Boxing an Internal art--an intellectual exercise

Shadowdragon posted the following on a different thread:

Internal vs. External
Internal External
Blending with an attack Stopping an attack
Yielding Struggling
Power comes from within Power comes from outside
Relaxed Tense
Fluid Defined
Slow forms Fast kata
Finesse Power
Indirect Direct
Circular Linear
Accepting what is Fighting against it
Acknowledging the
limitations of the self Denying any vulnerabilities
Winning without
fighting is best Destroying your opponent

Before anybody gets their panties in a wad, note the complete title of the thread–it’s an intellectual exercise, not a threatening challenge to internal artists or boxers :slight_smile:

Now, I realize the above is not necessarily a comprehensive breakdown, but it seems to me that based on those qualities, boxing shares far more in common with “internal,” vs. “external.”

Let’s examine the first issue–blending with an attack. In boxing, active hard blocking does not play a prominent role. Passive blocking does in the sense that you’ll take it on your forearms instead of your face if you have to, but ideally, you’d rather redirect with a parry or slip it or a combination of the two. Some people DO block–but rarely will you see it considered “good” to throw a hard block out there.

Yeilding–Boxers roll with the punches. If they get hit they might use that momentum as the first part of a big slip to avoid the rest of an incoming flurry. They might also use that momentum to get their whole body moving, taking the sting out of the shot, and setting up for a counter of some kind.

Power comes from within- Nobody has yet provided me with a reasonable explanation of this. Does this mean that power is channeled through your center? If so, then Boxing accomplishes this. There is no punch in boxing that does not derive the great bulk of its power through proper structure and torso movement. Arm punching is discouraged and also, next to useless :slight_smile:

Relaxed–a tight boxer is a bad boxer. Next.

Fluid-- Boxers are always moving, but rarely straight forward or back. Punches must flow from one into the next. Movement must flow from the punches and vice versa. If you aren’t fluid and relaxed you get hit and can’t hit back. Footwork is dynamic, well balanced, and almost constant. Bouncy is bad.

Slow Forms–While boxing does not have forms as such, shadow boxing at slow speeds is often encouraged, as is slow repetition on a bag to ingrain certain body movements–speed can be added, but NEVER at the cost of fluidity.

Finesse–Accuracy and counterpunching, coupled with movement, make a true “boxer.” Mike Tyson, in his early years was a fantastic “boxer.” He moved in and out easily, slipped most shots, and had uncanny accuracy with hands that happenned to be made out of sledgehammers. Ali was another very good “boxer,” when he wanted to be. Watch Roy Jones Jr. sometime. Sure, he’s got power, but he finesses his way into setting up that power.

Indirect- Boxers are ALWAYS taking angles–boxers are ALWAYS trying to draw the other guy out of stance and unbalance the opponent to take advantage with an unexpected attack from an angle that the opponent has a hard time countering in time, rather than battering through defenses to reach the body.

Circular-- Boxers circle to facilitate indirect attacks. Even if the boxer is moving in or out in a relatively straight line, they will be slipping in a circular manner as they step, to set up angles and avoid getting hit.

Acknowledging the limitations of the self–I’ve never met a boxer that really LOVED to just weather a storm of punches. Slipping, weaving, elusive footwork, parrying, etc. All are ways in which it is acknowledged that you, as a boxer, are vulnerable and human and have limits. “Take the pain,” isn’t very popular. It’s nice if you can, but boxers would rather work on how NOT to take the pain, while understanding that they WILL sometimes get hit. Practice is to improve your skill, not to make you into some uninjurable superhuman.

Winning without fighting–well, you got me here-- :slight_smile: It’s a duel, so you HAVE to fight. But that’s the nature of sportive combat–I don’t see people who do San Shou with a Tai Chi background just running away the whole time. So, if we look at it from “self-defense,” perspective, then boxing coaches almost always tell you to run, rather than use your skills.

Thoughts?

First of all before anyone begins the internal vs external argument I’d like to point out that no kung fu style is too internal or external. They have both concepts but the thing is that they tend lean towards another more.

Well as for boxing being internal..if you can box slowly then it might make it internal.j/k:p

Re: Boxing an Internal art–an intellectual exercise

Originally posted by Merryprankster
[B]

Thoughts? [/B]

Yeah, you think too much.

Now now, Water–don’t misinterpret lots of free time as thinking too much there, grumpybutt :slight_smile:

Did somebody steal your lunch? :smiley:

Having been hit by both boxers and “internal artists” I can tell you for sure boxing is not internal. Boxers punches push through and give you some small relief by knocking you away. Internal punches don’t push the body at all and are far more penetrating.

I really don’t know how to explain what the difference is other than (to me) it is a lot harder to take an internal strike. I would just recommend trying the two yourself. I wasn’t a believer personally until I felt it- just don’t do what I did and let the boxer hit you repeatedly in an attempt to generate the same type of power.:slight_smile:

As a side note is there really any art that urges it players to be tense?

Of course MPS. Just 'cause it ain’t called “internal” means nothing.

“Internal” is a bunch of letters arranged to make a “word”. That word however has been twisted, sinuously morphing into something else.

I think of it as music. Take the “Fifth Chord”. I know it as a fifth chord as there is no third. Hence it is neither major or minor. It is used in many styles if music, originally in Jazz.

Most people know a 5th chord [or a type of one] as a “Power Chord” present in metal.

Same thing different name.

Like you once said MPS “We’re all learning the same thing”. I agree.

See my signature :smiley:

Winning without fighting

[Read in Mr.Miyagi style hushed tone]

The day you realise that whether you “win” in the ring or not, you have “won” by merely turning up, by putting in 110% and bettering yourself, then you have understood the above phrase.

:smiley:

DS–here’s another name for it–the open fifth :slight_smile:

BeiKongHui–I think there are some people here who’ve done a bit of Kung Fu and boxing that would disagree with what you’ve said, although I do respect your opinion. A good punch in boxing has a great deal of “penetrating power,” which you can feel when you do it right on the heavy bag. It’s just DIFFERENT. Instead of pushing the bag around, in lands on it with this beautiful crushing thud and the bag stays put. Lovely.

Boxing will truly become internal when the boxers replace sparring and actual matches with shadow boxing and deep thoughts about what it would be like to be in a fight. Oh yeah, they have to make excuses for being out of shape like, “my gut is no reflection on my internal power, and weight training slows you down, yada yada yada…”

I think this internal-external thing has gone way too far. I think both rely on alot of the same thing. It seems to me that internal is just an expression of greater skill in an art then anything else. For instance BeiKongHui states that aninternal art seems to penetrate you without moving you, while MP has often said that that is a sign of good skill in boxing, when you can hit the bag on it doesnt move or rock.

Red–Hey, it’s just an intellectual exercise :slight_smile: I tend to agree with your statement, however.

I have a question. When I hit the bag, it’s not a dead stop but the swing is only about 1 inch or so. Can anyone tell me approximately how hard I’m hitting from this? I get a slight dent but no folding yet. (Well, I can fold it with an elbow but who can’t? LOL)

This is the best thread for this:

internal vs external is bs.

Very thoughtful and informative thread merry, but: you mention “boxing” as sportative combat - dont you think this imposes limits on how “boxing” is applied in a non-sportative context?

Of course thats up to the ‘stylist’ not the ‘style’ and is subject to the environment, situation, etc etc at the time (of the fight/duel).

I understand that your particular focus is in the sportative combat arena (no pun:D ) but do you believe that the limitations imposed by training with a sportative combat mindset/environment/training methods will have “bad” consequences when it comes to non-sportative combat?

I agree that the techniques should not change either way, and that boxing has a very ‘hardcore’ and ‘realistic’ training approach. Just wondering, 'specially since I said internal vs external is a joke.

:rolleyes:

Well, it must be nice to have all the answers about everything. maybe one day I can be as knowledgeable as you.

MP - sorry if it seemed I was trying to kill the thread, didnt mean it to sound that way. I just feel that internal vs external can sometimes be a matter of what your beliefs are. You have made a lot of comments that make a lot of sense about the martial arts from a very practical very ‘western’ point of view and I can respect that. My beliefs often time run somewhere in between, but on this many of the comments you have made on boxing make a lot of sense towards arguing that thin line between “internal” and “external”.
I think that people often attack sportive type arts for thier ‘non-realistic’ applications. what I have come to realize, with your help as well as apoweyn and a few others is that, they are sportive type things and that does not make them any less then any other combative art, just a different side of uh, er, something really multisided!

Yenhoi–I phrased it that way because when you learn to box at a boxing gym, you learn within the context of sport. Does that make sense? Now, hand boxing tools to a person more interested in self defense and you’ll probably get some adjustments made.

Do I think they will have bad consequences? Yes and no. I believe the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. That’s almost a completely different thread.

Water–it depends on the weight of the bag, I would think. But I’m no expert :slight_smile:

Paul–I don’t have all the answers. I made a case for boxing being an internal art that may or may not be true. If you have some other ideas share them–but don’t be such a little punk :slight_smile:

for what it’s worth…

I think that the best I can give you (merryP) is that boxing >might< be internal, but in only one direction. So if you got boxing down (pushing away) now all you got to do is learn the fine art of pulling.

:smiley:

-crumble

Originally posted by Merryprankster
[B].

Water–it depends on the weight of the bag, I would think. But I’m no expert :slight_smile:

[/B]

Ooops, I have a 90 pounder. Does that help? :slight_smile:

MP-

They can disagree if they want but I’ve done both also, although I have more experience in boxing than any internal arts. Boxers ALWAYS have the exact same argument as you stated as did I but the penetrating power of a boxers punch is nothing like the penetrating power of a good internal strike.

I’ve seen people get the knocked “the f**k” out by a good right cross but I’ve also seen a tiny little man give what appeared to be a light little surface punch to a guys stomach and seen the force cause a fist sized bubble of something (I don’t know what) to pop out of the guys back like he was made out of rubber or that the fist went through him. That “energy” (or what ever you want to call it) is real and it is NOT the same as a boxers punch it takes a lot more work to cultivate and you won’t get it training in western boxing methods.

Why does this subject seem to bother boxers so bad? I don’t know. To me it’s no different than anything else-because the goal is the same doesn’t mean the method is.

Try this: stack a couple of bricks up and break the bottom without breaking the top with any boxers strike-now I don’t do breaking so maybe it’s a gimmick-but I’ve seen people who call themselves “internal artists” do it.

BTW-Hitting a bag is not a good way to feel if the strike penetrates you need to actually be hit by both guys to FEEL the difference.

Check out my replies to the original thread. The listed definitions are simply not founded in reality.

“Blending with an attack Stopping an attack
Yielding Struggling
Fluid Defined
Slow forms Fast kata
Finesse Power
Indirect Direct
Circular Linear
Acknowledging the
limitations of the self Denying any vulnerabilities
Winning without
fighting is best Destroying your opponent”

Are all nonsense, and to define them along internal-external shows no knowledge of the methods of internal arts.

“Power comes from within Power comes from outside
Relaxed Tense
Accepting what is Fighting against it”

Are reasonable.

It’s worth noting, with respect to THIS thread, that many ‘thinkers’ in the internal arts suggest that western boxing has much more in common, in terms of strategy, with their arts than do many ‘external’ chinese or japanese styles.

Nothernmantis says:

“First of all before anyone begins the internal vs external argument I’d like to point out that no kung fu style is too internal or external.”

yenhoi says:

“internal vs external is bs.”

I couldn’t disagree more.

BeiKongHui says:

“As a side note is there really any art that urges it players to be tense?”

There are certainly arts whose training methods including high levels of intentional tension; and who advocate tension as part of both power generation and absorbtion. Also, among arts that claim to emphasize relaxation, there is a wide scope of what they consider ‘relaxed.’

BeiKongHui: Open 5th then. Theory is boring to me really, The more you know in the head, the less you play by the heart. Hendrix STYLE!!! :smiley: :stuck_out_tongue:

Rest of you. Internal/External is BS. It’s all just body mechanics and neurokinetics anyway. Call it what you like many styles can do “it”.

Don’t listen to 'em MPS, these CMA guys are just overprotective…