It's funny, because to me, it's not a question of which is better. It's a question of what else is there? If you're not using skeletal structure to aid your muscles, you're using muscle alone. Does anyone think it's easier to only use your muscles?
If there is anything else to use besides bones, connective tissue and muscle, what is it? It's not like we have much choice here....
Depends on what connective tissue we are referring to.
I'll cite this post from RSF from Robert John:
If it were simply the tendons that get developed, it doesn't explain why the "skin" seems to get thicker with years of practice. Even Ark himself has a skill where his skin turn rock hard like a statue, but he isn't stiff (IE the muscles aren't really tensed to the degree you'd expect). When I asked him about it, he simply said it was "kin-maku" or "muscle-membrane." (Note: Ark is not on the fascia bandwagon, the comment about kin-maku is something he learned from his own teacher...which implies that people before have kicked this idea around as well...ie nothing's new under the sun)
Mike Sigman has said similar things where he will occasionally tense this layer under the skin that is not muscle while having a massage and see what the masseuse says.
You will also notice that people who train to get their feet very heavy (which by the way implies more than just feeling pressure on the soles), start to have very wirey feet (from tendons) and "thick" feet.
This isn't the best aun statue picture, but you can sort of see the feet in this one. Next time I hit up the Smithsonain, I will try and get a better photo of the aun statue at the Freer/Sackler gallery.
While I think we all would agree that training for different sports leads to different body shapes (swimmers don't look like 100m sprinters), IS training leads to different body development that for most doesn't look like, exhibit nor produce the same characteristics when used as a typical athletic body.