As someone who has practiced external and internal martial arts I think internal is the superior path. Why?
Because internal arts are not dependent on strength(or speed really). They are a pure expression of skill. As you age (and everyone does, including you 20-somethings!) you naturally lose strength and you would be at a disadvantage compared to the young and strong.
That being said…what do you do when you encounters someone that is more skilled than you are? Curl up in a ball and die? Get the crap beat out of you?
No, that’s why it’s still important to build up strength and stamina as a fail safe. If you want to be a well-rounded fighter than you need to be in decent shape if you meet an opponent that has more skill. Ideally every fight would be ended with one punch, one kill. Anyone that’s put on gloves and gone a few rounds knows this is nothing more than an ideal.
But on the external side…why not try to be more efficient? Why build big muscles that slow you down and gas you out? Why not try to be as efficient in your movement so that you don’t have to? Relying on skill first, strength and speed second.
That’s where I’m at in my training. Where are you?
[QUOTE=Eric Olson;1085871] Relying on skill first, strength and speed second. [/QUOTE]
Let’s give a definition to “skill”. IMO, skill is:
(Shi Jian) - timing,
(Ji Hui) - opportunity,
(Jiao Du) - angle,
(Li De Shi Yong) - force,
(Ping Heng) - balance.
There is only so far that you can do with your skill, but strength will have no limitation. You will lose your speed, endurance, flexibility, balance when you get old. But you will never lose your strength. If you can bench press 250 lb when you are 30, you may still be able to do that when you are 80 if you keep doing that all your life. Strength is the only think that you can depend on when you get old.
You will need “finish moves” to end a fight. Those “finish moves” are:
punch to the head,
kick to the nuts,
elbow lock on the arm,
head smash with your throw.
They all require “strength”. No matter how good you are in your “internal” stuff such as yield, Sung, sticky, follow, sink, … you just can’t “yield” your opponent to death.
That’s usually the belief of those who are lacking in speed and strength…not that this belief is false, but it is only part of the answer. There is a time and place for everything, and I certainly would not sacrifice training for speed and strength, only to focus on ‘Internal’ skills.
In my opinion, you must maximize your strengths, train for diversity of skills and be adaptable to the situation at hand. The mind, your mind is your most powerful foe and your greatest ally. Why limit yourself?
That being said, it is not practical to believe you will be good in all areas of martial arts, some of us have natural affinities to one skill set or another, a favorite technique, a weapon that feels like an extension of yourself.
I guess your path to martial truth is your own, I believe in the balance of things, the middle road, I’d rather be a Jack of all trades and a Master of none.
You need skill to get strong, you certainly need skill to be fast, everything requires technique.
At different points in your MA “career”, you will focus/priortize something over the others, but ALL are important facets of a complete MA.
Considering the small part MA ACTUALLY play in our day-to-day lives, perhaps far more crucial is WHAT is a MORE benefit to us on a daily basis?
The ability to kick ass?
The ability to run fast and catch a bus?
The ability to carry something heavy?
I guess my point is that a lot of what we see as “martial arts” is jumping around, yelling and sweating a lot. Ok, good for you. It’s probably a good cardio workout.
But anyone that’s “sparred”, and I’ll use that term liberally, knows that you gas out fast if you’re not efficient…ooooorrrr…you can train to the point where you’re in such good shape that those inefficiencies don’t phase you much.
I think this is the real split between internal/external. Do we strengthen what we already have to the point we’re stronger/faster/fitter than the opponent or do we fundamentally change the way we move/fight for maximum efficiency?
There’s probably a happy medium in there somewhere. But how can you reconcile those two modes of training? Personally, I think it is to train in efficient techniques/skills but also be generally fit and strong.
So right now I’m working on my Taiji but also doing things like running and strength training with body weight.
EO
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1085880]Let’s give a definition to “skill”. IMO, skill is:
(Shi Jian) - timing,
(Ji Hui) - opportunity,
(Jiao Du) - angle,
(Li De Shi Yong) - force,
(Ping Heng) - balance.
[/quote]
Cool. Thanks for that.
There is only so far that you can do with your skill, but strength will have no limitation. You will lose your speed, endurance, flexibility, balance when you get old. But you will never lose your strength. If you can bench press 250 lb when you are 30, you may still be able to do that when you are 80 if you keep doing that all your life. Strength is the only think that you can depend on when you get old.
You are joking right?
You will need “finish moves” to end a fight. Those “finish moves” are:
punch to the head,
kick to the nuts,
elbow lock on the arm,
head smash with your throw.
They all require “strength”. No matter how good you are in your “internal” stuff such as yield, Sung, sticky, follow, sink, … you just can’t “yield” your opponent to death.
Hmmm…I don’t think you need to be strong to do any of those. Maybe punch to the head.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1085873]I don’t believe in internal.
So, that’s my comment. :)[/QUOTE]
Odd, isn’t it? Internal doesn’t believe in you, either.. that aside, though.. ‘internal training’, when based on traditional fighting skills rather than woo-woo chi-balls, is a formidable weapon in a fighter’s arsenal.. i suffer no illusions as to the availability of high quality internal training, or Taiji training that includes non-compliant interactive skill training, but.. having been fortunate to train with such a group, i am convinced of the practicality of Taiji principles and many of the techniques (not all)..
The great misfortune of Taiji is that it has been co-opted as the ‘New Age’ connection to something ‘Chinese’, or something ‘Taoist’, losing its historical Martial fundamentals..
… you just can’t “yield” your opponent to death.
No, but.. you can yield until the oponent has to ‘choose what to do’, adjust forward or retreat, this is the ‘opportunity’..
It’s always interesting to note how dismissive people can be about things that ‘they’ can’t make work in their paradigm.. i find external training AND internal training to BOTH be beneficial for a well-rounded Martial Artist.. but, unfortunately, not too may ‘fighters’ aren’t interested in anything but decisive and destructive conclusions, which.. should be a well-trained option in the arsenal, but.. so should carefully neutralizing an opponent, and.. developing the skill to discern when those options are appropriate..
[QUOTE=Eric Olson;1085895]You are joking right? [/QUOTE]
An old boxer may lose his speed and won’t be able to fight for 15 rounds, but his punch may still knock his opponent down. That’s “Gong Li - power behind the punch (strength)”.
[QUOTE=TaiChiBob;1085897]you can yield until the oponent has to ‘choose what to do’, adjust forward or retreat, this is the ‘opportunity’..[/QUOTE]
If you are
stronger than your opponent, you can use your own force to end the fight.
not stronger than your opponent, you have to borrow your opponent’s force.
Will it be nice if you are as rich as Bill Gates and never have to borrow money from the bank?
A XingYi guy will say, “I’ll run you down no matter you like it or not”.
A Taiji guy will say, “It you don’t move, I won’t move.”
[QUOTE=TaiChiBob;1085897]
The great misfortune of Taiji is that it has been co-opted as the ‘New Age’ connection to something ‘Chinese’, or something ‘Taoist’, losing its historical Martial fundamentals..
[QUOTE=bawang;1085901]tai chi isnt internal.[/QUOTE]
Born in Ixelles, Belgium, Audrey Hepburn spent her childhood chiefly in the Netherlands, including German-occupied Arnhem, Netherlands, during the Second World War. She studied ballet in Arnhem and then moved to London in 1948, where she continued to train in ballet and worked as a photographer’s model.
[QUOTE=bawang;1085901]tai chi isnt internal.[/QUOTE]
Taiji is not bound by your opinions.. the internal/external debate is unfortunate, two paths to the same place, many get lost on both paths.. more on the ‘Taiji’ path, though..
You don’t have to be strong to be “good” but you have to be strong to be the “best”. When you go to a tournament and you believe that you may be the strongest person there, you will have good chance to win that day.
[QUOTE=Eric Olson;1085871]As someone who has practiced external and internal martial arts I think internal is the superior path. Why?
Because internal arts are not dependent on strength(or speed really). They are a pure expression of skill. As you age (and everyone does, including you 20-somethings!) you naturally lose strength and you would be at a disadvantage compared to the young and strong.
That being said…what do you do when you encounters someone that is more skilled than you are? Curl up in a ball and die? Get the crap beat out of you?
No, that’s why it’s still important to build up strength and stamina as a fail safe. If you want to be a well-rounded fighter than you need to be in decent shape if you meet an opponent that has more skill. Ideally every fight would be ended with one punch, one kill. Anyone that’s put on gloves and gone a few rounds knows this is nothing more than an ideal.
But on the external side…why not try to be more efficient? Why build big muscles that slow you down and gas you out? Why not try to be as efficient in your movement so that you don’t have to? Relying on skill first, strength and speed second.
That’s where I’m at in my training. Where are you?
EO[/QUOTE]
You made absolutely no debate on skill vs strength and speed. Your argument is about internal versus external. Are you saying that an “external” practitioner doesn’t train accuracy or precision?
