Withdrawing "the Boys"

[taai gihk yahn]

There is even more to it, believe me.

my sifu has an indirect relationship to this system;

I agree and of course no one can move without using their muscles but this lineage is notoriously (and understandably) secretive. So all you are going to get from them are hints. Those who have trained this system the way it was meant to be will know what he means. It is a question of emphasis and a particular way of doing so.

perhaps, but I think that he is also buying into / perpetuating a particular conceit on the part of "internalists", who seem to have this need to characterize what they do as being above such base methods as using muscle power - it's one that has rather deep roots, unfortunately; and I have experienced it before elsewhere; problem is, they can be clueless about anatomy and kinesiology: for example one person I knew, very high level bagua, tried to make his point about not using muscle power by having me feel his tricep while he held his arm out extended at 90˚ from his torso - he was like "look, no muscle power"; of course, I didn't have the heart to tell him that triceps have nothing to do with holding the arm out that way one it is already extended - but I suspect he was showing what he had been shown by his sifu...
anyway, I don't think that, just because they demonstrate skill in their given area of expertise that it should make an allowance for him being intellectually sloppy in another area - consider the inverse: someone with expert knowledge of neuromuscular physiology drawing incorrect conclusions about "internal" practice - how forgiving would you be of that...sword cuts both ways...the interesting thing then is, what happens when you come across someone high-level competent in both areas...

What you describe holds true for Chow Gar (up to a point) as well as some other none related internal kung fu styles and methodologies. It is just that Chow Gar, (together with Pak Mei, Dragon, etc , I am told)have their own distinct methodologies that are not going to be in any YouTube videos. However, there are hints to them in what certain Masters may publicly say. Of course, each MA-ist will interpret them in relation to their personal experience.

IMPE, one can talk about it all day and even reveal the "secrets" if one wanted to, but the reality is that the only way to really "get it" is to a) feel it; b) train it; but this is the case with most anything involving subjective skill; I personally think that it has more to do with keeping one's rice bowl intact...

I believe that your take of it is pretty d@mn good for someone who has not practiced this style. Of course, that reflects a meeting point of different Internal approaches.

IMPO, the body is the body, and nature functions according to the principle of regression towards the mean...

[Dragonzbane76]

lol... i'm sorry anyone that stands in the way of a kick or punch is stupid. eventually somewhere along the line your going to get hurt... and speaking of idiots... Kung fu is not the only art to have dumb A$$'s enlisted in there search for total stupidity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njxuc3M0oTQ

[Fa Xing]

Watch and listen(specially, Sanjuro)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Q1WDGSUn44&NR=1

Whenever I sh!t like this, I am reminded of Yanagiryuken:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tib2Urowsdc

Here he fought an MMA fighter, watch the first video then watch how will he did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMgVmFzBrus

[Kansuke]

There is even more to it, believe me.

Believe you?! HAHAHAHAHAAAAHhahahahahaaaaaahhaahaaaa!!!!

[Hardwork108]

Whenever I sh!t like this, I am reminded of Yanagiryuken:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tib2Urowsdc

Here he fought an MMA fighter, watch the first video then watch how will he did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMgVmFzBrus

I have seen those clips and they have nothing to do with the methodology described in my clip.

You guys should really study authentic kung fu before making your silly assumptions about any TCMA methodology that you are unfamiliar with!

[Hardwork108]

lol... i'm sorry anyone that stands in the way of a kick or punch is stupid. eventually somewhere along the line your going to get hurt... and speaking of idiots... Kung fu is not the only art to have dumb A$$'s enlisted in there search for total stupidity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njxuc3M0oTQ

Again, sorry to burst your knucklehead MA bubble but when you harden your body, you do it not to be able to stand and take punishment for half an hour, until your assailant is tired out, after which you push him down with your little finger....LOL.

Valid Iron Skills will enable you to stand heavy blows on various parts of your body. However, you don't just stand there.....LOL. Having most of your body fortified you need less areas to protect. You can actually "walk into" a strike and unbalance or even hurt your attacker and follow through by delivering a telling blow.

[Hardwork108]

my sifu has an indirect relationship to this system;

I understand but there are others with whom I have interacted with, who claim indirect and sometimes direct, relationship with this system but are however unfamiliar with the profoundness of its methodology.

perhaps, but I think that he is also buying into / perpetuating a particular conceit on the part of "internalists", who seem to have this need to characterize what they do as being above such base methods as using muscle power - it's one that has rather deep roots, unfortunately; and I have experienced it before elsewhere; problem is, they can be clueless about anatomy and kinesiology: for example one person I knew, very high level bagua, tried to [make his point about not using muscle power by having me feel his tricep while he held his arm out extended at 90˚ from his torso - he was like "look, no muscle power"; of course, I didn't have the heart to tell him that triceps have nothing to do with holding the arm out that way one it is already extended - but I suspect he was showing what he had been shown by his sifu...
anyway, I don't think that, just because they demonstrate skill in their given area of expertise that it should make an allowance for him being intellectually sloppy in another area - consider the inverse: someone with expert knowledge of neuromuscular physiology drawing incorrect conclusions about "internal" practice - how forgiving would you be of that...sword cuts both ways...the interesting thing then is, what happens when you come across someone high-level competent in both areas...

To be honest, I believe that there is more ignorance from the modern perspective towards the TCMA perspective than the other way round. After all, and many people here have pointed it out as well, many kung fu styles have been using weight training in their methodologies for a long time. "Modernists" identify with that, while they cannot figure out how some Internal TCMAs can create power and strength without weight training. Unfortunately, more often than not, the modernists will refer to such methodologies as fantasy or fake, just because they are clueless about the deeper side of such practices.

IMPE, one can talk about it all day and even reveal the "secrets" if one wanted to, but the reality is that the only way to really "get it" is to a) feel it; b) train it; but this is the case with most anything involving subjective skill; I personally think that it has more to do with keeping one's rice bowl intact...

I disagree. I say what I say because I have experienced the power of this system. I talk from my experience while others here make assumptions because they are really unfamiliar with the methodologies. It seems that ironically, it is them that are being unscientific about the whole issue.

IMPO, the body is the body, and nature functions according to the principle of regression towards the mean...

There is more to the body (and mind) than meets the eye. The Chinese discovered that fact a long time ago. I hope that "modern" science catches up during my lifetime.

[Hardwork108]

Believe you?! HAHAHAHAHAAAAHhahahahahaaaaaahhaahaaaa!!!!

Christ!
Poor David Ross, you first lost your b@lls and now you are losing your marbles....LOL!

[Dragonzbane76]

Valid Iron Skills will enable you to stand heavy blows on various parts of your body. However, you don't just stand there.....LOL. Having most of your body fortified you need less areas to protect. You can actually "walk into" a strike and unbalance or even hurt your attacker and follow through by delivering a telling blow.

doesn't really matter if you stand in front of an oncoming strike and just 'take' it then you are an idiot. You need to be able to withstand some amount of punishment but to intentionally take it is moronic and just plain dumb. You know there is this thing called a SIDE STEP which i've heard works pretty dam good. anyone that beats there body into something that absorbs pain and damage is just asking for a death sentence somewhere along the line. Hoodini died of pretty much the same thing, taking punches to the mid section. I could probably find other cases of people doing this and not fairing very well either.

[Boston Bagua]

Again, sorry to burst your knucklehead MA bubble but when you harden your body, you do it not to be able to stand and take punishment for half an hour, until your assailant is tired out, after which you push him down with your little finger....LOL.

Valid Iron Skills will enable you to stand heavy blows on various parts of your body. However, you don't just stand there.....LOL. Having most of your body fortified you need less areas to protect. You can actually "walk into" a strike and unbalance or even hurt your attacker and follow through by delivering a telling blow.

Here is a video of yours truly being hit by two kung fu brothers who are instructors in our system of Baguazhang.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwBmA8r9v40

I do not stand around, but I move as well as I would be hitting back in a real situation.

Now HW, you talk about this but can you demo it like I can?

You seem to talk more than ever show anything.

[kfson]

lol... i'm sorry anyone that stands in the way of a kick or punch is stupid.

Here is one of those stupid (bagua) men:


Wang Shujin

[taai gihk yahn]

I understand but there are others with whom I have interacted with, who claim indirect and sometimes direct, relationship with this system but are however unfamiliar with the profoundness of its methodology.

fair enough

To be honest, I believe that there is more ignorance from the modern perspective towards the TCMA perspective than the other way round.

personally, I find the ignorance equal in both directions: the majority of TCMA stylists are pretty much clueless about contemporary anatomy / physiology / kinesiology and so too most folks who are knowledgeable in those areas are unaware of TCMA in general; fact is, not too many people have the combination of training and experience that I have, and therefore are at a loss to provide the sorts of connections I am able to make between them;

After all, and many people here have pointed it out as well, many kung fu styles have been using weight training in their methodologies for a long time. "Modernists" identify with that, while they cannot figure out how some Internal TCMAs can create power and strength without weight training. Unfortunately, more often than not, the modernists will refer to such methodologies as fantasy or fake, just because they are clueless about the deeper side of such practices.

well, I believe I provided a pretty specific "modernist" explanation previously - and this explanation is based on a combination of my training / practice from a contemporary perspective and what has been my personal experience in the particular sort of "internal" methodology I practice (of course it's not the same as Chow Ga, but I was looking to the general similarities common to "internal" arts): so I am fairly confident that I can speak with some degree of relative authority in the matter; of course, I didn't go into as much detail as I could have, because when I have done so in the past, I get accused of self-aggrandizement; now, you (or others) may absolutely disagree with the content of my explanation, but if you do, then I would suggest, as I have always done, that you discuss it specifically, as opposed to making a generalized statement; of course, I realize that if one lacks training in both areas it could be difficult to do so, and one might therefore be tempted to engage in a more knee-jerk emotional response;

I disagree. I say what I say because I have experienced the power of this system. I talk from my experience while others here make assumptions because they are really unfamiliar with the methodologies. It seems that ironically, it is them that are being unscientific about the whole issue.

while I agree w/your point that the ability of someone to speak to a given methodology is limited to their experience, by that logic, given that you do not have training in the particular "modern" methodology in question, it would appear that you would not then have the capacity to refute it's ability to explain what is going on in internal practice, and how it can generate power without engaging in resistance training;
as for feeling the power of that system - I do not disagree w/this, having experienced power of this nature myself, and again, I can understand why this power can be generated without the use of resistance training utilized by other approaches

There is more to the body (and mind) than meets the eye. The Chinese discovered that fact a long time ago.

well, I don't disagree, but I'm not quite sure what your point is here and I don't find this concept inconsistent with anything I have stated

I hope that "modern" science catches up during my lifetime.

don't know what the smile is all about, but if you actually had training in "modern science", you might have a slightly different perspective as to the actual depth and breadth of knowledge that it encompasses...

[Lokhopkuen]

Can this be learned or are some blessed.

The inguinal canal would have to be open.

This could be bad for you if you were to breath wrong at a critical juncture

[Hardwork108]

personally, I find the ignorance equal in both directions:

Fair enough.

the majority of TCMA stylists are pretty much clueless about contemporary anatomy / physiology / kinesiology and so too most folks who are knowledgeable in those areas are unaware of TCMA in general;

I agree. I also find that each side will acquire something that "works" for them and hence the methodology will become their benchmark.

Of course, that still does not mean that they can't learn from each other.

fact is, not too many people have the combination of training and experience that I have, and therefore are at a loss to provide the sorts of connections I am able to make between them;

I understand your background and that makes me understand your view of this subject matter and the links that you are able to make but I am sure that you are not implying that you are a kung fu master, either.

well, I believe I provided a pretty specific "modernist" explanation previously - and this explanation is based on a combination of my training / practice from a contemporary perspective and what has been my personal experience in the particular sort of "internal" methodology I practice (of course it's not the same as Chow Ga, but I was looking to the general similarities common to "internal" arts): so I am fairly confident that I can speak with some degree of relative authority in the matter; of course,

Chow Gar uses very DISTINCT methodologies. I suspect that other Internal styles have theirs. These differences are the factors that among other things distinguish these styles from each other.

I believe that through time and watering down of some of these systems the more profound aspects have gone "underground" (even more than before). Hence we are left with a lot of COMMON to all styles, internal practices that are more visible/available nowadays. These (and any so called scientific understanding of them) are the basis for any modern understanding of the Internals and hence limited.

I didn't go into as much detail as I could have, because when I have done so in the past, I get accused of self-aggrandizement;

IMHO, too much explanation and technical jargon can work against one in a forum that is not for specialists in that given area (human anatomy).

now, you (or others) may absolutely disagree with the content of my explanation, but if you do, then I would suggest, as I have always done, that you discuss it specifically, as opposed to making a generalized statement; of course, I realize that if one lacks training in both areas it could be difficult to do so, and one might therefore be tempted to engage in a more knee-jerk emotional response;

Well as far as kung fu goes then I do not generally discuss subjects I do not have personal experience in and I have been around long enough to know that the methodology I speak of is not at all common. Furthermore, the reasons were explained to me; I have seen the strength and power this produces and I will swear by it. Having said that, I am limited in what I can discuss on a public internet forum because of confidentiality reasons. Any one who has actually trained in an authentic TCMA school will appreciate that.

while I agree w/your point that the ability of someone to speak to a given methodology is limited to their experience, by that logic, given that you do not have training in the particular "modern" methodology in question, it would appear that you would not then have the capacity to refute it's ability to explain what is going on in internal practice, and how it can generate power without engaging in resistance training;

I see your point but then there are others here that follow the "modern" methodology, apparently with the good old, "decades of experience" tag, (including one that claims Olympic weight training credentials), who do not comprehend the acquisition of power and strength without the use of weights.

In that particular thread that this subject was discussed absolutely no one agreed with me. A couple of people who actually train TCMAs managed to discuss the matter in a civil manner. Others (together with their "decades of experience" only managed to throw ridicule and spite on this methodology and myself, not to mention the first poster who brought this practice to their attention).

as for feeling the power of that system - I do not disagree w/this, having experienced power of this nature myself, and again, I can understand why this power can be generated without the use of resistance training utilized by other approaches

Where were you when I needed you in the other thread? If you had come in and confirmed that such methodologies existed then you would have saved a lot of this forum's Tae Kwon Do and grappling experts, and Jack of All Trades from putting their foots in their mouths. LOL.

Based on my experience in Mainland Chinese Wing Chun, where weight training is also avoided, I believe that there are more than one way of generating such power. IMHO your way is not the same as the Chow Gar way.

well, I don't disagree, but I'm not quite sure what your point is here and I don't find this concept inconsistent with anything I have stated

That was just a general statement for those misguided souls who think that just because a methodology is modern and "scientific" it makes it automatically superior to ancient knowledge.

don't know what the smile is all about,

I was being civil and friendly.

Despite our history in this forum, I kind of enjoy in participating in TCMA discussions with you after you started acting in a civil manner towards me. However, I still suspect that if you ever met me in person you would attempt to strangle the life out of me. LOL.

but if you actually had training in "modern science", you might have a slightly different perspective as to the actual depth and breadth of knowledge that it encompasses...

I have no doubt about the depth and breadth of modern science just as I do not have any doubts about its limits when it comes to understanding traditional Chinese science and MA methodologies.

HW108

[kfson]

...so I am fairly confident that I can speak with some degree of relative authority in the matter; of course, I didn't go into as much detail as I could have, because when I have done so in the past, I get accused of self-aggrandizement...

Why would anyone bully knowledge/information? Carry on.