Hey there
If we take into account its body mechanics,sinking rising twisting and relaxation until impact,rather then how it is often performed,a quick lunge from the delts,lats and pecs,could we consider Boxing internal /external.Why and why not?
Let’s forget about the internal/external argument for right now. Mainly because no one can agree on what constitutes internal or external.
In that framework, boxing is on or above par with most arts I have seen.
“rather then how it is often performed”
So you’re asking it a jab can be done internally?
Yes.
How it is normally performed is external…particularly by boxers - as boxing is normally an external art.
But what is the point of this discussion…you can do karate internally, but karate is normally an external art. This is acedemics and serves no one.
WD I would have to agree with you there,My question will probally lead to another debate on definitions so I will repharse.
Could boxing jab/cross be considered a workable power base for TCC/Neijia practioners?
Ka,
I think part of the problem with questions of this nature is the questioner not liking or wanting to hear the responses he’s asked for. The typical pattern is 1) someone asks this kind of question. 2) Someone knowledgeable answers the question with specific points. 3) Original questioner gets mad and responds back with “nuh-uh”, or “is too”, or “does not”, etc., or the equally useless “all arts are internal”, or “there is no difference between internal and external arts”.
Now, while one may hold to either opinion regarding the internal vs. external debates, the original question assumes, at least for the sake of argument, that there IS a difference to begin with. Therefore, responses which include something to the effect that “there is no difference” or “all arts are internal at the advanced levels”, while possibly true or not, are irrelevant to the question as it was asked.
Please understand that I’m not assuming that YOU would necessarily respond according to this formula, just that that is the general pattern, and may explain why these kinds of questions, while certainly on-topic, usually don’t yield much in the way of useful discussion.
I, or someone perhaps more knowledgeable, might give you several specific points to consider regarding the boxer’s jab, but would we be truly discussing it objectively or would we be simply starting yet another argument? If your question is motivated by the former, I would be happy to take a crack at the question. BTW, my answer would have to be “technically, no”.
Hey Chris I understand your reply,however I would not ask the question if I wasn’t interested in your opinions.Arguments/differences of opinion/critical discussion/reasoning is what I am after,it is what the majority of thought is built on.As opposed to intutive thought of sages which is the basis of many Eastern Phill.None of this is helped with Yes/No answers.
Miscjnix I feel I have already offended you,but to me forums are acedemic,how can they not be?
I should however give you a background to where/why the question has poped into my head.
Recently having a play with a CMC TCQ student I found that he had trouble sticking/avioding jabs,nothing to do with his lack of ability more to do( IMHO) with his inexperience with the speed of jabs.He decided that I was using a very “internal” power generation,I explained that it was simply a boxers jab as how I had been taught.Following on we felt that this sort of training would have no negative effects on his TCQ but that it would be of some benefit.
And so I ask do you gents feel this training/power generation is a hinderence or help to your own power generation?
Note:trying to stay away from Internal/external debate
Considering the fact that one of the major proponents of CMC Taijiquan in the US is William C.C. Chen and that he was a boxer in his youth…and that he teaches his students and kids with boxing concepts thrown in…
I don’t think you can attribute the Taijiquan players reaction to anything but inexperience.
Ka,
Good to hear. In that case, let’s look at it a bit. Like I said last, TECHNICALLY speaking, I’d have to say no…it’s not an internal strike as such things are orthodoxically defined. Perhaps a more accurate characterization would be to consider it a “close cousin” instead.
It would seem from your second post that your CMC Taiji guy may have been labelling your jab as “internal” in an attempt at justifying why he was unable to ‘stick and follow’ it. After all, to an internal artist, it might be considerably less embarrassing if the failure was against a fellow internal technique as opposed to one of those “lesser external ones” (emphasis mine). His whole rationalization seemed just a bit too conveniently timed.
However, that aside, let’s examine the specifics which would determine whether or not it was internal. I’ll use your own examples as a good place to start. RE: sinking and rising: the types of these traits that are in the jab aren’t those that Taiji uses. A boxer’s jab doesn’t keep the head “as if suspended on a string” at all times, nor does it preclude bobbing the head up and down, another Taijiquan ‘no, no’. The twisting in a jab is not chan siu jing. Rather, it originates from the torso and moves upward, sometimes even resulting in the boxer momentarily rooting himself (the bad version of rooting) on one side. That is, he doesn’t maintain the links.
RE: “…relaxation until impact…”. This also is not Sung, or the internal arts version of relaxation. The most obvious reason is that internal arts maintain their kind of relaxation before, during AND after impact…in other words, constantly, whereas boxers are taught to tense up precisely at the moment of impact and then relax again.
Ultimately, the jab’s power source is not the dan tien/waist area, but rather the powerful musculature of the upper torso, with abdominal tension and leg tension/slight torsion as support.
As to the question in your second post, for me personally, it would be an extreme step backward. My strikes are far more powerful than what even a good jab can produce, but then again, they don’t rely on tight horizontal punching either. And while I’m not a boxer myself, I did have several years where it was part of my training as a kickboxer.
It’s just basically a different animal. Keep in mind that not being internal doesn’t always mean not being as powerful. My points should in no way be construed as a denigration of the boxer’s jab as an effective fighting technique, but whether it is effective or not wasn’t the question.
GLW,
I’m in agreement with you. On first read, though, your post appears to imply that WCC Chen’s being a boxer means that a jab IS internal. Maybe it’s the line spacing or something. Anyway, I believe you are actually implying just the opposite. Am I correct?
My first art was William CC Chen’s Taijiquan which I still practice to an extent. That puts me at around the 7 year mark, so you can gauge my respnce based on my understanding.
Many people claim the William CC Chen’s Taiji is boxing in disguise. I disagree. Some of the training does resemble boxing for the simple fact that we use gloves. Here are the differences as I see them.
-
No jab. We do use a lead hand punch, and it is failrly quick. But it’s not a jab. It’s used differently. All punches come out of an initial yield. The yield may be in response to an attack, or simply a reaction to a change in the structure of an opponent. In either case, the lead hand punch is a reactionary responce which travels in a circle based on the initila yield. It is not the offensive probing of the western jab.
-
Deactivation of the shoulder. Boxers use their shoulder to drive the power of the torse into the arm. I was taught to keep the elbow down to link the power of the waist into the arm. It makes the punch different. The key to these mechanics is in the form.
-
Tui Shou theory. The sparring training I received was basically an extension of my push hands practice. We simply added gloves, distance, and speed. The boxing was always seen as co-operative. (I did my sparring with boxers.)
-
Lack of specific punches. I have one punch, more or less. It can come from the lead, from the rear, from the top or bottom. This is dependant on my relation to the oppenent. The punch can be a loop, almost a straight line, or a crisp hook. This is dependant on the circle between the opponent and I.
-
I was trained to use my elbows and shoulders in conjunction with my hands to create an opportunity. Although this can be seen in modern boxing, the nature of these strikes, as with the punch, are different.
Stop talking about Gweilo Quan, its boring.
Ka,
"Miscjnix I feel I have already offended you,but to me forums are acedemic,how can they not be? "
You didn’t offend me, I am just tired of discussions/arguments about definitions.
Too many problems involved: lack of background of receiver to understand what you are talking about, multiple definitions for same word (qi for example is talking about more than one thing depending on how it is used), lack of equivolent words or ideas to express what is easier to show physically (language limitations), etc, etc.
And even if everyone agrees on the definition, what help did this provide in one’s studies. Nothing changed on how you do things, only what you call them. Raw acedemia and theory is usually what you see on forums, but it is not necessarily the only product of a forum. It is not easy to explain (instead of show), but you can explain things to people through similar experiences and tests/exercises others could try. Or invent a way to induce practicality into the discussion on your own. If I am trying to learn tai chi or internal strength, discussing terminology basically will get you chasing your own tail and you won’t progress.
Until you experience it, you don’t know it and no amount of typing out definitions on a forum will change that. A little more practicality and a little less philosophizing about this stuff is needed.
"Recently having a play with a CMC TCQ student I found that he had trouble sticking/avioding jabs,nothing to do with his lack of ability more to do( IMHO) with his inexperience with the speed of jabs.He decided that I was using a very “internal” power generation,I explained that it was simply a boxers jab as how I had been taught.Following on we felt that this sort of training would have no negative effects on his TCQ but that it would be of some benefit. "
That’s better…something with meat. I’ll answer with some of my own experiences.
I have had experiences similar to this. I don’t know if your jab is internal or not, but once when I met a guy who may be interested in training something similar came up. We crossed wrists and to test my sensitivity he threw jabs. He did them internally…he didn’t tense his arms, shoulders, etc - he just sunk a little and twisted his hips. That is a rough description anyway, easier to show. Needless to say I only blocked a couple and the rest got threw. He shook his head like he was disappointed (he was a little arrogant). So I asked him to show me how to do it and I threw “internal” jabs at him and he didn’t block a one. He looked ticked moved on to another test.
The jab is easier to detect (stick/avoid) the more externally it is generated. I found that the less the person tensed (particularly in the arms and shoulders), the less you could feel it. And due to the speed of the strike and the proximity to the person when thrown, it is difficult to avoid by sensitivity (sticking). I would classify this as a higher level test and most tai chi people I know could not defend against it, so I am not surprised you found your partner could not stick/avoid it.
His deduction that you were “using a very “internal” power generation” could be very flawed, but as I haven’t felt your jab I don’t know. A boxing jab is normally external, but depending on how relaxed you throw it - it is more difficult to sense and avoid. If the jab is thrown completely internally, there is even less to feel. He could have been trying to protect his pride by making the excuse that it was hard to feel because it was very internal. I’ve seen this happen.
Not to mention that there are far too many tai chi people who don’t know what internal power generation feels like or know how to do it, so that is a further complication. I’ve seen some very EXTERNAL tai chi people who think they are doing it internally.
So basically I gave you no answers, just more questions. But unfortunately without seeing and feeling your jab, I can not determine more.
Kinda seem like this person was trying to box with the other rather then using TC.
Or maybe just trading punches. In my experience intent has a lot to do with weather you can bridge something or not. Something thrown fast with out intent may slip past but not really do much except make some one mad.
In this case the ability to control or be aware of the distance, and see the hand coming might be more important then actually bridging it. Boxers train to do this; TC people do so as well.
Boxing operates at a very different range and as many have noted develops power in a very different way then TC. They require space for power development in their hands. A little different then most TC people I would think.
In boxing the use of gloves really changes the dynamics of how they throw their hands. For the most part they need to punch through the glove driving it with the body.
As Sam W. said, in another thread the use of what is called fa-jing is done very differently and has a more penetrating quality to it. It really is more of an energy transmission for those that specialize in this jing; then one of shock/compression generated by the punch itself as in boxing.
in either case getting hit by either one dosn’t feel to good 
State Of Mind/Intent
Read the opponent’s rhythm and intention, discern his gaps and fill them. Don’t think about what he’s doing, and don’t try. Just relax. Just do it.
Tommy Hearns was as close to an “internal” boxer as anyone could be (if there is such a thing).
A punch isn’t “internal” because it’s contrived. Hitting, on the other hand, is just moving into the opponent without thinking. He applies pressure as he moves forward, and you break down his form/structure/mobility by issuing force into his points of stillness. Secondary to that is sending your energy through him during the pause in his rhythm or during his recovery phase between steps, breath, or in his posture.
A jab can be internal once it stops being a jab.
My 1992 Chevy Cavalier has a stearing wheel and uses one peddle to go fast and one peddle to slow down and even stop. Has a pair of lights in the front and some red ones in the back. Even has a radio.
I heard that Mercedes also have these features. Think anyone will confuse my Chevy for a Mercedes and give me $35,000 for it?
Don’t be confused by the surface – that’s external. It’s the intagible, theory behind the movements that’s of value.
Barrera almost looks “internal” or like a gung fu fighter in the matches I have seen.
Waterdragon, I do have a clarification I would like to make.
We do use the jab when training at William CC Chen’s. We use upper-cuts, roundhouses, etc.
A jab is a jab, some people may throw it differently than others, but then again everyone is different.
Fighting is also fighting, the only thing that differentiates the different styles are their individual rules. A jab thrown by a jiu jitsu guy is a jab and a jab thrown by a TCC guy is a jab, the only thing that may look different is the level of skill that is displayed in the technique of the jab, whomever has better training and trains his jab more will obviously have a better jab.
At WIlliam CC Chen’s school we train using the ideas of western boxing mixed with the body mechanics of TCC to strengthen our punches and when comparing the lead of the shoulder in western boxing to that of William CC Chen’s style there is one more discrepency I woud also like to clear up. All BEGINNER’S and many amateurs lead with their shoulder. Western or internal, or whatever, a good fighter NEVER leads with his shoulder. This point is mentioned to us in class on a weekly basis and is common habit that is difficult to break. Any quality pro boxer/fighter does not lead with their shoulder.
recently I had a revelation whilst I was doing some bag work - I’d been doing 3-minute sessions of jab-jab-cross and jab-jab-hook and jab-cross. Eventually I was so fatigued I could barely raise my arms - yet I was still hitting the bag as hard as before.
I realised ALL of my power was coming from the waist - as soon as I realised this I started concentrating on it and I would guess my power doubled as a result of that change.
I’d spent two years believing I was generating power from my waist until I actually did it properly - what a change.
I went training the next day and I was really excited - yet when I looked in the mirror I could see absolutely no difference from before. It was an internal change - I don’t know whether it’s ‘internal’ - I just know it has changed my entire outlook on how I perform any technique.
I use all the punches I know in my technique - they are a good starting point for training explosive power (**** site easier than doing the kicks properly). I train for real world useage as well - and a good hard punch is always useful - I may not want to close to wrapping range (maybe more than one person)
ramble over
That’s interesting TC. I’m always hungry for info on what you guys are doing in New York. One of the things that was drilled into me time and time again was This is not western boxing, use you training, don’t box Because of this, I always equated our glove work as applying push hands to the boxing. Did I misunderstand something? Also, I was never taught the punches AS a jab or as a punch. I’m thinking that either I left before I got to the differences in the punches, or that the training in the Midwest is somewhat different than in Manhattan. When I left, I was at the point where I was using the following on my punches: Wind up and release(the kua thing) 3 nails, and putting my intent in the elbows instead of the hand.
I guess I’m asking, was my training different, or did I just not get to the point? If you want, I can send a private message of who I trained with. Maybe it’s simply that different instructors are promoting different aspects.
Thanks a lot.
At Master Chan’s school in NYC we also box, after all, its Chinese Internal Boxing. A lot of glove work. We have hook, upper cut, cross, a number of crazy palms, BUT NO JAB.
Jab has no power.
We set up differently. Everything is set up, but not set up with the jab. We do have a lead straight though, but its more of a Hsing-I type of blow. It has power and its deep. I will strike an incoming blow however with what “looks” like a jab, but its really trying to gain that inside position (sort of like Tan Sau’s aim) but not being so nice about it. Might as well chip at the soft underside.
All our blows are also delievred the same way, only changing to their individual shape near the end. T
Touch hand, push hand, hit hand.
Door closed, open door, hit.