"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
"Internal" strength is just focus + good psychomotricity.
IMO there's a bit more to it than that, particularly since "focus" is a particularly nebulous term. When most people use the term, it tends to mean something along the lines of "concentration", but good internal strength relies on a number of factors. Concentration, certainly, but observation, attitude, control of fear, flexibility, determination, decisiveness, and so on.

The best example I've seen of "inner strength" and it's cultivation is Miyamoto Musashi's Ni Ten Ichi Ryu, the Way of Strategy, expounded in his Go Rin No Sho, The Book of Five Rings.

There really isn't a true divide between "internal" and "external" strength, and martial arts which emphasize one over the other are ultimately weaker than one which puts equal emphasis on both, and are typically prone to woo -- either physical/situational or metaphysical, depending on which one they emphasize.
 
I recognise martial arts for what it is, a discipline often undertaken with great skill, but when these guys start claiming all sorts it makes me wonder what's going on.

A while ago I saw some self-proclaimed master punch the air infront of a candle. The candle went out. He said that it was due to his projection of chi, and it had taken 10 years to learn. Initially I was impressed.

It wasn't until at least a year later I tried it myself. The candle went out on the 5th try. Just to prove to myself I hadn't misremembered I did it again now. This time it took about 10 tries, but I got there in the end. Chi energy? 10 years to learn? Riiiiight.
 
It wasn't until at least a year later I tried it myself. The candle went out on the 5th try. Just to prove to myself I hadn't misremembered I did it again now. This time it took about 10 tries, but I got there in the end. Chi energy? 10 years to learn? Riiiiight.

Well.. you can learn the basic punch in no time, but if you train long and hard, you will attain a higher degree of realism and "feeling" in your punch. Your movement will be more crisp and precise, and will have more determination behind it :D
 
Baron, if you did it with your arms naked, I am impressed. If you had your karategi on, any little trained weakling like me can do it. It is the snap of the sleeve that does it. My sensei was honest, he just showed it as a cheap trick....:D

ETA: try with a horizontal shuto above, but not touching, the flame (naked arm). If you can not do it, let me know and I'll tell you the trick for that one too...
 
Last edited:
Baron, if you did it with your arms naked, I am impressed. If you had your karategi on, any little trained weakling like me can do it. It is the snap of the sleeve that does it. My sensei was honest, he just showed it as a cheap trick....:D

The first time I can't recall, I'm afraid. The second I was wearing a t-shirt but the sleeve reached the elbow. I must admit to trying it around 20 times after my post and failing. Still, I definitely did it once with a t-shirt on! :)
 
There are some interesting definitions of "internal strength" here but almost none address the OP which is about neijia, a particular meaning of the word which has nothing to do with focus, concentration or whatever. It's a non-intuitive way of using muscles to get some interesting effects. Some magicians have found aspects of it - see the book Body Magic for instance.
Problem is that too much of the stuff out there is disinformation spread by poseurs wishing to attract dilettantes with disposable income and a dislike of sweat to their classes when all people with real results are noted for training like madmen, quel surpris.
 
ETA: try with a horizontal shuto above, but not touching, the flame (naked arm). If you can not do it, let me know and I'll tell you the trick for that one too...

Gyakuzuki or haishu seem to fit the bill, too.
 
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.

Um, that's what katas are -- training on combinations and working on your form.

Katas merely train specific combinations -- in theory, although of course arts will vary on this -- the combinations trained in katas are those are are likely to be useful. I mean, sure, I can make combinations up myself to practice with, but some combinations are obviously better than others (e.g. punch to the stomach, then punch to the head while the opponent is leaning forward), while others are unobviously better than others (I didn't know myself that after this move, the opponent is likely to be off balance in this way, so that throw will be unusually effective.)

I trust the sifu/sensei to know how to throw a punch better than I do. Seems I should also trust him to know which punch to throw better than I, yes?
 
NitPicky mode: Kata, the Japanese word, is singular and plural. There is no 'katas' ...

And kata are not only the solo forms practiced in Chinese and Okinawan systems. In classical Japanese arts, kata are paired exercises that, while pre-determinate in terms of what happens, are ramped up significantly as the student progresses. In practicing classical Japanese kata, the senior usually takes the 'losing' role, in order to lead the junior to proper form and execution. At some levels, paired kata like this are _almost_ more like free form, because if one of the participants fails to make the proper call/response, someone's gonna get whacked.

Kata is an essential and irreplaceable element of training in classical Japanese systems (sword, jujutsu, etc), and is balanced by a certain amount of free-play, notably in arts like judo, which, practiced in the manner Kano prescribed, uses about equal parts of kata and randori (free-play). If you've ever seen senior folks in Shinto Muso Ryu or Hontai Yoshin Ryu doing kata, you really ought to take a look. It's intense, powerful and nothing at all like the acrobatics you see kids doing 'musical kata' on the Martial Arts Network.

Even in those arts using solo kata, kata is seldeom ever just waving your arms around (I will except those modern systems that build kata on the fly or cobble together peices of many forms just to have something that looks cool), but is almost always a methodology for teaching certain things, and those things are not necessarily combative techniques ...

After 34 years or so of classical (Japanese sword, staff and jujutsu) AND modern combatives (police and military hand-to-hand/CQC/personal combatives), I've got to say that I learned as much about timing, control of spacing and initiative from kata as I did from free-play.

And personal combat is all ABOUT initiative, timing, spacing, and control of the common center.
 
NitPicky mode: Kata, the Japanese word, is singular and plural. There is no 'katas' ...

SNIP

Thanks for the correction, and added information :)

I used to jokingly tell folks, I can count in Japanese, and I can kick your butt, and tell you in Japanese what blows I administered, but that was the extent of my Japanese. It's been so long, I can't even do the latter now :(
 
NitPicky-picking mode: given that we are writing in English (sort of :D ) does not really matter what the form is in the original language, it is the accepted English usage of foreign words that matters. Therefore, "katas" as a plural is acceptable, like Wudang's "dilettantes" instead of "dilettanti". (btw... it is actually "quelLE surprisE" Wudang :) ).

Disclaimer: this is what I was taught learning the Queen's English, maybe Murican is different ...:D
 
If you've ever seen senior folks in Shinto Muso Ryu or Hontai Yoshin Ryu doing kata, you really ought to take a look. It's intense, powerful and nothing at all like the acrobatics you see kids doing 'musical kata' on the Martial Arts Network.

I've never seen Shinto Muso Ryu or Hontai Yoshin Ryu kata. But I searched youtube and watched some videos. Again, I saw nothing but dead movements. Can you point me to some good videos?
 
You'd have to define 'dead movements' I suppose. Experiencing the real thing, live and in person is the only way. Video can't really convey the sense of the thing. And most times, videos like that are actually posed and not performed at speed, with full intent, anyhow.
 
I've never seen Shinto Muso Ryu or Hontai Yoshin Ryu kata. But I searched youtube and watched some videos. Again, I saw nothing but dead movements. Can you point me to some good videos?

Have you actually taken any martial arts classes? I suspect not. But of course, could be wrong.

Any movement performed in martial arts can be very dead or very alive, and that can either be seen by an observer, or felt by the performer, and sometimes both (but not always).

A simple punch can be anything from throwing your hand out, to a perfect movement that not only places your hand in contact with the target (real or imaginary), but also has your body movements all perfectly being at the right place/right angle/right time, to make it the most effective punch your capable of delivering. When you get that perfect combination, you feel it. When your foot placement, hip movement, shoulder movement, arm/hand movement all hit the correct point at the correct time, it's a beautiful thing :)

But trying to impart that feeling is, I would imagine, about the same as an NBA star describing the feeling of hitting a 3/4 court shot, while spinning in the air, and hitting nothing but net, to someone that never played basketball. The difference being that you can see the results of the basketball shot, but not necessarily the perfect punch.

A perfect kata (if one has ever been performed) would be a series of perfect punches/kicks/blocks and related movements performed in the correct order, while moving around the floor (for those that have more than one step). You start and end at the exact same point (in most), you don't bounce up and down, but have a constant head level (should be able to perform it with a board just above your head, and never open or close the distance between your head and the board, unless of course there are jumps or something :)). No wasted movements. And should be done as if there were opponents against you, not just like your doing a dance, though the result might look somewhat like a dance.

I would suggest that if you haven't, you might consider finding a local school, and try a few months of lessons. If time permits, go to a few of the schools and observe a lesson or two. If they won't let you observe, you probably don't want anything to do with them. Some offer a two week intro course. That isn't bad to get an idea of whether or not you would like to try it, but it's not enough to actually learn anything. I'd suggest trying the intro, see if it's something you'd like, then try to get a 6 month contract. 6 months should give you a good idea of what it's about. After that, you'd be in a better position to decide if a 12 month contract would be a good or bad thing for you :) If there are less than two lessons a week, I'd walk out and check another school. My first dojo had two (or three) classes a week for each of 4 (maybe 5) levels. Once you advanced to the third level classes you could attend the class above or below your level at no additional cost. There were a few months I was taking about 8 classes a week. Two a night on some nights, plus a couple open classes we had on the weekends. Classes should be at least 2 hours (at least after the intro).

I think most styles, if taught correctly, are equally as good at both physical conditioning, and self defense. I'm partial to the Japanese arts, because that was what I started with. WADO used to be a very well rounded style, in my opinion. I'm not sure where it stands now though. I do know that when Master Otsuka passed away there was a break up. His son Jiro took over, and made some changes away from the original style as created by the Master. Suzuki, I've been lead to believe, broke off and stayed more with what the Master had taught. I'm not sure what names are used to distinguish the two systems. But I'm sure either would give a well rounded training regimen.

Korean, Chinese, or other arts I'm sure are generally as good, if not better (just to appease practitioners of those styles;)). My brother achieved a black belt in Tae Kwon Do, and has really enjoyed that style over the years. While in the military, I worked out with folks from several different styles (Kung Fu, some Okinawan, and a few others) and from my somewhat limited direct exposure, I enjoyed what I saw. I've had pleasant experiences with (Don't laugh!) Chuck Norris' schools and David Deaton (a local chain of schools). I think by and large, it's the performer more than the particular style, that makes the difference. I'm sure there are exceptions (maybe we'll get some other points of view here :)).

If your a master of some style, I apologize for my assumption that your not well trained in "the arts". But I also suspect that if you were well trained in any of the martial arts, you'd have a better understanding of what Kata are good for :)

(Just previewed what I wrote! Sorry for being so "wordy". But not sure what I'd cut out, so leaving it all in. Hope something there helps someone :))
 
Last edited:
Have you actually taken any martial arts classes? I suspect not. But of course, could be wrong.

I did a little judo when little. I started to practise mixed martial arts recently.

I think most styles, if taught correctly, are equally as good at both physical conditioning, and self defense.

Well, firstly, "taught correctly" is the clincher here. Having students practise katas is not a correct training method in my mind. And secondly, since quite several arts do not do free sparring , they often use techniques that simply will not work against a resisting opponent. Aidiko is a prime example in that regard.

I've had pleasant experiences with (Don't laugh!) Chuck Norris' schools and David Deaton (a local chain of schools).

What's wrong with Chuck Norris' schools? He is God :)
 
Last edited:
Aidiko is a prime example in that regard.

I can assure you than when I practice Aikido I often resist my uke (partenair) in ordre to teach him how to do the technique properly. He'll notice that the way he do things don't work if I'm resisting, and with a few explanation try to improve his move. So it's mostly pedagogical.

I don't resist white belt movement of course, there is not point in that. I'm not teaching them something by doing that. But the more I practice with an advance student, the more I resist what they're doing.

Of course I don't resist with strenght, but mostly with techniques (shift of balance, counter-moves, and so on).

So what you were stating is just untrue: the partenair resist in Aikido. :p

ps: I understant your point of course. I do Aikido because my goal in life is not to hit people or even kill them in real fight... But everyone is different in that regard. I know that most people in combat's sports enjoy hiting other people, feeling and inflincting pain, and so on... I'm just not like that. I'm not a violent guy...
 
Last edited:
There is no such thing as internal strength. There is good body mechanics and poor body mechanics. Pure physical strength helps as well.
 
SNIP
ps: I understant your point of course. I do Aikido because my goal in life is not to hit people or even kill them in real fight... But everyone is different in that regard. I know that most people in combat's sports enjoy hiting other people, feeling and inflincting pain, and so on... I'm just not like that. I'm not a violent guy...

I'm with you on that :)

Believe it or not, my reason for taking my first martial arts class had nothing to do with fighting, and everything to do with magic (stage type, not black or whatever;)) Long story, but it's true.

And I've never done full contact sparing, and would not. I have a large dislike for pain, and no desire to cause it in others either.

Of course, that dislike for pain over rides my desire to not hurt others, if/when the options come down to hurting someone else, or getting hurt. :)
 
There is no such thing as internal strength. There is good body mechanics and poor body mechanics. Pure physical strength helps as well.

Internal strength is pure physical strength. It is trivially obvious that if you change your stance you change how force is propagated through that stance. Anyone who has a half-decent book on east german research on sports science or any books on how the west has built on that should know that.
Anyone who's trapped in a cult that says that anything they see on TV is real won't get that.
 
I don't resist white belt movement of course, there is not point in that. I'm not teaching them something by doing that.

So providing a realistic sparring is not teaching something? How can the students know whether a technique is working if their opponents are just pretending it works?

I do Aikido because my goal in life is not to hit people or even kill them in real fight... But everyone is different in that regard. I know that most people in combat's sports enjoy hiting other people, feeling and inflincting pain, and so on...

Wow.. it's been a while since I encountered such a sweeping denigrating statement.

First, there are many ways to subdue an opponent. Aikido does not seem to be very good in that regard, since its techniques are not trained in a free sparring environment. Brazilian jiu jitsu, for example, is pretty good in that regard. It doesn't involve strikes or kills, but it does utilize pain via joint manipulation. How exactly can one overcome physical violence without inflicting pain (barring chokes, of course)?

Second: so most people in combat sports are both sadists AND masochists?
 

Back
Top Bottom