IMA = republica, EMA = democrat

[David Jamieson]

Originally Posted by Flusher

Brings us back to the questions here: Why do some people consider IMA to be the top 1% (superior)? What shows it to be so?

so far, nothing really of any great merit.

as far as martiality goes, it is absolutely inferior to many of the simplest of styles either boxing or wrestling.

you can't learn to fight if you don't fight. Period.

Crikey, I've met snooty tai chi women who are convince you shouldn't sweat during a workout! Ridiculous.

I've also met bagua and xingyi people who can fight just fine for what they do. What I saw coming from Lee Ying Arng is proper tai chi.

[Empty_Cup]

Originally Posted by David Jamieson

...

you can't learn to fight if you don't fight. Period.

...

I consider IMA and EMA to be two directions on the same path and somewhat inseparable. From Internal to External. From External to Internal. There is no need for one to be proven superior vs. the other. Yin and Yang are both complementary.

^ I agree with what David said above, but in a different way. Let's assume both an IMA and an EMA have the same years of experience and have the same amount of practice time live sparring against a 3rd party opponent (meaning some style that is neither IMA nor EMA). I believe both the IMA and the EMA would be equally matched.

[Robinhood]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

Here is an example that an IMA guy used EMA technique.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9kFxPuRYSg

At 2.29, The guy with white top and black pants used was a "head lock leg twist". Didn't know Chen Taiji guys also train that move.

Looks OK to me, the internal comes before the external. Sounds like your not clear on what internal is, you are probably thinking of no touch internal.

[YouKnowWho]

Originally Posted by Robinhood

you are probably thinking of no touch internal.

I will be the last person on this planet who believes in "no touch"?

The "leg twist" is "force against force". There is no way to borrow your opponent's force by using that move.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NgXae8ApQE

Translation:

Last move I was using "skill" to throw him. Next move I'll use "strength" to throw him. I'm going to throw him with "leg twist" ... Teacher: "Are you really trying to use your force to against me? I'm already over 50 years old ..." Student: "I was trying to help your throw to look real."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnxG84QTGx0

[Syn7]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

Sometime I don't understand why anybody who belongs to the bottom 99% want to vote for those who belong to the top 1%. When I look at TCMA, I then realize the reason.

Many people believe that IMA training path is superior. Even if they are not IMA masters yet, since they believe that if they follow that training path, oneday they will become IMA masters. Those guys will be in favor of the IMA training path.

Many people don't believe that they will be IMA masters no matter how hard that they may try. They just want to take the safe path by working on heavy bag and throwing dummy. Those guys will be in favor of the EMA training path.

What's your thought?

I dunno bout your analogy. Seems a lil too far out there for me. But the reason why people vote for who they vote for is because they want to believe. Look at what Obama did last time out. His supporters were in tears and so sure this was the huge change they had been "waiting" for. This time they may vote for him, but it won't feel the same. People simply want to be told and want to believe that they are in good hands and everything will be just fine. Whoever does that and spits out enough talking points to hit their target audiences will get votes.

Most people who work hard don't believe they will be multimillionaires. Hard work does not guarantee success. I think most folks know that.

[YouKnowWho]

Originally Posted by Syn7

Most people who work hard don't believe they will be multimillionaires. Hard work does not guarantee success. I think most folks know that.

If this is true then why do we have people like "Joe the Plumber"?

[Robinhood]

Its smart work that produces results, efficiency !

[Robinhood]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

I will be the last person on this planet who believes in "no touch"?

The "leg twist" is "force against force". There is no way to borrow your opponent's force by using that move.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NgXae8ApQE

Translation:

Last move I was using "skill" to throw him. Next move I'll use "strength" to throw him. I'm going to throw him with "leg twist" ... Teacher: "Are you really trying to use your force to against me? I'm already over 50 years old ..." Student: "I was trying to help your throw to look real."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnxG84QTGx0

It still boils down to more skill equals less effort.

[Syn7]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

If this is true then why do we have people like "Joe the Plumber"?

Joe the plumber who isn't even a plumber is a complete idi0t. He took his fifteen minutes and exploited them for all he could get. He and people like him are a big part of the problem. Ever notice that loudest motherfukcer at the rallies can't even name the last five major bills their "hero" candidate voted for or against. Unfortunately, voters are usually the least qualified the judge anything political. When we use emotion to choose leaders we are making dangerous decisions.

[Syn7]

Originally Posted by Robinhood

It still boils down to more skill equals less effort.

Word. It's the same with gymnastics and B-Boyin'(breakdance). You have to power thru a handspring at first. Same with a windmill, you kick out, twist, turn and then muscle yourself back to the starting position again. But when you are good at it, you just use body mechanics and very little effort. But part of this effortlessness is coz you have actually gotten stronger from practice. Same with a handspring, you figure out the body mechanics and weight distribution and then it is all real fluid and effortless in appearance. At first you can actually see the student struggle through it.