I am curious about the way people feel about this so i want to to ask, Do you feel the internal styles are superior to the external styles. If so why.
Please list
If you feel one is superior, or they are both equal.
Why you feel that way
what style you practice
Any style - in the right hands - can be superior.
I suppose I should post my feelings on this. I think they are equal, in fact I don’t even like the catagories as they seperate styles that don’t really need to be seperated. Both catagories use similar training techniques, I have heard stories of Chen TaiJi stylists doing pushups and running as a part of their training and most external styles do some form of qigong and train structure to minimize the use of muscle while they fight.
If both are trained as a martial art they both spar and hit bags. All styles use different structure and methods of generating power so it would be wrong to say external styles power generating methods lack the same quality as internal methods. Yet if trained as a martial art both methods include both soft and hard training.
I practice Shaolin Longfist and have recently started learning Choy lay Fut.
Delecate sound- I agree, as long as it is a sound style (ex. of unsound would be chung mo quan)
I guess i should have said “if you feel one type can give a practitioner the advantage over the other.”
SD - Perhaps you should reserve judgement on the nature or lack thereof of internal styles until you have studied one. As far as the original question goes, I think to get any reasonable responses you’ll have to define what you mean by ‘better.’
Yes, but I bet there are some moves in CMQ that could be made effective in the right hands… 
I hate any style Vs. style debate*. Any style can be made effective. Even Karate 
[Peter Consterdine]
As for whether internal or external is better - it depends on your goal. What do you want to achieve. If you wantto kick someone’s ass, I wouldn’t recommend Tai Chi. But for relaxation and health…
Yes, a style can be anything you wish. I imagine that Mhuy Thai could be good for health [fitness] and Tai Chi can VERY easily be used for combat. However, in most places internal is used for its more traditional purposes.
As always, there are exceptions.
Good thread. 
DelicateSound - Internal’s ‘more traditional purposes’ ARE martial usage.
I don’t want to argue about it. What I was hopeing to do is get other peoples opinons on this. I haven’t studied both and was curious as to how people who studied internal arts felt about it. My opinon doesnt matter in this, I just find more people will post if you start off your topic by yourself. I want to learn about other peoples experience and discuss it with them, not try to force my opinon on them. I hope this thread can stay in a non confrontational manner.
By better I mean more combat effecient.
But don’t most traditional external styles have internal type stuff at higher levals anyway? Kind of a different path to the same goal thing?
Which tastes better, a dill pickel or caramel?
There’s got to be at least as many variables affecting combat efficiency as taste. “Which is better?” just isn’t a viable question. If all you want is info about internal arts, ask for that. The best discussions I’ve seen on the topic are simply where people discuss their training methods. Unfortunately, for some reason not alot of people will do that. 
Brad - “internal type stuff” is not the same as being of the neijia. Just like a club sandwich isn’t a salad just because it has lettuce.
Styles are mixtures, evolutions. the more you learn the better. When i was young Shaolin was required before you were taught internal styles. How can you know soft without hard? Even Hsing-i and pa kua are taught together. straight and circle.
DelicateSound - Internal’s ‘more traditional purposes’ ARE martial usage
I understand what you are saying - internal force, hard qigong etc. but I feel that in modern times they are less relevant to combat that a basic external system.
Not worse - just different.
Some styles just place an emphasis on certain thinkgs. Aikido on locks and nonresistance, Judo on throws. Both contain a portion of throws and locks and nonresistance. Different weighting.
Greendragon -
“When i was young Shaolin was required before you were taught internal styles.”
Required by who?
“How can you know soft without hard?”
By studying only soft techniques, for example.
“Even Hsing-i and pa kua are taught together.”
Sometimes. And often they’re not.
DelicateSound -
“I understand what you are saying - internal force, hard qigong etc.”
I’m not sure if you do. Baguazhang, taijiquan, and xingyiquan (the orthodox internal styles) are complete martial systems with single movement technique practice, sparring drills, energy drills, and everything else.
“but I feel that in modern times they are less relevant to combat that a basic external system.”
What has changed?
Time has changed. Before commercialisation it used to be the way that you were accepted into a school and allowed to live there to further your studies.
I know about baguazhang, taijiquan, and xingyiquan being complete systems.
Xingxi in particular I would LOVE to learn.
However IMHO in today’s rushed society in terms of Combat efficiency ONLY, over a practical short-term timescale, a more direct and external art is better for self-defence.
I would LOVE to learn XingXi, but I have not the time to cultivate internal skills. I have a Uni course and a part-time job. And a need to defend myself NOW. One day I’d love to… 
“Even Hsing-i and pa kua are taught together. straight and circle.”
Greendragon. xingyi is NOT straight.just because the circles are hard to see does not mean they are not their and for a more outward expression of circularity in training,whatabout “pangen”?however, if that is not what you meant then I apologise.
“Before commercialisation it used to be the way that you were accepted into a school and allowed to live there to further your studies.”
I don’t believe that is historically accurate, at least pertaining to internal schools in China. But other than that aside, what you said certainly makes sense.
Cool. A lot of internal guys don’t see it that way.
Braden, i was only referecing to my specific school requiring shaolin before hsing-i and pa-kua. I still think it is recommended so beginners are not totally lost about power through relaxed unity, etc. also a lot of stance and basic training overlaps. I am not saying it should be done or not. the other side of the coin is that some things must be unlearned. But that teaches change. I have never heard of a Hsing-i master who did not also study PaKua or vice-versa since the dual in the 1800s that ended in a draw. The 2 are so complimentary i will be surprised if you tell me your school only teaches one. Maybe it is some new developement that has passed me by. Wu Xing, a straight line becomes a circle, a line leaving a circle is straight, the two are like ying and yang. Hsing is is linear. Just look at Lin Wan Wu Hsing, straight down the line and back.
“I have never heard of a Hsing-i master who did not also study PaKua or vice-versa”
Really? Off the top of my head, let me consider famous north american bagua teachers who have not studied xingyi. We have most of Liu Yun Qiao’s group (Adam Hsu, James Guo, Tony Yang, Glen Gurman, Su Yu Chang, Kurt Wong, Jason Tsuo, etc), Park Bok Nam, Xie Peiqi and He Jinbao, Yang Guotai, Victor Fu, Liang Qiang Ya… Outside of North America, we have Erle Montaigue, Ma Chuanxu, Liu Jingru… Historically we have such big names as Yin Fu, Gong Baotian, Liang Zhenpu… I don’t have my books with me, so this is just off the top of my head.
Maybe I’m mistaken about one or two of these names, but really I’m surprised you believe this.
greendragon.i disagree with you again, xingyi is not linear.just how much xingyi have you done in your thirty years of internal experience? think of a spring.does energy transfer through that in a straight line? or does it spiral through it ?i hate to use it but does qi travel in a straight line?no.it spirals.even at a far simplier level to understand.Does beng quan travel through the opponent in a straight line(as is the way it looks)?or is there more to it?things that are not so obvious?and im not talking about qi or anything like that.