Internal and Combat

[A BIONIC LEG]

Thanks Mighty, I can see that. Someone one the page once said (probably quoting some else that coined the phrase) when the stuff hits the fans you will always go to your most basic form of training. So if your most basic form is circle back fist or in my case, "basic salutation", that is as spontaneous as its going to get.


I hate beating a dead horse but I will probably turn this poor thing into pulp before useful fertilizer, but I will continue to try and figure out the answer to this friggin equation. Which will probably take my life time.... And I'm drunk again... Hey, whose up for drunkin boxing

[A BIONIC LEG]

manchu prince duan was a big head in boxer rebellion. tai chi founder yang luchan was part of his retinue.[/QUOTE]

Ok so now I need to do some research, so how does that relate to coining the term "internal or external"?

[lkfmdc]

I thought the Grandmaster Wang Xiang-Zhai (1885-1963) Interview thread would generate more discussion,

it's like so much of what is posted/discussed here... people don't want to rearange their delicately placed world views, it makes them uncomforatable

I laugh when people here try to pass off controversy in TCMA as "those MMA guys"... Wang wasn't an "MMA guy", he was a TCMA master.

These debates have a long history in China, a long history in the traditions. There is definitely something in the TCMA tradition that leads it astray

[Frost]

I thought the Grandmaster Wang Xiang-Zhai (1885-1963) Interview thread would generate more discussion, but I did make the mistake of putting it on the internal and not the general forum.

Anyway - it seems he liked two things, internal cultivation and fisticuffs and pretty much eliminated all else from his practice. His interview was pretty scathing about his contemporaries. It sounds a lot like the forum talk as of late and it was written quite some time ago. anyway...

My take on it was that he didn't like the classifications of internal or external either. He seemed to describe the major difference in terms of the ideal approach to training. External was more of "if he does this, then you do that" style of training for newbies, and Internal was more spontaneous with spontaneous reaction being the ideal for both.

Again my take from the interview, Fighting was supposed to be the first goal.

you read it the same way i do lol, and it wont get much discussion because as diavid has said people dont like their world views shattered

the mere fact that almost a centuiry later things are still the same, or even worse, than when he made these comments is telling

[A BIONIC LEG]

So I jus did a quick search on the boxer rebellion and now I think I found my disappointing answer.... "Don't ask the questions you don't want the answers to", right?

This is what I gathered from reading just a few paragraphs from wiki (yeah I know not a valuable source but I wanted something quick, kind of like a hot pocket, not all the nutrition bus something to hold you over until you get to hometown buffet) the boxers were a group of individuals that did not want western influence (which is not important for the argument) and believed that through training one could be impervious to western weapons (I.e. cannon fire gun fire ect). And this the birth of internal martial training was born, which also brought about the birth of iron body ( as a whole ). Am I any bit correct in my assumptions (please for the love of God tell me I'm not).

[Dragonzbane76]

it's like so much of what is posted/discussed here... people don't want to rearange their delicately placed world views, it makes them uncomforatable

and putting yourself in uncomfortable positions is usually were people learn the most.

[lkfmdc]

and putting yourself in uncomfortable positions is usually were people learn the most.

that's what I told her

[sanjuro_ronin]

I thought the Grandmaster Wang Xiang-Zhai (1885-1963) Interview thread would generate more discussion, but I did make the mistake of putting it on the internal and not the general forum.

Anyway - it seems he liked two things, internal cultivation and fisticuffs and pretty much eliminated all else from his practice. His interview was pretty scathing about his contemporaries. It sounds a lot like the forum talk as of late and it was written quite some time ago. anyway...

My take on it was that he didn't like the classifications of internal or external either. He seemed to describe the major difference in terms of the ideal approach to training. External was more of "if he does this, then you do that" style of training for newbies, and Internal was more spontaneous with spontaneous reaction being the ideal for both.

Again my take from the interview, Fighting was supposed to be the first goal.

Bang on dude.

[YouKnowWho]

External was more of "if he does this, then you do that" style of training for newbies, and Internal was more spontaneous with spontaneous reaction being the ideal for both.

When you talk about the

- striking art, the principle approach may work better than the technique approach. When your opponent moves in from 5 feet away and tries to punch at your face,, your defense and counter is unlimited.

- throwing art, the technique approach will work better than the principle approach (find the right key to open the right lock). When your opponent has controlled your upper body and uses his leg to attack your leg, your option is limited. When your opponent uses his right leg to hook your left leg, your best counter is to use your right leg to knee lift his attacking leg. You then drop your right leg and attack his left standing leg. All the other counters are not proper at that particular moment. It does fit into the pattern, "If you inner hook me, I'll knee lift your attacking leg and then ...".

I just don't think it's proper to look at the "internal and external" issue only from the striking art point of view.

[YouKnowWho]

Fighting was supposed to be the first goal.

This is the main point of this discussion. I'm glad that in this forum, we have more members who does care about "combat".

The main reason that I don't like to talk about "health" is in "health", you truly don't care about where your hands and feet position are. In "health", it won't make any difference if your hands are 3 feet apart. It does make sense in "combat" because if you try to grab your opponent's right wrist with your right hand, and grab his right elbow with your left hand, your left hand can only be so far away from your right hand.

One of my teacher's major criticize on CMC's Taiji is his "double pulling". In the following clip at 0.23, both CMC's palms are facing down. How will he be able to "pull" his opponent's arm if his left hand hold on his opponent's wrist downward (correct way), and his right hand also hold his opponent's elbow "downward" (incorrect way)?

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...=0&FORM=NVPFVR

Without talking about "combat", there won't be any "guideline" to follow. The discussion can go into any direction.

[bawang]

i think another big problem in kung fu today is pride and refusal to learn from others.

in kung fu our sabre is mongol, two hand sword is from japanese, the mace is from the persians, musket and grand cannon from the portugese, wrestling from the manchu. we used to learn from everybody.

[Lucas]

that is why the kungfu genius learns from the most deadly, this comes from the wombat. there is no more fierce creature in the world.

[bawang]

that is why the most deadly comes from the wombat. there is no more fierce creature in the world.

the wombat is the perfect organism. I admire its purity. A survivor... unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality.

[YouKnowWho]

i think another big problem in kung fu today is pride and refusal to learn from others.

This is quite true. My teacher commented on my friend's "both hands facing down double pulling". It took my friend 25 years until his Taiji teacher passed away, he finally changed his "double pulling" into the correct way. I asked him why it took him that long. His answer was, "As long as my teacher is still alive, I can't change it."

[MightyB]

i think another big problem in kung fu today is pride and refusal to learn from others.

in kung fu our sabre is mongol, two hand sword is from japanese, the mace is from the persians, musket and grand cannon from the portugese, wrestling from the manchu. we used to learn from everybody.

That's a good point...

Wang Xiangzhai: The way of learning builds up from comparison, this applies to boxing as well. When comparing skills, there is victory or defeat, but one’s personality is not harmed by it, on the contrary, it may improve one’s personality and increase one’s morals. If everyone could inspect and learn from each other’s experiences, the dispute between different schools could be avoided, and furthermore, it could stop the irresponsible talking. I wish that those who pursue the same things as I, will not take these words as empty talk, and if the prominent personage and the wise hermits of this country will be willing to make a journey to grant me instruction, they are very welcome. If you do not wish to come to visit me, please just send me a note and I will surely and wholeheartedly pay you a visit and respectfully listen to all you have to say. To sum up, I only seek to improve the boxing art, I do not bother about anything else.