• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Internal" strength in the martial arts

What do you think?

  • Internal strength is different from regular strength

    Votes: 4 6.8%

  • Internal strength is really just regular strength

    Votes: 55 93.2%
  • Total voters
    59

T'ai Chi

Penultimate Amazing
T
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
11,219
Anyone with some exposure to the martial arts has heard about 'external' and 'internal' martial arts.

I wrote this up recently on the issue

http://www.statisticool.com/internal.htm

Is their vector theory the best they can do? It isn't really a convincing theory I must say.
 
I'll admit to being a bit confused by some alleged aspects of martial arts. Ch'i in particular.

My first instructor was an ex-street rumbler. He taught us two styles, in a sense. We learned the traditional Japanese techniques/style (the "Formal" way of doing things) and also what he would often refer to as what works on the street.

One of the things that was stressed to us was that timing was a major factor in delivery. We were taught to, basically, get all the associated body movements working together to use the full effect of the momentums involved, concentrated at the point of contact. Nothing mystical there. Just getting the most "body" behind a punch as possible, while using stances that attempted to get the best compromise between speed and power ("if it's all power and no speed it won't land, if it's all speed and no power, it won't do any good if it does land").

When I first found Randi's weekly tidbits, I was a bit put off, while going through past issues, by some comments he made negative toward martial arts. I haven't had a formal lesson since the 80's. My first was in the early 70's. I have never been told about any mystical powers. Everything we were taught relied on using our bodies to the best of our abilities. Heavy drilling on timing and reflexes. Lots of drills on combinations. I never realized that the field seems to have been invaded by Woo. A little research eased my feelings about Randi's comments, but caused me some concern about where the martial arts were headed.

Now, all that being said, I've never heard the Internal/External thing. My opinion is that true martial arts are nothing more than learning how to use your body to it's maximum potential. I believe (based on the schools I was trained in) that a 4 part training regime -

1. Physical exercise/stretching

2. Formal technique training, solo and with partners, and reflex training *

3. Kata practice

4. Free style sparing

gives a good balanced way of learning any martial art. Done properly, you end up in good general physical condition. Have a large range of "tools" available to use, should the need arise (note that we were told to avoid conflict when possible). Have a good degree of self confidence, and (IMHO) no need to "Prove" that you are tough. Case in point, I was about 16 when I started my training. I'm about 52 now. There has been one time that I had no choice but to fight (I was grabbed by the arms by two guys that were walking past me). That is the only time I used (the pure basic fighting aspects of) my training in self defense. But over the years, I believe the general benefits of the training have served me many times and very well, from my general health, to my ability to think well under pressure, along with what I believe would be a long list of other benefits. Again, nothing mystical, just good physical and mental training.

OK, I rambled a bit. Sorry. But in summary, I think to deliver a good punch boils down to getting your body moving in the proper direction(s) at the proper time, and bringing it all together on your opponent. Now, whether that's External or Internal or what, I don't know. I think it boils down to using the right muscles. in the right way, at the right time :)

I will add that sometimes speed is more important than power. In the case I briefly described above, it was a quick snap kick to the groan that took the fight from 2 on 1, to 1 on 1, and allowed me to walk away, while the 2 thought things over ;)

* We had a few methods of working on reflexes. One was to be running in place while our instructor walked around us. He would yell Drop, or Jump, and swing a plastic tube at our head, or knees (never applying more than a gentle tap, if he made contact). My favorite involved using a string of lights he had along one wall. He would line us up, one half facing the lights, and one half with backs to them. He had a long cord with a switch attached for the lights. We would practice whatever "movements" we had been working on. Those facing the lights would attack when the lights flashed on, this required those defending to react to the movement, not the command to attack.
 
I think that the phenomena that are attributed to "internal strength", "Ki", "chi", or what have you are better explained by body mechanics, (kinesthesiology?)
or in some cases fakery.
Some of the fakery may not be deliberate. I have seen chi "demonstrations" passed on by teachers to students as fact, but they do not stand up to scrutiny by someone with an eye for mechanics. They may be believed, however.

I remember an interview with a martial artist who had begun, after some considerable training, to develop some real power in his blows. He said that his instructor told him that he was "beginning to flow chi."
More likely he was just, by dint of his training, becoming stronger and was more able to use that strength effectively.
 
Wudang said:
It's not intended to convince people who know nothing about the art such as yourself.
Click to expand...

Ok, the wu in your name is wu as in 'nothing' apparently.

Personally I find it interesting but not terribly useful since as soon as you start to apply it you get overwhelmed by complexity.
Click to expand...

Find what interesting exactly? Pretending "internal" is something different from "external"?
 
In my teens, I did Wadu Ryu karate at a local dojo. The sensei did talk about "extending ki", but he never got into mystical "the force is with you" woo.

I agree that putting your whole body behind the blow is important - for example, I still remember the difficulty I had in mastering just the right butt-heave used in the execution of lunge and snap punches.

Other factors were:

  • Tight, square fist, concentrating the force on the two big knuckles directly in line with the forearm. My index and second finger knuckles are huge, and I can fold the other two right out of the way. This increases the impact pressure and ensures all the force vector lies along the line of the arm.
  • Being properly braced for a punch or kick. We would take up positions such as homni (the deep horse stance) and the sensei would try to push us off balance.
  • Acceleration and speed.
  • Accuracy - it's no good if the blow skids off someone's cheekbone.
  • Follow-through: don't waste energy in pulling back.
These factors are addressed by conventional boxers - I used to box, too. I did begin to feel good after a while, but I'm sure that was just due to regular, intensive workouts.
 
Last edited:
Mashuna said:
You're asking for clarification when Wudang posts that something is 'interesting' without explaining himself :jaw-dropp
Click to expand...

And? He is free to not answer further, just like anyone else is. I'm sure even you can understand that.

BTW, "Mashuna", if you read closer, it was clarification for what the "it" he referred to was, not why he thought it was interesting.
 
Big Al said:
Where yoiu practice techniques like punches, kicks, stances, etc. without a sparring partner.
Click to expand...

Ok. Like with a punching bag?

Practicing complex sequences of moves - a kata is a sort of set-piece routine. This is in contract to kumite, which is free sparring.
Click to expand...

I know what katas are. I asked what are they good for. When looking at, say, Wado Ryu katas, they look of little if no use in free sparring, simply dead exercise.
 
Kaarjuus said:
What is solo technique training?
Click to expand...

Solo in the sense I was referring to would be when you practice a given movement (punch/kick/whatever) while stepping down across the floor. It's not solo in the sense that your the only one doing it, but in that your not interacting with anyone else. Basic repetition training. We would sometimes work in place (stepping forward or backward, as required, then returning to our starting position), or step forward from one end of the dojo to the other, turn and work our way back. pretty standard I believe, but also an important part of training, IMHO.


And what are katas good for?
Click to expand...


Katas are IMHO good for getting good form. Since most katas that we had at least, used not only a lot of basic movements, but also some of the less practiced "formal" movements. They also help work on combinations. I also think they can add a sense of realism to a practice session your doing alone, at home or whatever. We were taught, and were expected to do our katas as if we were fighting someone. We were expected to pause at some points in some katas, and look in the direction of the attack we would be blocking/dodging, whatever, or in the direction of the invisible opponent we were attacking. We were also expected to put a lot of strength/effort into our katas. No sloppy moving around the floor slinging your arms and legs about ;)
 
"Internal" strength is just focus + good psychomotricity.
 
Kaarjuus said:
Ok. Like with a punching bag?



I know what katas are. I asked what are they good for. When looking at, say, Wado Ryu katas, they look of little if no use in free sparring, simply dead exercise.
Click to expand...

Wado is actually the style I started with. Before Master Otsuka passed away, and things got changed by his son Jiro (I believe). The katas we used were pretty basic katas. I believe most styles of Karate and Tae Kwon Do use the same general combinations, just with minor alterations for the difference in styles, and maybe a few added or left out steps.

They can be very dead things. But that was a good way to get a good butt kicking in my dojo ;)

If done correctly they are VERY dynamic, and alive. If you haven't had the chance, try to catch a tournament, either live or on TV, and watch the Kata competition. The ones that get the prizes will have shown you just how alive katas can be :)

EDIT to add - Actually looked at the link you gave. If you compare the first two, you'll get an idea of how different katas can be. I mean no disrespect for Michelle Tough, but I think if you compare her to Tatsuo Suzuki, whom I believe was Master Otsuka's second in command for most of the time the Master was still active, you'll see (well, I saw ;) a higher degree of realism and "feeling" in his movements. The movements were more crisp and precise, and had more determination behind them. Anyway, I saw it that way :)
 
Last edited:
This Guy said:
I also think they can add a sense of realism to a practice session your doing alone, at home or whatever. We were taught, and were expected to do our katas as if we were fighting someone. We were expected to pause at some points in some katas, and look in the direction of the attack we would be blocking/dodging, whatever, or in the direction of the invisible opponent we were attacking.

If done correctly they are VERY dynamic, and alive.
Click to expand...

I'm somewhat confused. I thought katas are a pre-defined set of movements? For example, the Pinan seriesWP. It's a set list of moves to do, in precise order. I see neither realism nor life in this.

Wouldn't simple shadow boxing be better, where you are free to imagine whatever attack you want, and respond with whatever block or counterattack you want? No need to memorize an otherwise useless order of movements, you can train combinations, and work on your form.


EDIT to respond to addition: no discussion about it, Tatsuo Suzuki showed better form in his katas. It still seems pretty pointless to learn a long pre-defined set of moves by heart and practise it to perfection. Pointless in terms of combat or free sparring.

Also, in this kata, Tatsuo Suzuki did some moves that seem a very bad idea in sparring. For example, at 00:19, he stands on left leg, his hands are above his head, and his right leg is in the air drawn close to his left leg. The move itself is impractical and he himself is unbalanced.
 
Last edited:
Kaarjuus said:
I'm somewhat confused. I thought katas are a pre-defined set of movements? For example, the Pinan seriesWP. It's a set list of moves to do, in precise order. I see neither realism nor life in this.

Wouldn't simple shadow boxing be better, where you are free to imagine whatever attack you want, and respond with whatever block or counterattack you want? No need to memorize an otherwise useless order of movements, you can train combinations, and work on your form.
Click to expand...

Katas are pre-defined movements. And yes, shadow boxing, or sparing with your local punching bag can be good. But I believe that kata practice is a valuable piece of a total training picture. It's hard to describe all the reasons. If you had ever performed a very good kata, and felt the feeling that tells you you did it well, you'd understand better what I'm trying to describe, but am not finding the words to do so.

Also, in this kata, Tatsuo Suzuki did some moves that seem a very bad idea in sparring. For example, at 00:19, he stands on left leg, his hands are above his head, and his right leg is in the air drawn close to his left leg. The move itself is impractical and he himself is unbalanced.
Click to expand...

The moves he was doing, was a block with his hands, and the leg movement was avoiding a leg sweep (I believe). These were defensive movements, not offensive. And yes, at the instant he was doing them, he was off balance, but I would argue that his (invisible) opponent was committed to the attack he was defending himself from, and therefore it was not an issue. ;)

Some movements in katas don't appear to make much sense, and in my opinion are designed more to show your ability to perform the prescribed movements in the correct order (getting your hands/feet/body from one position to the next without falling on your butt for instance ;) Some are meant to just look good. Most do simulate possible, however unlikely, situations.
 
Last edited:
When I was about 18-20 I did a lot of wakiwara punching training, mostly against concrete walls.
I almost never used full power during these sessions, but when I did I found that I was holding back quite a lot of my power when I struck with a fist compared to when I struck with the palm of my hand.
Presumably this was an instictual way to pretect myself from getting hurt.

Since it was a great way to clear my head (no thoughts just the punching), I tried a session once when I was angry (not merely miffed, but borderline berserk) I struck the target once... and all my anger was drained away by the shock of the stupidity in the act I preformed. Punching a concrete wall with full power... If I had struck the wall in the "wrong" way I would definately have hurt my hand, but luckily I didn't even get a minor scratch.

After that I set up wooden boards for breaking, and found that I could replicate 'no holding back' punch if I emptied my mind and focused on the punch, but I must say that I prefer the palm strike better than the fist.

Later on I described the feel of the exercise I went through before the punch to a Kung Fu practitioner his response was:
"Wow you know how to use chi??"

For me it was just a way to temporarily remove a mental block, for him it was a magical mystical energy I accessed.
*sigh*
Go figure.


oh and... I do not recommend punching concrete walls.
 
I have to agree with This Guy on katas/forms/etc. and on Michelle Tough vice Tatsuo Suzuki. For Michelle, it was pleasant to watch but she seemed on the edge of of-balance at many points and seemed to be doing the form for the sake of the form. Not so with Suzuki.

My martial arts experience is fairly extensive but almost entirely informal. I have done Tae Kwon Do forms and Ju-Jitsu preceptors. For TKD, the forms were helpful in cementing stances and moves into my head (from a visual-memory standpoint).

For Ju-Jitsu, the preceptors (there are only a few) were shorter and more violent and even when done alone gave a sense of actual fighting. The intent, according to my friend/instructor, was to develop a habit or instinct so that when faced with any of a variety of suitable real-life situations, the preceptor kicked in, at whatever point the situation called for.

Having worked in the security field for a long while, nearly always with a psychiatric patient component, I had chances to use my training. Never the JJ, though, as it tends to be destructive. Some karate, ninjutsu, and TKD was always welcome.
 
T'ai Chi said:
And? He is free to not answer further, just like anyone else is. I'm sure even you can understand that.

BTW, "Mashuna", if you read closer, it was clarification for what the "it" he referred to was, not why he thought it was interesting.
Click to expand...

Thanks, "T'ai Chi".
 
I was refering to Mike Sigman's analysis of Internal Strength and the classic 8 Jings in terms of the underlying force vectors and the resultant vectors. I did a weekend seminar with Mike and talked to him extensively for many years both privately and via the 6H ec mailing lists so I know his ideas very well.
They are very useful in terms of analysis and getting you thinking about what you're doing and trying to achieve but they're not always so helpful as the classic imagery. An analogy I used once talking to him was that the difference between "Qi" and "peng jing" is like centrifugal and centripetal force. Neither of the former exist but can be easier for people to grasp than the things that actually do exist.
The problem is that once you get past a simple lever model of say the arm then you get lost in the complexity of all the muscles that support the hinge. Mike has ideas regarding fascia and etheric qi that I don't go along with at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom