further conversation. You can't beat me in real time and you can't beat me with words. I'm better than you. Let it go.
Give me your real name and I'll ask Eric myself.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Ask Eric what exactly? I'm just saying , I will fight you since you've challenged me numerous times. How can I remain posting, but unwilling to fight?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I'm sure my student Bai He offered to clean your clock, you'd rather I instead?

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28406&perpage=15&pagenumber=3

[Buddy]

<<Ask Eric what exactly? I'm just saying , I will fight you since you've challenged me numerous times. How can I remain posting, but unwilling to fight?>>

Ask Eric if he said he could do what you say he said.
Just so there is no legal issues, you are the one who said you could beat me. Just today. So when and where, you puss? You're not going to show so just leave it alone and skulk away with what little self indulgent pride you can muster. But if you insist, we'll meet privately and I will offer you a chance to jump me. Then I will respond. Otherwise be quiet and leave me alone, boy.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I said if you meet me, then I will. But jumping you? That's about as legit as a parking lot brawl, for saying Al Colangelo and falun gong are cooler than you.

And Buddy, you don't need my name to ask Eric. But, how do you plan on contacting him?

Hmm. If you really are over 250lbs, I should take this VERY, very seriously, in my training. But you're no Eric or Al.

[Buddy]

No you said, "I'll fight Buddy Tripp and win period, and he mightt not survive. I'll fight him, with no ref, in a field, like he himself wants."

So those rules work for me. I suspect I will survive. Pick the field, I don't play sport slap fight. As Li Cunyi said "if you want mercy, best not raise your hand." Now go away. Or come see me. Either way is fine.

"And Buddy, you don't need my name to ask Eric."

And whom should I say is misrepresenting him when he denies it?

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I'm a bit tempted to give my name, but I know I shouldn't. I can't go see you, you started that. I would much rather go to Eric Tuttle, or someone else.

I'm telling you what he said, that is all. I am not lying. I gave you alot of info, go check it out. I learned from him in ***** B.C. I've seen someone else from here on emptyflower.

[Buddy]

I knew you'd puss..again. I know you just want the attention, queen. No wonder all the chicks think you're a ****. Not that theres anything wrong with that.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I'm not. You said you'd fight me, I said okay, not the other way around. You said you are 250lbs. I say, I will still fight for honor, win lose or draw, because I don't beleive in your Kungfu. And I'd be in way more trouble if this was Bullshido. There I would lose.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by SifuAbel


On a side note, its funny to me how a guy/girl/whoknows like chingei/unkokusai can be known as a total dip by the entire board, be banned from the borad once already and still come on here like his words mean anything at all.

Everything you say is funny Mr. Lion!

Say some more funny stuff Mr. Lion!

[SifuAbel]

How about

yawn................


:o

[scotty1]

Right Fu Pow, I think we should stop this silliness. I did resort to an ad hominem attack on you, I admit that. But there is a reason for it.

You're making a lot of assertions about the whole internal/external thing.

We got to the point on the other thread where after a few pages of arguing you said, and I quote, because I'd hate to paraphrase you:

"Again, this goes against what the Taiji classics say."

I said "Quote them then."

Hmm, end of thread. I (and others) argued against your point, you resorted to the classics without actually quoting them to back up your argument, and then the thread stops.

Next, you start a thread where you state your opinion of what internal/external is:

"External frame uses muscle based strength. Internal frame does not uses muscle based strength. In fact, it refrains from using strength at all. Force is something different than muscular strength."

That's what we were arguing about on the other thread pretty much, so you've restated your case.

After stating your opinion, you then say:

"There are a lot of Nei Jia practitioners out there who practice their art using the external frame. They tell you, there is no real difference between the two. This is incorrect...it's PC language.

Their art is weak because they can't understand the difference. They give other real Neiji players a bad name by their ineffective use of the external frame for techniques that require internal frame movement. They then have to rely on pseudo-scientific hocus pocus because the art as they practice it does not work."

So by implication, those that do not agree with your definition (ie. myself and CSN, amongst others) have a weak art, that relys on hocus pocus and gives "real" neijia players a bad name because their art doesn't work.

Well, that implication, combined with the fact you didn't bring ONE example of the classics to support your argument on the trad. taijichuan thread, meant I was not going to waste my time arguing my point again. I felt it was time for a mild personal attack.

Your tone is, surely you must admit, antagonistic. Or have you not noticed how many people you seem to end up having flame wars with?

"If you do not agree with my above definition of internal/external your art is weak etc." If that's not how you meant it, then OK, maybe I should have asked you to clarify. But that's certainly how it reads. Bear in mind recent threads, differences of opinion, and how your words might easily be interpreted as an attack on other forum members.

Finally, I said "nice way to come off like a blow-hard."

That was an indirect insult, much like when you indirectly called CSN an "arrogant tool".

And you can report me to the moderators, because I told my mum on you. :rolleyes:

Please don't copy and paste bits of my post and write "your opinion" as a rebuttal. Most comments on the forum are opinion.

Seriously, lets give it a rest, eh?

Backbreaker and Buddy do it much better.:D

[Buddy]

Well, at least I do. BB runs away from his own words. I'm done unless ***** boy brings me up again.

[scotty1]

Yeah I noticed that. With that level of intelligence, I'm amazed he made it out of his teens without getting run over.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by FatherDog
He had a back injury, incurred in training.



No, not at all. Not sure where the hell you got that idea.



It's either unrelated to Muay Thai, or you have extremely ****ty technique, because MT training shouldn't be even tiring your back, let alone injuring it. [/B]

yeah, that's true. I have a spinal deformation - it's twisted too far forward on the right side - you can't visibly see it, but I've had x rays and tests. Things like running can be murder on it, but thai boxing doesn't phase it at all.

[SevenStar]

For the record, posts on this thread have been reported. In order to prevent locking it, let's tone it down a bit guys.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by scotty1
Right Fu Pow, I think we should stop this silliness. I did resort to an ad hominem attack on you, I admit that. But there is a reason for it.

At leat you admit it.




You're making a lot of assertions about the whole internal/external thing.

We got to the point on the other thread where after a few pages of arguing you said, and I quote, because I'd hate to paraphrase you:

"Again, this goes against what the Taiji classics say."

I said "Quote them then."

And I said "do your own homework." I COULD quote them because I have them in book form. But I am limited by the fact that I am at work and don't have immediate access to them. If you want I can bring my book to work and copy it verbatim for you....but basically let me summarize:

1) Don't use force against force.

2) Use Yi (mind-intent) to lead the Chi (bodies function), not Li (muscular strength).

The point is that you don't have to be muscularly strong to do Taiji effectively. And the "stronger" of two Taiji players is not going to win a fight. It is going to be the one that understands the principles better.




Hmm, end of thread. I (and others) argued against your point, you resorted to the classics without actually quoting them to back up your argument, and then the thread stops.

Actually, it devolved into a flame war and then things got erased because the forum "burped."




Next, you start a thread where you state your opinion of what internal/external is:

"External frame uses muscle based strength. Internal frame does not uses muscle based strength. In fact, it refrains from using strength at all. Force is something different than muscular strength."

That's what we were arguing about on the other thread pretty much, so you've restated your case.

I decided that it was interesting enough to warrant its own thread instead of being tacked on to the end of a thread about Taiji.


After stating your opinion, you then say:

"There are a lot of Nei Jia practitioners out there who practice their art using the external frame. They tell you, there is no real difference between the two. This is incorrect...it's PC language.

Their art is weak because they can't understand the difference. They give other real Neiji players a bad name by their ineffective use of the external frame for techniques that require internal frame movement. They then have to rely on pseudo-scientific hocus pocus because the art as they practice it does not work."

So by implication, those that do not agree with your definition (ie. myself and CSN, amongst others) have a weak art, that relys on hocus pocus and gives "real" neijia players a bad name because their art doesn't work.

That's actually your own insecurity talking. I wasn't referring directly to you or CSN. I have zero idea how well you understand the priniciples of Neijia. I've never met you and I've never pushed hands with you. What I was pointing out is that there are people that believe that there is no difference. If you truly believe that there is no difference then I find that very questionable, yes.


Well, that implication, combined with the fact you didn't bring ONE example of the classics to support your argument on the trad. taijichuan thread, meant I was not going to waste my time arguing my point again. I felt it was time for a mild personal attack.

Well personal attacks won't get you very far here.


Your tone is, surely you must admit, antagonistic. Or have you not noticed how many people you seem to end up having flame wars with?

Some people love me and some people hate me. And the reason for that is that I have an opinion. From my perspective most people are wishy washy and they'd rather make friends then have a rigorous debate. I have an opinion and so I get attacked that's how it works.


"If you do not agree with my above definition of internal/external your art is weak etc."

I never said that anywhere. You put those pieces together. Like I said if you truly think there is no difference significant difference in body use between Neijia and Waijia then I think you are very mistaken.


If that's not how you meant it, then OK, maybe I should have asked you to clarify.

Always a good idea.


But that's certainly how it reads. Bear in mind recent threads, differences of opinion, and how your words might easily be interpreted as an attack on other forum members.

Finally, I said "nice way to come off like a blow-hard."

That was an indirect insult, much like when you indirectly called CSN an "arrogant tool".

Two wrongs don't make a right.


And you can report me to the moderators, because I told my mum on you. :rolleyes:

Read the sticky at the top of the forum. Direct insults are no longer permitted because they just encourage flaming. I'm guilty of it just as much as anyone else. But this forum is going to be more productive and worthwhile if we avoid all that.


Please don't copy and paste bits of my post and write "your opinion" as a rebuttal. Most comments on the forum are opinion.

Opinions and facts are two different things. When you try to post your opinion as though it is fact I'm going to point out that it is simply your opinion and not a fact.


Seriously, lets give it a rest, eh?

Backbreaker and Buddy do it much better.:D [/B]

haha

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow


And I said "do your own homework." I COULD quote them because I have them in book form. But I am limited by the fact that I am at work and don't have immediate access to them. If you want I can bring my book to work and copy it verbatim for you....but basically let me summarize:



Don't summarize. I believe the original request was for a link, or a direct quote. If its a book, can it really be that much trouble to do?If you bring something up, it is generally expected that you can provide proof.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by unkokusai
Don't summarize. I believe the original request was for a link, or a direct quote. If its a book, can it really be that much trouble to do?If you bring something up, it is generally expected that you can provide proof.

The Taiji classics are very well known to most Taiji players. Pick up a copy of Douglas Wiles "Yang Family Secret Transmissions." Or Yang Jwing-Mings "Advanced Yang Style Taiji Quan", he has the chinese text, direct translations and commentary.

I'm not gonna go to all the work to copy the stuff verbatim.

[unkokusai]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
The Taiji classics are very well known to most Taiji players.
I'm not gonna go to all the work to copy the stuff verbatim.


Didn't you offer to do just that a few posts ago?


"If you want I can bring my book to work and copy it verbatim for you"


These were your words, were they not?

[scotty1]

"1) Don't use force against force.

2) Use Yi (mind-intent) to lead the Chi (bodies function), not Li (muscular strength)."

1) no-ones advocating using force against force. Doesn't mean that when you need to, it's not useful/essential to have a bit of strength (trained force) to back up the principles.

2) it's my understanding that Li refers to 'dead' strength. Brute force. Again, not advocated. I'm referring to trained force (jin?) of which strength is a part, of which muscle is a part, because it's a part of your body, and you're using your whole body.

You're taking it to extremes. I'm not talking about being a powerlifter, not training softness and just bashing the other guys head in.

I like to think of it like this:

Your body should not be like metal (stiff and unyielding) but like rubber (yielding to an extent but still firm). The Classics do not advocate being limp and having no power.

And you just defined chi as 'bodies function'. What does that mean?

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by scotty1
[B]"1) Don't use force against force.

2) Use Yi (mind-intent) to lead the Chi (bodies function), not Li (muscular strength)."

1) no-ones advocating using force against force. Doesn't mean that when you need to, it's not useful/essential to have a bit of strength (trained force) to back up the principles.

Actually, I think SOME people are trying to say that. What do you mean by "back up?" To me that sounds like "have limited internal skill so must rely on li (muscular strength) some if not all of the time."

Ok here's one (of many) quotes that warns about using "external frame" strength. It's from the "Thirteen Postures: Understanding Internal and External Training" by Wang Dsung-Yueh with commentary from Yang Jwing-Ming:

"(First) extremely soft, then extremely hard. If able to breath properly then you can be agile and alive."

Yang's commentary:

Before you can be hard, you must first cultivate softness. Only through complete relaxation can you develop your Chi and become supremely sensitive and responsive to your opponents actions. Only by learning not to rely on external muscular strength (Li) can you deveop internal energy and achieve real strength.

My commentary:

When they say "before you can be hard you must be soft" they are not referring to it as linear sequence. (Like be soft when your opponent attacks and be hard when you counter.) They are saying that you must be soft always even when you counter. By training to be be "competely" soft (ie relaxing the ENTIRE external frame) you become "hard" again inside (engaging the internal frame.) The internal frame is much more of a refined type of force (ie Jin).

There cannot be any breaks or gaps in the internal frame. Especially if you are fighting another internal artist. He will find it and exploit it.



2) it's my understanding that Li refers to 'dead' strength. Brute force. Again, not advocated. I'm referring to trained force (jin?) of which strength is a part, of which muscle is a part, because it's a part of your body, and you're using your whole body.

I'm not saying that when you train Taiji that your muscles are never used. That is confusing my point. My point is that your muscles, specifically the ones that are on the exterior of your body are not integral for generating power in Taiji. Taiji force is a cumulative type of force that is generated by the whole body equally. Every muscle engaged (to a limited degree), every joint engaged, every tendon and ligament engaged. You can only get that kind of whole body engagement if you relax the entire outer structure. If not then you have points of stiffness and dissipation of energy. Your body cannot move in a truly "whole body" type of way.

This is very different than most martial arts which employ several big muscle groups at a time to generate power.

Not saying which one is better but just saying they are different and you have to train them differently.




You're taking it to extremes. I'm not talking about being a powerlifter, not training softness and just bashing the other guys head in.

That is the point. You have to take it to the extreme. Extreme softness so that you can find hardness again. That's why they call it Taiji boxing, Yin and Yang boxing.


I like to think of it like this:

Your body should not be like metal (stiff and unyielding) but like rubber (yielding to an extent but still firm). The Classics do not advocate being limp and having no power.

Many martial arts embody the concept of being relaxed and not stiff. But most martial arts don't have quite the level of relaxation and internal integration that Taiji has.


And you just defined chi as 'bodies function'. What does that mean?

Chi refers to function. Jing refers to essence or matter. Chi is sometimes translated as biolelectrical energy which I don't necessarily agree with, especially in terms of martial arts.

Peace.

[bamboo_ leaf]

(Many martial arts embody the concept of being relaxed and not stiff. But most martial arts don't have quite the level of relaxation and internal integration that Taiji has)


;) well said


What should be added is that most people never really reach this basic requirement. It is extremely hard and the work of many yrs of practice. I think this is the result of much of the confusion over subjects like these. Even those who have practiced many years may not be there yet.

If you manage to meet someone who can truly do it, the differences and meanings of internal and external are very clear. They are only distinctions that help to difine a method or thought nether is better.

Problems or confuseion can arise when people try to infer either one is better then the other or confuse methods or ideas between the two.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

My commentary

There cannot be any breaks or gaps in the internal frame. Especially if you are fighting another internal artist. He will find it and exploit it.


That's an important point. Are you trying to gain, realistic based fighting ability in sparring, or high level skills in fighting?






I'm not saying that when you train Taiji that your muscles are never used. That is confusing my point. My point is that your muscles, specifically the ones that are on the exterior of your body are not integral for generating power in Taiji. Taiji force is a cumulative type of force that is generated by the whole body equally. Every muscle engaged (to a limited degree), every joint engaged, every tendon and ligament engaged. You can only get that kind of whole body engagement if you relax the entire outer structure. If not then you have points of stiffness and dissipation of energy. Your body cannot move in a truly "whole body" type of way.


No matter what people tell you, even with leg power and torso power generation, all the force of the external is still a rock tied to a string.

That is the point. You have to take it to the extreme. Extreme softness so that you can find hardness again. That's why they call it Taiji boxing, Yin and Yang boxing.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Very true

[Ford Prefect]

Any movement you make is made by your "external" muscles. You "external" muscles keep you body in the correct alignment as well. Your "external" muscles are an important part of any martial arts style.

[bamboo_ leaf]

http://www.yiquan.org.uk/art-zz.html


a good link that speaks to your post.

[Merryprankster]

You can only get that kind of whole body engagement if you relax the entire outer structure.

Oh, like when a boxer punches!

Or when you go for a throw!

Well, glad that's cleared up!

[Merryprankster]

Wait... I'm getting a vision....it's a bit blurry... but it's coming into focus now....


Ah.... here it is...

"No, that's not what I meant at all. Those arts don't really know how to relax at all. They don't really understand structure.

No matter how much it looks, smells, feels, walks, talks, quacks like a duck, it's really a goose. Even though every principle of movement is identical they aren't really, because belief preservation demands it."

[Merryprankster]

Need a little clarification on belief preservation?

I stole the below from the WC forum.


As I wrote before, because it comes down to worldview of WCK (or martial arts in general). The first view is what I call the dogmatic view of WCK. This view holds that WCK is a secret book, written by a supremely skilled and knowledgeable person or persons or entity that contains the secret wisdom of fighting (“WCK is a complete fighting system”) and has been secretly passed down over the ages to a lineage of keepers-of-the-secret-book. Some have only gotten parts of the secret book; others, of course, have learned it all (the protectors of the secret book). A variation of this metaphor is that GM So-and-So is a genius and singularly skillful fighter, and he took the info available and came up with a new secret book (that only he and his followers have access to, naturally). The secret book typically contains a very complex and arcane theoretical “knowledge.” Secret-book styles rarely “test” their approach, i.e., challenge fight, as their methods are “too dangerous” or “lethal” and are for “combat” or “street fighting” not “sport.” This world view is closed (“don’t add or subtract from the secret book”; “that’s not part of the system”; etc.), rigid (“you can only do it this way” -- as outlined in the secret book), elitist (“we have the genuine secret book, the rest of you poor fellows, well . . . “) and doesn’t evolve or change (why would it evolve when you have the perfection contained in the secret book?). Worth is measured by how close one is to the keeper-of-the-secret book. The absolute accuracy of their “history” is vitally important to them -- because if you question their claim to access to the secret book (let alone suggest that the secret book itself doesn’t exists), you question the very foundation of their belief system.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

I agree with Fu Pow, because relaxation is the way I learned, so I am skeptical of development of sung, or the total relaxation of what fu pow calls the outer structure, without a real effort to focus specifically on remaining sung, all the time.The joints, muscles, everything relaxed, but coordinated, able to expand or contract, so that something is hard when something is soft balnced in all directions. I can't explain well, and beyond my level, but you are not really in danger and off balance with what fu pow calls internal frame, even when it looks like it, or even in qinna, and the opponents force is returned to him and multiplied or doubled. Or rather, perhaps what he means is that, in Taiji, ALL opposites must clearly be distinguished. Up and down, forwards and backwards , left and right, opening and closing, empty and full, big and small, as well as inner and outer movements coordinated together. Beyond that is beyond my understanding, at which fu pow speaks.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

A bit about Chen Fa Ke on this page (http://www.chinafrominside.com/ma/taiji/FZQinterview.html)

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by bamboo_ leaf
http://www.yiquan.org.uk/art-zz.html


a good link that speaks to your post.


That's a great article and you pointed me to it before....that's what got me thinking and researching a great deal.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
[B]Oh, like when a boxer punches!

No.


Or when you go for a throw!

IMA's don't really throw in the Judo sense of a throw.




Well, glad that's cleared up!

It's gonna take more than 3 lines to clear this up.

[count]

:eek: muscle on the exterior of your body :confused:
Those must be the non-contiguous parts. :D

[count]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow

IMA's don't really throw in the Judo sense of a throw.

How is it different?

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Need a little clarification on belief preservation?

I stole the below from the WC forum.

MP,

I think it's lame to post someone elses essay without your own commentary or summarization. The least you could have done is pulled out the relevant parts and showed how they refute parts of my argument. But I'm really not even clear what you are refuting with this article.

I tried to think of a way to address your post but seeing as I'm not even sure what your argument is I don't see an effective way to get at a rebuttal.

It seems there are a lot of assumptions along the way to that article and I'm not sure what they are and if I don't know what they are than I can't refute them, nor agree with them.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by count
:eek: muscle on the exterior of your body :confused:
Those must be the non-contiguous parts. :D

Contiguous frame. As in not broken between between some internal and some external.

That's still pretty funny though. I'm imagining what non-contiguous body parts would look like. ;)

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by count
How is it different?

If you look at the Judo clips MP recently posted you can see that there is force on force going on until someone looses there balance and/the other person throws them.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
MP,

I think it's lame to post someone elses essay without your own commentary or summarization. The least you could have done is pulled out the relevant parts and showed how they refute parts of my argument. But I'm really not even clear what you are refuting with this article.

I tried to think of a way to address your post but seeing as I'm not even sure what your argument is I don't see an effective way to get at a rebuttal.

It seems there are a lot of assumptions along the way to that article and I'm not sure what they are and if I don't know what they are than I can't refute them, nor agree with them.

For someone who claims to be good at rhetoric, you're pretty poor at reading critically.

[Merryprankster]

FatherDog has a raging, incurable, terminal case of the correct.

Fu-Pow, I think it's lame to bring stuff up but refuse to cite it.

As it is, I'm not refuting anything you have to say.

I'm telling you something. I'm telling you:

1. You think what you've found or got is unique and special.
2. That ain't so.

Good principles transcend stylistic boundaries. The only people who think otherwise are people who don't even know what to look for.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by FatherDog
For someone who claims to be good at rhetoric, you're pretty poor at reading critically.

Nice try.....I see you are just going for some "ad hominem" attacks ie attacking me instead of the points I'm making.

That's a crappy debate tactic. And see I just called you out on it.

Mp's crappy debate tactic is that he's trying to change to an entirely different topic in the middle of this thread. He hasn't shown me how what he posted and what we were discussing earlier ties together.

If he want's to start a new thread then that's his option but don't do it in the middle of something else or no one is going to know what the hell you're going with it.

[count]

Here's where I disagree with you. Anyone involved with a throwing style knows that the only way to execute a succesful throw is to minipulate your opponents center, disrupt their balance, complete the takedaown. In those terms, any grappling style is an "internal martial art". In actuality, it is only a higher level of skill and understanding. I will grant you that in our imperfect world you may be against an equally or greater skilled opponent and things don't always go as planned. I didn't catch the video clips you mentioned although I have seen some of MP's clips. Want to post the link here?

I'm still not clear on what you mean or the difference between "frames"? Want to give some specifics about say, alignment or creating space that might open up a discussion of internal development. Because I still think creating terms which might mean something to you but not to the rest aren't helping your argument here. There are some differences in development, and usage, and strategies between methods of martial arts that might make your point or at least make an interesting discussion. At least Buddy and 3rd rate have stopped side tracking your thread. :p

[rubthebuddha]

haven't said much until now, but i guess i'm gonna have to take merry's side -- again. (**** you james :mad: )

movement in the body is initiated and performed exclusively by muscles. period. it's what muscles do. they contract to lever a joint one way, they relax to let an antagonist muscle move the joint the other way. tendons? they attach muscle to bone. ligaments? they attach bone to bone. muscles contract either in isolation or in cooperation with other muscles to form larger movements.

in the judo clips that merry posted, strength was an obvious factor, but was more obvious to me was leverage. performing a throw without leverage is akin to doing an anterior deltoid lift with the same weight you would use for a military press. the leverage just isn't there.

what i saw the judoka doing more often than not wasn't using their own brute strength as much as using their opponent's tension -- be it a push or pull -- against them and tossing them on their bums. the cleanest throws looked like little effort was used in making them happen, and to me, that's nothing different than what most internal advocates use to describe really good internal work -- much bang for little buck.

i'm somewhat dumbfounded when people who haven't really done another art try to classify it and describe what it is and what it is not. even if they're just taking their sifu's word for it, who is to say that the sifu knows what he's talking about? he may have his own kitchen finely tuned, but that doesn't mean he knows how or what someone else is cooking up or how it will taste.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
FatherDog has a raging, incurable, terminal case of the correct.

Fu-Pow, I think it's lame to bring stuff up but refuse to cite it.

Actually, I did cite it, earlier today. If you scroll back through the thread I quoted from the Taiji classics.


As it is, I'm not refuting anything you have to say.

So are you saying I'm %100 correct?


I'm telling you something. I'm telling you:

And who are you to tell me something? And why should I even listen to you? Frankly, MP, I don't know you, I've never met you, and never tested hands with you.



1. You think what you've found or got is unique and special.

And I posted that where exactly?

Actually, I think a lot of people have good internal skill (not just me or my teacher) and a lot of people don't. But mostly the people that do practice IFMA's (internal frame martial arts), not wrestling, judo or Muy Thai. Perhaps through trial and error these people in other arts stumble on a few of the principles but they don't have the whole picture.


2. That ain't so.

Please see my response to part one.


Good principles transcend stylistic boundaries. The only people who think otherwise are people who don't even know what to look for. [/B]

The first part of that argument may be true or not. I tend to think not. Especially when they are difficult and hard to grasp prinicples. As Bamboo Leaf stated, even the basics are hard to grasp and take years to learn. If you don't have a good teacher and/or aren't patient enough to learn them then that's that.

The second part of the argument really says "fu-pow doesn't know what to look for." Not having the ability to come up with an effective argument beyond "telling me" something and stating your opinion you resort to an attack "ad hominem" ie attack the arguer.

You actually don't know my skill level or if I "know what to look for." So why would say something like that? It just makes you look foolish.

Let's stick to the topic at hand.

[count]

Good post Rub!

[Merryprankster]

The fact that you think legitimate practicioners of other arts have only stumbled on some of these principles by accident and lack a complete picture speaks volumes.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by count
Here's where I disagree with you. Anyone involved with a throwing style knows that the only way to execute a succesful throw is to minipulate your opponents center, disrupt their balance, complete the takedaown.

Agree.


In those terms, any grappling style is an "internal martial art". In actuality, it is only a higher level of skill and understanding.

Disagree. I can disrupt my opponents balance by using external muscular strength or the internal skill set. In Choy Lay Fut we disrupt balance either by striking, grabbing or pushing. In Taiji we stick and follow and let the opponent undo their own balance and then apply only the minmum necessary force to topple them over.
In order to do this you need a high level of balance and sensitivity that you can only get from IMA's.


I will grant you that in our imperfect world you may be against an equally or greater skilled opponent and things don't always go as planned. I didn't catch the video clips you mentioned although I have seen some of MP's clips. Want to post the link here?

http://www.judoinfo.com/video/ot_highlights.wmv


I'm still not clear on what you mean or the difference between "frames"? Want to give some specifics about say, alignment or creating space that might open up a discussion of internal development.

If I was "completely" clear on how it all works then I could give more details. But I'm not. I'm still figuring it out. However I've seen /felt the difference.



Because I still think creating terms which might mean something to you but not to the rest aren't helping your argument here. There are some differences in development, and usage, and strategies between methods of martial arts that might make your point or at least make an interesting discussion. At least Buddy and 3rd rate have stopped side tracking your thread. :p [/B]

Let me give you an example. When you put your weight onto your leg. What usually happens? The outside of the quad muscle contracts and the calf muscle contracts. This creates an "external frame."

When the my Taiji teacher puts his weight onto his leg nothing contracts. At least not externally. His quad muscle and calf actually relax and get longer. So what's holding the weight? The "internal frame." The muscle, ligaments and tendons close to the bone.

That is what I mean by "internal frame."

The second part is what makes it a "frame."

In order for it to work in a martial arts sense the "frame" has to be connected contiguously through all the joints, ligaments, tendons of the entire body. You can't have breaks in the internal frame (interspersed with external frame) and have it work. If one joint moves all joints have to move. If one joint stops all joints stop.

You can have a well coordinated external frame. But it doesn't have to be so well coordinated as the internal one to work. Hence, the years and years of training to develop this internal frame.

That is as deep as my understanding really goes.

Peace. And great questions, BTW.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
The fact that you think legitimate practicioners of other arts have only stumbled on some of these principles by accident and lack a complete picture speaks volumes.

Again...with apparently nothing better to say you reply with attack "ad hominem."

(argumentum ad hominem)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition:
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.

There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:

(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion,
the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an
assertion the author points to the relationship between the
person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.
(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the
person notes that a person does not practise what he
preaches.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

You want to be so sensitve that all your joints are moving, you can sink into hips , rotate your center which tilts the opponent, and speretes his upper and lower parts. You don't need to trip, just turn the torso to throw, both feet planted equally. Not that you wouldn't ever want to cut their legs out. Non visible movements, like fu pow says, bones and tendons, and muscles and stuff, opening closing, and stretching internally.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by rubthebuddha
[B]haven't said much until now, but i guess i'm gonna have to take merry's side -- again. (**** you james :mad: )

movement in the body is initiated and performed exclusively by muscles. period. it's what muscles do. they contract to lever a joint one way, they relax to let an antagonist muscle move the joint the other way.

That's a very simplistic and Western way of looking at movement. In actuality the body is made up of many concentric muscular layers.



tendons? they attach muscle to bone. ligaments? they attach bone to bone. muscles contract either in isolation or in cooperation with other muscles to form larger movements.

Yes, all facts.


in the judo clips that merry posted, strength was an obvious factor, but was more obvious to me was leverage. performing a throw without leverage is akin to doing an anterior deltoid lift with the same weight you would use for a military press. the leverage just isn't there.

What it looked like to me is that they would "feel the other person up" by pushing and pulling around with them and then sensing the other person was off balance they would try to execute the throw. Sometimes they sensed this unsuccesfully and would have to resort to muscular force to try to complete the throw. Sometimes muscular strength was used from the beginning ie picking someone up and throwing them down.



what i saw the judoka doing more often than not wasn't using their own brute strength as much as using their opponent's tension -- be it a push or pull -- against them and tossing them on their bums. the cleanest throws looked like little effort was used in making them happen, and to me, that's nothing different than what most internal advocates use to describe really good internal work -- much bang for little buck.

There are similarities at the point of the throw. However, the actions leading up the throw would be very different.


i'm somewhat dumbfounded when people who haven't really done another art try to classify it and describe what it is and what it is not.

Not only me.


even if they're just taking their sifu's word for it, who is to say that the sifu knows what he's talking about?

Exactly. Who is to say? You?


he may have his own kitchen finely tuned, but that doesn't mean he knows how or what someone else is cooking up or how it will taste.

But he would have a very good idea. Actually, my Taiji teacher used to study karate, judo and the like before he got into Taiji.
So he might not know the specifics but he has some general idea.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Perhaps, perfect empty and full is the key here, hard and soft together?

[count]

Well I liked the clips. They show a good amount of sensitivity, balance, intent, change...All qualities any so called internal martial artist could appreciate. I agree that different methods of martial arts have different strategies and usage which make them unique. But I wouldn't be so quick to discount the level of skill.

I'm starting to understand the way you define your understanding of internal structure. Hsing-I is hard on the outside and soft on the inside. Bagua is both. I know I'm repeating what I said about 8 pages ago, but Hsing-I Chuan is the opposite. Isn't Hsing-I Chuan an internal martial art? Baguazhang can twist each joint independently. Isn't Baguazhang an internal martial art? Tai Chi Chuan doesn't have a patent on Chi. Just the term. ;)

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
That's a very simplistic and Western way of looking at movement. In actuality the body is made up of many concentric muscular layers. Could you give an example of an area of the body with these concentric layers, naming the muscles in each layer?

[bamboo_ leaf]

Could you give an example of an area of the body with these concentric layers, naming the muscles in each layer?


A striated muscle is an assembly of fascicles, each of which is bundle of roughly 100 muscle fibers. In effect concentric circles of muscle fibers.

[omarthefish]

Not possible because for the most part it's not like that. I've forgotten most of the names but I did spend a smester in collage peeling them back on male and female cadavers. There are deeper muscles and more superficial ones but for the most part they are not in concentric layers but in convolutded sprials. Some start deep and end superficial like the illiopsoas. Some stay mostly deep but peek out at the end like the anterior tibialis. (I think that's what its called. Weird how the names float out of my memory). Only a couple remain deep and the ones I can think of are not for articulation or posture so much as for breathing. The 2 diaphrams come to mind. The one we usually think of as the diaphram. It separates your lungs from your guts. Then the one between your guts and your bladder. And then I can't remember if there's a 3rd one lower down or not.

The muscles of the calve are pretty well layerd and the deepest one in the middle seems to stay deep untill it pokes out in the area of your achilles tendon.

I supposed your tongue is a completely internal muscle. Maybe that's why IMA'ists like to talk so much. :)

[omarthefish]

p.s. to Bamboo Leaf who posted while I was writing.

Technically that would show how the internal structure of a single muscle is arranged in concentric layers. But the various muscles of the body, for the most part, are not.

[Fu-Pow]

I've never taken anatomy so I can't "name names."

However, this is partially where my idea comes from.

http://www.massageandbodywork.com/Articles/JuneJuly2004/openuniverse.html

"Rolf recognized that a body is organized in concentric layers, that body function can be understood only by realizing the interrelationship of these layers."

"Fascia is organized in three continuous envelopes and multiple layers interwoven into planes. Organizing layers is central to unwinding, relaxing, and releasing structure. Fascia subcutanea is the web beneath the skin. This “greasy” protein fabric is removed in anatomical dissections to expose muscles and familiar landmarks, but ignores the essential character of fascia in the formation of muscle, bones, and organs, as well as fibrous tissue repair from injury. We rely on the continuity and communication inherent in soft tissue dynamics to affect structure and function simultaneously — the same medium of communication, change, and flow of the dan tien, or triple warmer, exercised in acupuncture. This tela, or web, is continuous throughout extrinsic musculature into the fascia profunda — the deep second layer surrounding and investing intrinsic musculature into joints and bones via the periostium surrounding and investing the matrix of bone.

The third layer (subserous fascia) surrounds, supports, and invests visceral organs. Together, these layers communicate inside to outside, structure to function, flowing from head to foot, binding body and structure as a tensional continuum at the effect of habitual holding, movement patterns, and injury. You probably know someone recognizable at a distance by their posture or the way they move. It is as individual and personal as one’s signature. "

[count]

Originally posted by omarthefish
I supposed your tongue is a completely internal muscle. Maybe that's why IMA'ists like to talk so much. :)

:p :p :p :p :D

[Christopher M]

People unfamiliar with BJJ often complain that watching a match is boring, and perceive the interaction as uncoordinated 'rolling around.'

Following some amount of familiarity, the spectator becomes increasingly able to observe the strategic and tactical interchange between the fighters, which makes the match much more intriguing.

This is not an unusual phenomenon - the same can be said for nearly any skilled activity; another example would be golf.

This situation is more complex than this. People unfamiliar with BJJ and catch wrestling may observe, or feel for themselves, groundfighting of both styles and be unable to distinguish them.

Again, however, as familiarity increases, we are more able to observe the peculiarities which distinguish the two.

The same can be said of the neijia (chinese internal martial arts). There is a certain 'body method' characteristic of these styles which typically only becomes apparent with some level of familiarity.

It's easy to surmise, with the above established, a certain process which contributes to misunderstanding and false superiority among practitioners of martial arts (or any other set of skilled activity).

It's quite likely that someone may become familiar with only those small number of martial arts that are similar to those they practice. In such a circumstance, they will be able to easily perceive the skillfulness characteristic of these arts, but be unable to perceive the skillfulness characteristic of other arts. *

From this point, it may seem quite rational for them to conclude that there is no skillfulness in other sorts of martial arts. After all, they can perceive some skillfulness, and they don't see it exhibited by these other stylists.

The complexity of this situation makes debate and misunderstanding unavoidable, at least at first: it is true that the specific training methods of the neijia will develop a certain skill. And you get what you train for: if you train differently, you will not get the same skill. The people claiming this are not, at least so far, incorrect.

I think the misunderstanding arises when such people fail to recognize that there is also skilfullness characteristic of (eg.) judo. Being unfamiliar with the skillfulness of judo, they are unable to see it manifested in judo practice, and then conclude it isn't there. Following the apparent absence of skill, the practice is misunderstood to be one of 'brute strength.'

The neijia, or any other family of martial arts are different insofar as they offer a characteristic skill. Yet they are also the same, because the same can be said of any martial art, properly taught.

As in anything, the truth is neither black nor white, and people taking extreme positions on either side are succumbing to misunderstanding.

The best solution to this problem is simply to accumulate some experience in a wide variety of approaches. The skillfulness of a judoka becomes readily apparent if you happen to be lying at the feet of one, gasping for air.

Once such familiarity of diverse approaches is established, the contempt that results from ignorance can be dismissed, and we can be open-minded and informed enough to be able to observe the skillfulness even in those approaches we are not familiar with.

This quality of being "the same but different" is well understood in some situations. Martial artists tend to recognize that savate and kickboxing have characteristic approaches; that they are 'the same but different.' The same is often understood of BJJ and catch-wrestling, as discussed.

When we say that savate and kickboxing are different, yet the same, people tend to accept it. There's no need to place a barrier of mysticism or false superiority between the two. We should apply the same understanding to the neijia.

As in many things, a study of history helps clarify this approach. Savate and kickboxing are understood simply as being different martial arts. The problem arises in the neijia because it has been misunderstood as some sort of objective qualifier: meant to indicate skilfullness in a general sense. History tells us, though, that 'neijia' is merely a recent term used by the practitioners of a small number of martial arts who joined together in recognition of some similarities, and with the goal of improving their knowledge thereof.

In this sense 'neijia' and 'weijia' is no different a juxtaposition than 'javanese' versus 'sumatran' silat. It would have been nice if, instead of neijia, the founders of this school chose some less objective name for their school: perhaps 'the beijing school.' They didn't; but we should not allow this to confuse us.

[bamboo_ leaf]

Roffling good stuff, read her work many yrs back.
My own work/training is based on Travell and Simons Myofascial pain and Dysfunction, (trigger points).

Omar, agree muscle fibers/layers probably is a better description.

[Merryprankster]

Chris, I'm quite familiar with BJJ and even I think matches are frequently boring.

In regards to your post though, excellent as usual.

However, I would like to stretch it a bit further:

The peculiarities are exactly that- peculiarities. The underlying principles remain the same.

To quote an anthropoligist whose name escapes me, it's not the differences between us that allow us to recognize individuals...it's the similarities. His point being, of course, that the innate similarities between humans allow us to key in on the extremely minor physical differences that distinguish individuals from others in the herd...

After all, who among us can readily tell zebras apart?

[Ford Prefect]

http://www.yiquan.org.uk/art-zz.html


a good link that speaks to your post.

lol! I'm glad they didn't let science get in their way of that article. Wow.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Nice try.....I see you are just going for some "ad hominem" attacks ie attacking me instead of the points I'm making.

Just mimicking your own crappy debate tactic - rather than addressing the points Merry was making, you claimed to be unable to discern what he was trying to say. This either demonstrates that you are extremely poor at reading critically, in which case continuing the debate is fairly pointless, since you're unlikely to understand the points we're trying to make, or is an attempt at attacking Merry's style of expressing his points rather than addressing them. Either way, you're not continuing the debate in a constructive way.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by FatherDog
[B]Just mimicking your own crappy debate tactic - rather than addressing the points Merry was making, you claimed to be unable to discern what he was trying to say.

My point was that Merry wasn't making any argument at all. He simply cut and paste something from another forum and gave no indication which part of my argument he was using it to refute. Therefore, I have no way to argue for or against it because I fail to see its relevance.



This either demonstrates that you are extremely poor at reading critically,

Actually it doesn't indicate that at all. It simply indicates what I stated above.



in which case continuing the debate is fairly pointless, since you're unlikely to understand the points we're trying to make,

I understand the points that have been made. And I disagree with them. I haven't such much in the way of anything that refutes what I said. Most of what has been attempted is an attack on me personally. Comments like "if you don't agree then you obviously don't know what you're talking about" and the like. You guys don't seem to get that those kind of comments are counter productive to any real debate. Its a cheap debate tactic that seeks to discredit the argument by discrediting the arguer.



or is an attempt at attacking Merry's style of expressing his points rather than addressing them.

Here's another thing you guys like to do. "It's either this or it's that" and then you follow it up with "if you disagree that it's either/or then you don't know what you're talking about."

Its a combination of "Either/Or" fallacy with a "Ad hominem" twist. Really. This is killing me. Can't you guys make any positivistic statement ie I disagree, because in my own experience " blah blah blah. "



Either way, you're not continuing the debate in a constructive way.

Actually you're the ones that are not. I'm simply showing you that you guys are using rhetorical tricks that get you no where fast. Until you understand that, you'll keep trying them and I'll keep shredding them apart. Its fun for me but you're right in that it gets us nowhere.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Ford Prefect


lol! I'm glad they didn't let science get in their way of that article. Wow. [/B]

And what do you mean by science?

[Meat Shake]

"I fail to see its relevance."


This seems to be the case every time you are wrong. If you want people to have any sort of respect for your opinion, behave yourself more like an adult and less like a 14 year old who just cant be wrong. If you dont care about the general opinion here for you, then why even bother posting?
Every retort on this thread and others just seems like an angry, albeit well spoken, middle schooler.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Meat Shake
[B]"I fail to see its relevance."


This seems to be the case every time you are wrong.

So you're pointing to a specific pattern of behavior that say everytime I'm wrong I say "I fail to see it's relevance." Actually, I don't see that pattern.

What I see is me pointing to specific case, by a specific poster in which I stated "I fail to see the relevance of the article that you posted without any explanation to why you are posting it and which part of my argument its supposed to refute"

And BTW, please tell me why I am wrong on my points? I don't think I'm wrong on my points in the slightest.


If you want people to have any sort of respect
for your opinion

I care less who "respect's my opinion." That's a meaningless statement.



behave yourself more like an adult and less like a 14 year old who just cant be wrong.

I'm not sure how you draw that conclusion. Perhaps you could point me specifically to ANYWHERE in this thread where I've acted like a 14 year old. BTW, what do you have against 14 year olds? Are you discriminating against the younger members that post to this forum? Are you saying that they don't have anything to contribute? Prejudicial and bigoted if you ask me.


If you dont care about the general opinion here for you, then why even bother posting?

So basically you're asking me "Do you care what the forum as a group thinks?"

And my response to you is...do you think that this is some kind of popularity contest? Do I care if "in general" everybody that posts on here likes or agrees with what I have to say?

My reason for posting here is very clear. I post my ideas about a particular subject. People agree or refute. If you refute then I defend my ideas. If some new info, new ideas or new way of looking at things comes through the process then everyone (including myself) benefits. I'm here for purely selfish reasons.

Not to win anybody's approval.



Every retort on this thread and others just seems like an angry, albeit well spoken, middle schooler. ]

I need some clarification on this....

What prejudice do you have about middleschoolers?

And what about my post indicates that I'm "acting like" a middle schooler?

Is it because I won't lay down and take a mind f-ing from the "popular guys" on the forum you claim I'm adolescent.

To me it seems that you are more caught up in seeking "peer approval " which is rampant amongst teenagers.

What's even more pathetic is that you've probably never even met these "peers" that you "jumpe in" to defend.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
My point was that Merry wasn't making any argument at all.


Except that he was. Again, this is a poor debate tactic on your part; rather than addressing the points he made, you simply claim he hasn't made any.



He simply cut and paste something from another forum


Claiming that the argument has no relevance because it is pasted from somewhere else is another form of ad hominem, in that you are attacking the source of the argument rather than the argument.



and gave no indication which part of my argument he was using it to refute.


It specifically addressed points that you made, which should have made it obvious which parts of your argument it was being used to refute.



Therefore, I have no way to argue for or against it because I fail to see its relevance.


Again, I must assume that this is because you have poor comprehension skills, since its relevance is plainly apparent, and was even explained to you by MP later in the thread.



I understand the points that have been made.


Evidently not, if you fail to see their obvious relevance.


Most of what has been attempted is an attack on me personally. Comments like "if you don't agree then you obviously don't know what you're talking about" and the like. You guys don't seem to get that those kind of comments are counter productive to any real debate. Its a cheap debate tactic that seeks to discredit the argument by discrediting the arguer.


This is another rhetorical fallacy; you are conflating my behavior with other people on the thread who have disagreed with you. We are not a monolithic whole. I have made no comments like the one you quoted; I have simply stated that Merry's argument was clearly worded and addressed your points, and if you state that you fail to see that you are either engaging in rhetorical tricks or poor in reading comprehension.



Here's another thing you guys like to do. "It's either this or it's that" and then you follow it up with "if you disagree that it's either/or then you don't know what you're talking about."


I stated that it seemed to me it was either "this or that". I never followed it up with anything like "if you disagree that it's either/or then you don't know what you're talking about." You stated that you saw no relevance in MP's points. Since the points he made were directly relevant to your argument, you are either missing them deliberately, or missing them through poor comprehension. I f there is a third reason you could be missing them, I invite you to explain it.


Can't you guys make any positivistic statement ie I disagree, because in my own experience " blah blah blah. "


MP has made several on this thread.



Actually you're the ones that are not. I'm simply showing you that you guys are using rhetorical tricks that get you no where fast. Until you understand that, you'll keep trying them and I'll keep shredding them apart. Its fun for me but you're right in that it gets us nowhere.

Actually, what's happening is that some people are making valid and relevant points against you, and some are engaging, mostly through impatience or lack of interest, in rhetorical fallacies. You are responding to the rhetorical fallacies while ignoring the valid points. I am simply pointing this out, since it demonstrates your hypocrisy - you are perfectly willing to point out the flaws in some arguments against you, but you ignore any that would require you to actually address their points rather than their rhetorical technique.

[Merryprankster]

It's ok Fu-Pow.

It's tough being the purveyor of the single sacred book. The "true believers" have got your back!!!

[SifuAbel]

This thread is making my head spin.

Everyone here is guilty of piecemeal discussion.

I've had my share of flamewars, they seldomly end about the matter at hand.

This thread is no different. Half of it is contextual minutia.

Fu-pow,

You'd be a lot happier if you just igorned the troll portion of the discussion. It IMPOSSIBLE to argue yourself into a percieved upper hand. The more you try to attack, the more people will have to defend and vice versa. Trolls need this like vitamin c. When it stops being fun tormenting them, you should know when its time to move on.

Opinions here are just that. Nodody here is abolutely right or wrong about anything. Being that all we have on a board like this are short descriptions of ideas. Which , because of semantics, might be misunderstood. Each person has his own way. How much of this board is really just a measure of hubris?

Lord knows thing are bad when even I get dizzy reading this stuff. Where is the vomit smiley when you need it............

[omarthefish]

Originally posted by FatherDog
[B]. . . perfectly willing to point out the flaws in some arguments against you, but you ignore any that would require you to actually address their points rather than their rhetorical technique.

There are 2 kinds of debate.

1. To show you are right.

2. To find the truth.

Sometimes it takes a lot of discipline to stick with the second.

[SifuAbel]

Originally posted by omarthefish
There are 2 kinds of debate.

1. To show you are right.

2. To find the truth.

Sometimes it takes a lot of discipline to stick with the second.

The truth according to whom?

Your truth? My truth? This is the most subjective thing of all.

[Nick Forrer]

Originally posted by Christopher M
People unfamiliar with BJJ often complain that watching a match is boring, and perceive the interaction as uncoordinated 'rolling around.'

Following some amount of familiarity, the spectator becomes increasingly able to observe the strategic and tactical interchange between the fighters, which makes the match much more intriguing.

This is not an unusual phenomenon - the same can be said for nearly any skilled activity; another example would be golf.

This situation is more complex than this. People unfamiliar with BJJ and catch wrestling may observe, or feel for themselves, groundfighting of both styles and be unable to distinguish them.

Again, however, as familiarity increases, we are more able to observe the peculiarities which distinguish the two.

So true...They say that if something looks easy it doesnt mean that it is..it may be that the person doing it is doing it very well.

[omarthefish]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
The truth according to whom?

Your truth? My truth? This is the most subjective thing of all.

Not to prove a truth but to discover one. Not accorcing to anyone. I mean asking questions in order to discover something you didn't know before or at least to clarify your own views. I try to avoid the first type of discussion but sometimes it's irresistable. Of course when I am doing it I don't think of it as "showing I am right" I think of it as "education" :rolleyes:

From your post it looks like you don't believe in absolute truths?

I'm kind of old fasioned that way. Just cuz I can't prove it doesn't mean it isn't true and just cuz someone else can form a stronger argumetn doesn't mean they are right.

And the biggest one of all for me:

I have never observed a real relationship between the strength of ones convictions and the likelyhood that they are correct.

[David Jamieson]

one can express internal power in a so called "external" form or exercise.

are they married? yes, of course they are.

do they immediately present themselves as married to teh practitioner? no, this comes with time and further understanding through diligent practice.

do some methods have a more efficient route to gain this understanding? Yes and no. For instance, a person with no martial background can undertake to study tai chi and perform it externally with no internal expression and in fact without experience of teh internal power that it can cultivate.

This is in fact more often than not the case.

As time passes and one practices, some may get an inkling of the marriage between intent and will and physical movement. And some may not.

Is there a difference? sure, but I don't think it is so easy to quantify or qualify what the difference is without direct experience.

cheers

[Fu-Pow]

I think this thread has been filibustered and I'm moving on.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

It got alot of views in ashort period of time though, which I think is also important. R.I.P thread. Jason Putman thread ain't got **** on this one.

[count]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
I think this thread has been filibustered and I'm moving on.
Hmm, I'm still waiting to read your view on whether hsing-I or bagua are internal and if so, how you resolve the contridictions in your description of internal frames?
:confused:

Oh well, guess we'll never resolve this topic. :cool:

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by count
Hmm, I'm still waiting to read your view on whether hsing-I or bagua are internal and if so, how you resolve the contridictions in your description of internal frames?
:confused:

Oh well, guess we'll never resolve this topic. :cool:

Of course not; that would mean he'd have to address an argument rather than just claim it's an ad hominem and ignore it.

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by count
Hmm, I'm still waiting to read your view on whether hsing-I or bagua are internal and if so, how you resolve the contridictions in your description of internal frames?
:confused:

Oh well, guess we'll never resolve this topic. :cool:

Sorry I never got back to you on that. So many side topics going on in this one thread it was hard to keep track.

Anyways, I don't see any difference between Xing Yi, Ba Gua and Taiji in that they use "internal frame" body mechanics. NOT to say there is no difference in mechanic or application. It is just that they seek to find that "internal frame" by different routes.

There are 4 main types of Taoist meditation/qigong. I use the term meditation/qigong interchangeably because the Taoists see no differentiation.

1) Sitting
2) Standing
3) Walking
4) Lying down

What does this have to do with martial arts? Well I believe what makes Xing Yi, Ba Gua and Taiji unique is that they have incorporated Taoist "self-cultivation" methods into there training. That is why Neijia arts (and other "Internal Arts" that use similar methods) are so unique in the world.

Xing Yi and Taiji use standing meditations to arrive at the "internal frame". Ba Gua starts with "walking meditation" to arrive at the "internal frame."

My Taiji teacher also studies Ba Gua and Xing Yi. In my style of Taiji, Xing Yi is incorporated.

In fact the style of Taiji I learn is called "Hun Yuan Xin Yi Chen Shi Taiji Quan" or "Big Circle Mind Intent Chen Family" Taiji Fist.

If you haven't seen it already here is a link to a great article on my style which may help explain some of my viewpoint:


http://www.chinafrominside.com/ma/taiji/FZQinterview.html


I

[Ford Prefect]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
And what do you mean by science?

Fu,

I mean by the fact that they make claims that are completely false. It isn't an eastern vs western thought thing. They just outright lie.

Just a few examples since I could cite many:

"For example, those muscles used mainly for posture have a high content of slow-twitch fibres whereas the muscles used mainly for movement have a high content of fast twitch fibres."

Lie. First off, can they explain exactly what muscles are used primarily for posture? Are these the ever elusive posture muscles that have escaped all human anatomy researchers? Firstly, there are no muscles that are "mainly used for posture". All your skeletal muscle is involved in minute adjustments every second to keep you upright. The oply ones which aren't directly effected by most athletic activity are the ones that move your neck.

What keeps you upright? Well that'd be your spinal erectors. Used for posture and motion. Powerlifters do a "goodmorning" exercise with 700+ lbs which targets the spinal erectors. Hardly slow-twitch. I could go on and on about skeletal muscles and it's strength capabilities. Please name a single "postural" muscle. Thanks.

"What is important about postural muscles from our perspective is the fact that they react against the force of gravity and that they act outside of our volition - we cannot normally control postural muscles directly, only indirectly - through intent"

Actually that is your skeletal muscle which is responsible for movement and posture. Through many many years of standing up, your nervous system has grown accustomed to the movement and controls your stability subconciously. It has nothing to do with these elusive "posture" muscles.

Not only that, but all voluntary muscles are controlled through intent...

---

That's just from the first few paragraphs too. The article is a complete and utter farce in regards to this talk of posture muscles and movement muscles which is the premise this is built on. Rip that down and much of the rest falls.

[3rdrateIMAkilla]

Taoist, or Tantric. Hard to tell, indeed the difference is.:D ;)

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Ford Prefect


"For example, those muscles used mainly for posture have a high content of slow-twitch fibres whereas the muscles used mainly for movement have a high content of fast twitch fibres."

[QUOTE] Lie. First off, can they explain exactly what muscles are used primarily for posture? Are these the ever elusive posture muscles that have escaped all human anatomy researchers? Firstly, there are no muscles that are "mainly used for posture". All your skeletal muscle is involved in minute adjustments every second to keep you upright. The oply ones which aren't directly effected by most athletic activity are the ones that move your neck.

Ok...let's limit the field a little bit.

When you do standing meditation there is a limited range of motion.

For one you are standing upright. You're body is being compressed vertically by gravity.

If you were laying down or at a 45 degree angle then sure other muscles might come into play as postural muscles but with your body aligned vertically aren't there certain muscles that could be considered postural?




What keeps you upright? Well that'd be your spinal erectors. Used for posture and motion.

Wait, I thought you just said it was a "coordinated" effort? Now it's only these muscles? Not trying to be snotty but it seem you are contradicting with those two statements.



Powerlifters do a "goodmorning" exercise with 700+ lbs which targets the spinal erectors. Hardly slow-twitch. I could go on and on about skeletal muscles and it's strength capabilities. Please name a single "postural" muscle. Thanks.

I am partially agreeing with you that any muscle can be postural or phasic. However, again, if you are parallel with the field of gravity (ie standing up) aren't certain muscles going to come into play more than others as postural muscles?



"What is important about postural muscles from our perspective is the fact that they react against the force of gravity and that they act outside of our volition - we cannot normally control postural muscles directly, only indirectly - through intent"

Actually that is your skeletal muscle which is responsible for movement and posture. Through many many years of standing up, your nervous system has grown accustomed to the movement and controls your stability subconciously. It has nothing to do with these elusive "posture" muscles.

I think what they are getting at is that you don't normally get feedback from certain muscle groups when they are used against gravity. That is because they have more slow twitch fibers (not sure if this is true.) Only when you started to fatigue the muscles ie by contracting against gravity for a long time (as is the case in standing postures) would you begin to fatigue those muscles and get sensations like heat, tingling, etc that are often confused for chi.




Not only that, but all voluntary muscles are controlled through intent...

---

That's just from the first few paragraphs too. The article is a complete and utter farce in regards to this talk of posture muscles and movement muscles which is the premise this is built on. Rip that down and much of the rest falls. ]


I agree that postural and phasic muscles are not quite so easy to define. But I think if you limit the range of possible movement to "on your feet" positions that it would be easier to categorize certain muscles this way.

From the IMA view developing bone alignment and developing the "standing postural" muscles would be of prime importance.


For an art like BJJ, for example, where you are going to spend some time on the ground and some on your feet then postural and phasic would have less meaning and you would want more external development.

[omarthefish]

Powerlifters do a "goodmorning" exercise with 700+ lbs which targets the spinal erectors.

I have no idea where in 17 pages this quote came from that just showed up in Fu Pow's post but that's ridiculous.

Give me a link to a pic or something so I can try to be more specific in my criticism than, "That's ridiculous". But the erector spinae are NOT suitable for heavy lifting. Relying on them is EXACTLY how you suffer MAJOR back injury. They are little bitty muscles just going from one vertebrae to the next. Excelent example of postural muscles.

[Merryprankster]

Picture this: The great Olympic weightlifter Vasily Alexeev’s ponderous body draped over a gymnastics long horse with his feet wedged between the stall bars of an unbelievably archaic training gym in Moscow’s Lenin Institute of Sport. With four hundred pounds precariously perched behind his head, he explodes for five reps of back raises. There is virtually NO hip extensor involvement, only pure erector spinae contraction. That means 1) tremendous low back limit strength and speed-strength is developed far beyond what any other low back exercise could possibly accomplish, and 2) virtually NO trauma to the tenuous intervertebral discs of the lumbar spine, which is something no other low back exercise ever conceived can claim.


700+ may or may not be a bit over the top.

But as you can see above, Vasily Alexeev used to do back extentions - for reps - with 400 lbs. Consider that this almost completely isolates the erector spinae and reduces gluteal and hamstring involvement - part of good mornings, and it makes it much more impressive.

This is from Dr. "Squat" Hatfield.

Considering that powerlifters frequently move more (much more - most O-lifters can't come close to their powerlifting counterparts in any of the lifts in terms of sheer weight) weight than olympic style weightlifters, it's quite believable that 600+ might be possible from guys squatting near or over 1000.

Before anybody gets any ideas about 700 being almost twice as much as 400...

1. 400 was for reps!
2. Elite powerlifters move around 350-400 lbs (or more) more in the squat than their o-lift counterparts.

I think it's safe to say that while most powerlifters probably can't do that type of thing, the elite level guys might very well be able to do it.

As far as them being postural, Ford is 100% correct. Your body does not have "postural muscles." Interestingly, I just read an article about bipedal movement in Discovery that highlighted that fact that when we are standing we are constantly falling from one movement to another and it's only a rather exquisite neuromuscular system that keeps you upright.

Or... you could just chalk it up to "postural muscles."

[Ford Prefect]

If you were laying down or at a 45 degree angle then sure other muscles might come into play as postural muscles but with your body aligned vertically aren't there certain muscles that could be considered postural?

No. There are no "postura"l muscles. You have skeletal muscle. That muscle is resposible for movement or lack there of by locking your body in place. There are no muscles resposible for just one or the other. That whole premise is completely false.


Wait, I thought you just said it was a "coordinated" effort? Now it's only these muscles? Not trying to be snotty but it seem you are contradicting with those two statements

Your spinal erectors main function is bending you over unilaterally and the extension of your spine. It is one of the main muscles in order to keep your back upright along with others... Each muscle has it's own function. Keep being obtuse if you like. It doesn't change the fact that the article you put so much faith in has no grounding in human anatomy.


I am partially agreeing with you that any muscle can be postural or phasic. However, again, if you are parallel with the field of gravity (ie standing up) aren't certain muscles going to come into play more than others as postural muscles?

Sure. Your legs, all the muscles of your trunk, your neck muscles. Your muscles produce force to overcome resistance. Gravity and the weight of your body standing is one form of resistance. These same "postural" muscles are the ones used for squatting 1000+ lbs, sprinting the 40 in 4.4 seconds, etc.


I think what they are getting at is that you don't normally get feedback from certain muscle groups when they are used against gravity. That is because they have more slow twitch fibers (not sure if this is true.) Only when you started to fatigue the muscles ie by contracting against gravity for a long time (as is the case in standing postures) would you begin to fatigue those muscles and get sensations like heat, tingling, etc that are often confused for chi.

Well if that's what they are getting that then they are completely wrong. Some things are subconcious because neuromotor adjustments made from frequent action. Take standing for example. When children are first learning to stand they have to concentrate on balance and keeping themselves steady. Through repetitive practice this eventually becomes a subconsious thing. The same can be said for riding a bike, shooting a jump shot, throwing a ball correctly, punching correctly, etc.


I agree that postural and phasic muscles are not quite so easy to define. But I think if you limit the range of possible movement to "on your feet" positions that it would be easier to categorize certain muscles this way.

Maybe if you don't know what you are talking about. The same muscles that are used for standing upright are the same muscles used to jog a marathon, sprint the 100m hurdles, high jump 8', squat 1000 lbs, do 5000 reps of hindu squats, etc.


"That's ridiculous". But the erector spinae are NOT suitable for heavy lifting. Relying on them is EXACTLY how you suffer MAJOR back injury. They are little bitty muscles just going from one vertebrae to the next. Excelent example of postural muscles.

lol! Okay, Omar. How about any Human Anatomy text book. At least this statement allows us to see your lack of knowledge on this subject. The erector spinae travel up the spine yes, but included in the group (it's a triple headed muscle) is that bunch of muscle right above your butt that looks like a x-mas tree if you have good enough muscle development and low enough body fat.

Not suitable for heavy lifting, huh? How about people that squat big weights? The spinal erectors are one of the main muscles stressed. The same with the good morning exercise I talked about. The same with hyperextensions and reverse hyperextensions. The same with deadlifting. Geez. At least get a clue before posting. This is one the most common trained by athletes in high contact sports, power lifters, and olympic weightlifters.

"700+ may or may not be a bit over the top."

Merry,

See Westside Barbell at www.elitefitnesssystems.com. The goodmorning is their staple exercise which has allowed them to field numerous 1000+ squatters, and more 900+ lbs squatters than can be easily remembered. They goodmorning 600-700 lbs frequently. Their training system is adapted from the way the Russians trained their oly lifters. It's a conjugate system that trains maximal sttrength, speed, and hypertrophy all in one system. It's interesting stuff if you haven't seen it before. Many athletic programs are now adapting a similar systems to meet their needs.

[bamboo_ leaf]

In this article I shall try to outline my theory that should explain, from western perspective, why these exercises are so important both for Internal Martial Arts and Qigong, how this western view correlates with the traditional Qi view and give training advice on how to practice them. In writing this article I have drawn upon my experience from Taijiquan, Yiquan and information from medical postural rehabilitation research and sports science.


For example, those muscles used mainly for posture have a high content of slow-twitch fibres whereas the muscles used mainly for movement have a high content of fast twitch fibres. But not only are muscles different from each other, one muscle can be quite different in different functions. For example a muscle when used in a postural (stabilising or tonic) function will act differently from the same muscle when used for movement (mobilising or phasic function). So for ease of explanation, let me pretend that each muscle is really two muscles - a postural one and a phasic one (sometimes called stabilisers and mobilisers). As a further simplification, when I say a muscle, what I will mean is the muscle with all the various sensors associated with it plus its controlling mechanism within the Central Nervous System. So please keep it in mind when I talk about muscles 'feeling this' or 'doing that'.

http://www.yiquan.org.uk/art-zz.html

still a good read. ;)


I think he stated theory, and also noted much of what was brought out in the discussion of his article which I still think is a pretty good explanation for his ideas.

Such a long post, and now we seem to be on weight lifting. For something that has already been decided by the people who say there is no difference and by those who do.

To those who say there is no difference there really is no answer that you can read and it will make sense to you. You just have to find some one who says this is how they do things and then see if it is truly different.

The problem with this is that, as Omar and others have found (Leaf included) is that there are really very few people who can really express this ability. But once found there is no question of what is and what is not, or what the differences are.

[Fu-Pow]

The problem with this is that, as Omar and others have found (Leaf included) is that there are really very few people who can really express this ability. But once found there is no question of what is and what is not, or what the differences are.

Exactly!:D ;)