[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083382]Well, when that is proven in a laboratory or in comparative analysis, then I’ll give you that.
Till then, when it comes to building the strength of the muscle, which is involved in EVERY movement we make, I will stick to what has been proven over and over and over, even in China, to be the best way to build muscular strength, endurance and explosive power and that is progressive resistence training.[/QUOTE]
The methodology I am discussing is not taught openly even in China. Also, it does not take away anything from the effectiveness of the methodology that you describe, however it is still an effective alternative that will last you into year later years.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083382]Like I said a few times before, if I find myself in a situation that requires the use of strong muscles to save my life, I would prefer to have with my a strong man, rather than someone that has spent the last 30 years doing IMA and can’t even deadlfit his bodyweight.[/QUOTE]
I would agree with you as far as most people claiming internal MA knowledge are concerned.
As I said, the methodology is rare. I have only come across one person who taught this. There is another whom I know of who probably knows it, but I am not sure, but he certainly does not teach it, openly at least. So, that is ONLY two people I know. And I do my best to research as much as I can about the TCMAs.
So, we are talking about a rare methodology which should be investigated by those who want to research the TCMAs to a deeper level.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1083399]well, maybe not. helo’s don’t weigh much and you did say he was a big ol Hawaiian guy so I’m gonna assume he probably also outweighs the chopper. lol[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1083403]The methodology I am discussing is not taught openly even in China. Also, it does not take away anything from the effectiveness of the methodology that you describe, however it is still an effective alternative that will last you into year later years.
I would agree with you as far as most people claiming internal MA knowledge are concerned.
As I said, the methodology is rare. I have only come across one person who taught this. There is another whom I know of who probably knows it, but I am not sure, but he certainly does not teach it, openly at least. So, that is ONLY two people I know. And I do my best to research as much as I can about the TCMAs.
So, we are talking about a rare methodology which should be investigated by those who want to research the TCMAs to a deeper level.:)[/QUOTE]
ALL IMA methodologies were investigate in China, don’t think for a minute that they weren’t.
It’s actually well documented, if you can get you hands on the info.
The chinese were driven to give their athletes the best possible chances to win in athletic competitions and outside of the use of some herbs like cordyceps ( a mushroom) and some other stuff, they found nothing of value for their athletic program.
In regards to the subject at hand - strength development- the studies and science is clear and has been for sometime.
If you choose not to believe me that is fine, I respect that, I am just stating what is.
Trust me ( or don’t) the fact is that IF any IMA methdology could have given the chinese results in athletic competitions, they would have been adopted and guard with even MORE secrecy than anything in the TCMA.
The fact that some Chinese athletes got caught for performance enhancers and the discovery of the potential effects of things like cordyceps, makes a clear statement.
Again, focusing on the facts- progressive resistence strength training has been shown over and over to be the best possible way t increase stength.
Do the study yourself:
Do one year of ST and see what you can lift and compare it to one year of IMA work.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]ALL IMA methodologies were investigate in China, don’t think for a minute that they weren’t.
It’s actually well documented, if you can get you hands on the info.
The chinese were driven to give their athletes the best possible chances to win in athletic competitions and outside of the use of some herbs like cordyceps ( a mushroom) and some other stuff, they found nothing of value for their athletic program.
In regards to the subject at hand - strength development- the studies and science is clear and has been for sometime.
If you choose not to believe me that is fine, I respect that, I am just stating what is.
Trust me ( or don’t) the fact is that IF any IMA methdology could have given the chinese results in athletic competitions, they would have been adopted and guard with even MORE secrecy than anything in the TCMA.
The fact that some Chinese athletes got caught for performance enhancers and the discovery of the potential effects of things like cordyceps, makes a clear statement.[/QUOTE]
i pointed this out to this muppet a year ago, if the methods worked that well how come the chinese athletes prefer modern ST work…of coursehe chinese dont know the secret stuff, only a certain few people know…and he happens to be one :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083508]Again, focusing on the facts- progressive resistence strength training has been shown over and over to be the best possible way t increase stength.
Do the study yourself:
Do one year of ST and see what you can lift and compare it to one year of IMA work.[/QUOTE]
studies dont matter, scienctific work doesnt matter because only a few know the real way to build strength and they dont share with anyone…not even the chinese people (but they will share with HW108)
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]ALL IMA methodologies were investigate in China, don’t think for a minute that they weren’t.
It’s actually well documented, if you can get you hands on the info.
The chinese were driven to give their athletes the best possible chances to win in athletic competitions and outside of the use of some herbs like cordyceps ( a mushroom) and some other stuff, they found nothing of value for their athletic program.[/QUOTE]
The “nothing of value” findings may have more to do with the Chinese government’s general attitude towards traditional kung fu training (as opposed to modern Wu Shu), than actual serious investigations. I am just wondering…
Also, competitive athletic programs want quick results, while many Internal methodologies will not be “time efficient” in that regard.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]In regards to the subject at hand - strength development- the studies and science is clear and has been for sometime.
If you choose not to believe me that is fine, I respect that, I am just stating what is.[/QUOTE]
Again, I am not disputing the effectiveness of your ST methodology. I am simply pointing out that there are other less known ways, that are also valid. I am saying that because I have seen it with my own eyes, so to speak.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]Trust me ( or don’t) the fact is that IF any IMA methdology could have given the chinese results in athletic competitions, they would have been adopted and guard with even MORE secrecy than anything in the TCMA.[/QUOTE]
I agree and that would certainly be the case if the Internals could give them short term results required for competitive sports.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]The fact that some Chinese athletes got caught for performance enhancers and the discovery of the potential effects of things like cordyceps, makes a clear statement.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1083519]The “nothing of value” findings may have more to do with the Chinese government’s general attitude towards traditional kung fu training (as opposed to modern Wu Shu), than actual serious investigations. I am just wondering…
Also, competitive athletic programs want quick results, while many Internal methodologies will not be “time efficient” in that regard.
Again, I am not disputing the effectiveness of your ST methodology. I am simply pointing out that there are other less known ways, that are also valid. I am saying that because I have seen it with my own eyes, so to speak.
I agree and that would certainly be the case if the Internals could give them short term results required for competitive sports.
The fact is that not all Chinese know kung fu.;):)[/QUOTE]
It is an erroneous belief to think that sport performance is focused ONLY on the short term gains or the quick turnaround, that is incorrect, but even if it was correct, the fact that it takes longer for method “I” to get results than method “T” would make method "I"inferior anyways.
The chinese government cares very little about wushu or TCMA or anything else, they care about results and like any other athletic program, if they found that standing on one leg and quacking like a duck would lead to cutting 1 second of the 100 meter sprint then the sprinters would be doing just that !
I do agree though that there are other methods of building strength that are also effective.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083523]It is an erroneous belief to think that sport performance is focused ONLY on the short term gains or the quick turnaround, that is incorrect,[/QUOTE]
I did not mean ONLY, but the competetiveness of the sports arena, combined with the relatively short athletic careers of exponents, will demand a time efficient ST methodology, in favor of something that can take much longer.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507] but even if it was correct, the fact that it takes longer for method “I” to get results than method “T” would make method "I"inferior anyways.[/QUOTE]
Inferior as far as sport competetiveness is concerned, of course. However, for many of us Kung fu training is not for sports competition purposes, meaning that the longer term benefits of Internal training become more relevant, specially when one considers their longer lasting effects and benefits into old age.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]The chinese government cares very little about wushu or TCMA or anything else, they care about results and like any other athletic program, if they found that standing on one leg and quacking like a duck would lead to cutting 1 second of the 100 meter sprint then the sprinters would be doing just that !
:D[/QUOTE]
I tend to agree with your statement. In my previous post, I was just wondering wether there was a little bit of left over aversion to TCMA training within Chinese government circles.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1083507]I do agree though that there are other methods of building strength that are also effective.[/QUOTE]
And all I am saying is that some of those methods are embedded within traditional kung fu Internal training methodologies that are not so well known.
[QUOTE=Frost;1083512]i pointed this out to this muppet a year ago, if the methods worked that well how come the chinese athletes prefer modern ST work…of coursehe chinese dont know the secret stuff, only a certain few people know…[/QUOTE]
Well, genuine kung fu training has been like that for centuries. I promise you that if and when you start training authentic kung fu, in an authentic kwoon, it will all become clearer to you.
The secret in that regard is to find a real kwoon and dedicate time and effort, which would mean that in your case, you would need an attention span that is superior to that of a rabbit.
[QUOTE=Frost;1083513]studies dont matter, scienctific work doesnt matter because only a few know the real way to build strength and they dont share with anyone…not even the chinese people (but they will share with HW108) [/QUOTE]
You know, for someone who has never actually practiced authentic TCMA, you have clocked up a lot of posts, in this KUNG FU FORUM…
I am guessing that the thirst of the forum’s knucklehead MMA community for Olympic Weight lifting knowledge has been keeping you busy…
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1083528]Well, genuine kung fu training has been like that for centuries. I promise you that if and when you start training authentic kung fu, in an authentic kwoon, it will all become clearer to you.
The secret in that regard is to find a real kwoon and dedicate time and effort, which would mean that in your case, you would need an attention span that is superior to that of a rabbit.;)[/QUOTE]
Why would someone spend a significant amount of time seeking out a traditional secret strength training method when there is a proven quick and effective method of building strength available openly for free? The free and open method can even give lasting results that last well into old age if you put in the time and effort. What is the advantage of the “secret” TCMA training? I don’t think you’re effectively communicating the advantage of this “secret” training. Or are you simply saying it is an alternative rather than superior method?
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1083529]You know, for someone who has never actually practiced authentic TCMA, you have clocked up a lot of posts, in this KUNG FU FORUM…
I am guessing that the thirst of the forum’s knucklehead MMA community for Olympic Weight lifting knowledge has been keeping you busy…:D[/QUOTE]
Yep keep telling yourself that basement boy…does it ever occur to you that not everyone on the forum who disagrees with you has just trained bad TCMA, has it ever occurred to you that your very very limited exposure to any TCMA might really not be that much to anyone on here
Of course not because you have the real goods right…..funny how you have it but no one else, not david ross, ronin or anyone else has it just you (of course you never actually completed your studies or even actually studied what you talk about in depth…but you know you know it exists )
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1083528]Well, genuine kung fu training has been like that for centuries. I promise you that if and when you start training authentic kung fu, in an authentic kwoon, it will all become clearer to you.
The secret in that regard is to find a real kwoon and dedicate time and effort, which would mean that in your case, you would need an attention span that is superior to that of a rabbit.;)[/QUOTE]
What like the couple of years you trained before being banished off to your basement to train on your own you mean :eek:
[QUOTE=B-Rad;1083533]Why would someone spend a significant amount of time seeking out a traditional secret strength training method when there is a proven quick and effective method of building strength available openly for free? The free and open method can even give lasting results that last well into old age if you put in the time and effort. What is the advantage of the “secret” TCMA training? I don’t think you’re effectively communicating the advantage of this “secret” training. Or are you simply saying it is an alternative rather than superior method?[/QUOTE]
The other problem with his logic (if you can call it that) is that he calls it different, superior etc but has no knowledge of the methods he is comparing it to, but then bashes those that do when they talk about it saying they don’t know what they are talking about…oh the irony
[QUOTE=B-Rad;1083533]Why would someone spend a significant amount of time seeking out a traditional secret strength training method when there is a proven quick and effective method of building strength available openly for free? [/QUOTE]
Let us just say that each method will have its own advantages. Besides, if one is training authentic kung fu, wouldn’t using authentic TCMA methodologies, or genuine variations of, be a logical path to take?
[QUOTE=B-Rad;1083533]The free and open method can even give lasting results that last well into old age if you put in the time and effort. What is the advantage of the “secret” TCMA training?[/QUOTE]
It is my belief that the Internal TCMA methodology will give you much longer lasting results than the modern Strength training.
[QUOTE=B-Rad;1083533]I don’t think you’re effectively communicating the advantage of this “secret” training. Or are you simply saying it is an alternative rather than superior method?[/QUOTE]
I am saying that it is simply an alternative that most people will not know about. Wether one system is better than the other will depend on what one is trying to get out of it, meaning that each one is superior to the other, but in different ways.
[QUOTE=Frost;1083538]What like the couple of years you trained before being banished off to your basement to train on your own you mean :eek:[/QUOTE]
It seems that my “couple of years of (kung fu) training”, has given me a knowledge base that the “kung fu” tagged MMA-ists such as yourself can only dream of…
