Have you guys ever heard of this? Royal Dragon says you start with longfist which is pure external then you should go to animal styles which are a mix, then you graduate to internal styles which are like college courses. He says it ususally goes like this but I have never heard of it before and I can think of alot of things wrong with it.
Longfist isn’t always just external and can get you to alot higher level than most people think, look at Ku Yu Cheung.
Animal styles after longfist? why it is a seperate system with it’s own set of basics so no prior training is really needed, but I afgree that it is a mix of internal and external.
Internal College level? Internal styles have nothing to do with external, the reason why alot of teachers in the past required that ou had previous experince was so they wouldn’t have to take you though that beginner movement stage, since internal arts take so much time to learn this saves time by skipping a step. But you guys know from my pevious posts I don’t beleive them more advanced.
Anyway I’d like to know if you guys ever heard of this progression happening alot cause I sure haven’t.
At my longfist kungfu school we do pure external training. Animal styles are taught during intermediate level. I don’t know if we do internal or not afterwards, i just joined the school
Perhaps the obvious question: what if you don’t start with Chang Chuan or any other Northern system? Let’s say you start with CLF, Bak Mei, or Wing Chun…where would that fit into the supposed formula?
There are other problems with it that I won’t go into here. However, in fairness, the point Royal was making does have a certain logic to it. Starting with a relatively simple, very athletic system ideal for longer ranges might give someone a foundation of both basic motor coordination and cardiovascular fitness. Finding some of the responses of that system a bit ham-handed or inadequate against a more subtle fighter might lead one to change to a style with more efficient and flexible responses. Eventually, a desire to maximize efficiency of power with superior biomechanics might lead one to begin a study of the internal arts.
While I don’t think the whole of CMA can be put into a fairly simple one-size-fits-all formula, I doubt seriously if that’s what Royal is trying to imply. The idea of moving from a system of gross motor movement and simple responses to more and more efficient, subtle and fluid methods seems pretty sound, especially for those looking at a lifelong commitment to the martial arts.
I whent from Isshin-Ryu, to Hung Gar/Wing Chun (with one teacher) and then to S. Mantis with another. I am not studying the internal, Hsing-I/Ba Gua, Taiji.
I can say I have benefited from all of my training, because I don’t need to be taught from scratch, just sort of readjusted, new principles to incorporate.
The way I look at it is a spectrum
Isshing-Ryu---------- HG/WC ------ S.Mantis ------ me now ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ my master.
I am trying to close the gap, but going further with the principles and theory. He is not so much as teaching me as transforming me into a better MA.
I think it would be much harder if I just took to the internal from scracth, without any principles to work with. I see other students who have gone this route, and after soem time they don’t really have a grasp.
I guess each person is unique. I think learning a few external styles first is good. ALso, its hard to see how much better a way is when all you have is one way – nothing to compare it with.
I do, and I find the internal to be the truth, the clear way that everyone should be aiming towards. One can not be a brwaler at 65, just an a$$ kicker.
I really think you should just start with what you want to do, and do it.
I’m not sure how something can be ‘partially internal.’ I’ve been taught a few very basic ‘physical ideas’ which must be present in every movement of the internal arts, but are not present at all in any of the external arts I have seen. These ‘physical ideas’ cannot be ‘partially done’ - unless you count ‘done poorly.’ But I’m awfully sure no art aspires to do something poorly.
you start with mostly boxing and muythia strikes to learn to land a hit and get some decent conditioning from pad work … move on to movements which are more or less concepts that require you to think . .. you are then introduced to the internal in small doses . .. and finally you concentrate mostly on the internal work.
I am not argueing that moving from a simple to more complicated is a bad move but have you heard of this progression between what I think are completely unrelated styles. I think a progression similar to this happens within a style but the way he put it is sounded like he means unrelated systems like learning Bak Sil Lum to 5 animals to bagua/hsing yi/Taichi. I don’t beleive that’s the way things were intended. A similatr progression should happen within 1 complete style.
I don’t really see downfalls to it but it is part of a larger conversation. He was using that “progression” to prove that internal styles are “more powerful” in some way. So he said that’s how most schools progress you. When I told him I’ve never heard of that he said I should look cause he sees it but he didn’t give me examples(cause I don’t think he has any) so I posted here to see if anybody else has heard about it. They do somthing kind of like this in his school and I think him reading about most internal styles having known another style first makes him beleive that this is the way most people do it. H e is just trying to prove to me that internal is more advanced than external, I simply don’t feel this is true and to me complex “superior” mechanics doesn’t mean better than simple easy to learn mechanics. I think somtimes he tries to intellectualize and complicate things too much but he’s alright.
We also follow a similar progression within our style BUT we don’t learn a style then learn another to get “internal”. What he described to me sounds like learn a few longfist forms, then a couple hung gar forms, then learning TaiChi. Each of those is complete by itself, they can stand on their own and don’t need each other cause they can progress from external to internal within it’s curriculum and training. A complete system is a complete system. There is more than one way to get the job done even if your job is “internal”.
Internal & external, when applied to whole systems, are pretty meaningless labels. Every style has some aspect of both in it. One cannot be called superior to the other when it comes to fighting.
I guess I don’t know cause my system has both. We have between the sets and suplement exercises, external and both soft and hard qigong. So I reap the benifits of all. It still alludes me to see how “internal” arts develop anything better than any other art. I see for instance Shaolin and Taichi as equal. Maybe that’s just me, I must be a special person to be able to make the inferior external methods equal to the superior methods of the internal masters:rolleyes:
Why would anybody want to go from a simple system to a more complicated one???
The simple approach is always the best approach. Keep it KISS.
From what I have seen from a pure physical perspective is that the internal arts, though having a very long learning curve, have some of the most simple “outward” apperance based moves than some of the external CMA I have seen.
I do not advocate styles per say anymore, I have my own personal opinons of course, but do what you do, but be honest with yourself, as to what it is.
I used to attend a school where you you started learning one form from chung chuan, then one form from wingchun, then a choi li fut form, then northern mantis. Other forms followed, finishing with some stuff from hsing-i, bagua and tai-chi chuan. Only when you’d proved you could learn all these were you taught the deadly, secret system, which I think was called Pa Ze(?).
I left well before this point.
HHHMMMMMMMMM. I found this conversation interesting, because I plan on learning Hsing-Yi, and I’ve never studied any other CMA before this. I did TKD for two years about five or six years ago. What are some of your opinions on learning an internal style first? I agree with SD about external not being inferior to internal and that he views them as equal. But what do you think about starting an internal first? From what I understand Hsing-Yi is less complicated and more aggressive than it’s internal cousins. So wouldn’t this be a good style to start of and build a “foundation”?
