Why do you perceive "internal" superior to athleticism?

Michael Varin wrote: Keith, Would you care to expand on that? Especially "pulling yourself down" and how it relates to "activate the complete connection internall[y]"? I realize that many tend to avoid questions that probe deeper, but I get the sense that you are not inclined to do that. And I don't really care what your level of expertise is. I'm just curious because this sounds very similar to the way that I would explain good pressing form.

Well, I can only explain it in somewhat subjective terms. But here goes. If you stand up, put your arms straight out in front of you with a slight bend in the elbow. Splay your fingers out with your palms now parallel to the plane of your body. Rotate your hands in place bringing turning your hand such that your thumbs end up pointing downward making your elbows rotate out. So you're kind of making a big, oblong circle. Hands just a little wider than shoulder width.

This is the starting position when you're in a standard pushup position on the floor. Hopefully that description makes some sense.

Now from here you try to engage a connection going all around from your arms across your back. It might help to think of expanding your back a bit. Now, with control, slowly lower yourself with a feeling like you're pulling yourself down to the ground "loading up" a spring. You should feel this in your chest, of course, but also across your back. Then to "push up" the feeling is like you "let go" and allow yourself to be pushed back up.

Try it some day when you're rested. Do a handful of regular pushups. Wait a while to recover completely and try it again using the above. Most will find they can do more in this way.

It is a good way to illustrate a more way of doing something that utilizes more than just the "assumed muscle" we would normally use. There is a sort of "store/release" thing going on here. But also learning to use more than just your localized muscle, instead focusing on distributing the load across a much longer group of muscles more evenly. Which makes for a more efficient pushup.

Of course the question begged here is why you would do an exercise this way. In context of this discussion *if* your goal is building bulging pecs and ripped deltoids, this probably won't help, if anything it will slow that down. It doesn't isolate muscles for the purpose of making the individual muscles stronger. The idea is to build more strength overall by learning to use more of your body to do each thing. Taking advantage of the internal connections to more completely use your body. Here the goal is being able to do more, more efficiently, with less energy. I.e., to the outside you look like you can do more pushups. And you can. But you're not really doing the same thing inside.

Sounds familiar in this thread?

I'll also point out that for those who are paying attention, there is quite a movement that has been going on in the last few years in the world of exercise. Many criticisms I've seen of modern exercise is based on stuff that is probably 10-20 years out of date. I've got friends who are personal trainers who are vastly more focused on "functional" fitness. Yes, weight bearing training still happens, but how it is done is totally different. Weight machines are in general not that helpful since they ignore the larger picture by the very nature of their design; isolating individual muscles or groups. Instead you're seeing more and more people doing things with heavy ropes, kettlebells, even long, heavy, flexible poles. In some ways it started with the focus on "core". Now they realize that it's about how everything attaches to the core and so all can be used at the same time, unified, connected. Any weakness in the chain and the whole things falls apart. So we're back to pushups done in more specific ways, lots of picking up heavy stuff and simply carrying it from point A to B. Swinging heavy sticks trying to control it with your entire body. Trying to put a wave down a long, heavy rope. Etc.

Edit added. Added since Janet posted as I typed. Yes, Pilates is another area where there is an increased focus on a more holistic approach to exercise. All good stuff. You'd think I'd be in better shape... Gonna have to cut the double-martini's at night since they tend to be followed by cravings for a sandwich. My problem is quite simple. Too much food... I love food. Sigh...

FWIW I have been known to teach that pushup to students before teaching them techniques from ushirodori (bear hug from behind in case terminology varies). Think about what you're doing when you extend your arms. Not an exact mapping, but the pushup is meant to stack the deck maximally for the pushup. We were taught to first bend the arms at the elbows when grabbed from behind. Think now of that movement as activating that same path you would "pulling yourself down". Now when you want to extend there is no slack, no delay, and a lot of power possible, if needed.

Extending further, thing about hand position in Funakogi undo (if you do it). Think why some focus so much on letting the wrist bend. Extend your arms with that same feeling as in the pushup but with the wrist bent down (as you'll see in the photos of Tohei). Keep the "tensioned" feel but now straighten the wrist. Something goes away. My sensei to this day still say that you bend those wrists so you don't "cut off the ki flow". If you feel that change when you do it, that's (I think) what they're talking about. This is something I've been told Tohei had said as well. If we assume they really are feeling this same something, is this a manifestation of a larger, physical connection? So are we talking about "energy" literally flowing or are we talking about very real connections in the body that we can condition and learn to utilize directly?

But again, I'm just a noob, so grain of salt.

Mike Sigman wrote: Yes, it does. Because it takes some background about internal strength which hasn't been discussed on this forum and I doubt seriously that you know what I'm talking about or you wouldn't have posted what you did. Ipso facto. Hence my comment that it would take a lot of writing to get there. Mike Sigman

Hence your comment to make you sound smart. Ipso facto and all that. Why can't you post because you said X I can tell you that you aren't doing Y?

Janet Rosen wrote: Again I'm going to analogy. I have taught beginning painting classes. I can offer exercises for sharpening observation skills of color, principles of the relationship of colors in light and shadow, and give people the knowledge and skill they need to be able to mix colors. Myself, after many years of painting - and I am by no means a master painter - I can look at almost anything and mix a color match to it using acrylic paint. I do this with no real understanding of the optics, pigments or chemistry involved. I cannot explain it beyond metaphors like describing a color as "cooler" or "warmer." Does this mean that I'm not actually matching the color or transferring the skill?

So you just randomly mix together paints with no plan or explanation of what is happening? Or maybe you just proved my point that you don't know what you're doing well to explain it in simple terms?

You can't explain what is going on with IS than how do show what's different that shiko than squat for instance?

Keith Larman wrote: I'll also point out that for those who are paying attention, there is quite a movement that has been going on in the last few years in the world of exercise. Many criticisms I've seen of modern exercise is based on stuff that is probably 10-20 years out of date. I've got friends who are personal trainers who are vastly more focused on "functional" fitness. Yes, weight bearing training still happens, but how it is done is totally different. Weight machines are in general not that helpful since they ignore the larger picture by the very nature of their design; isolating individual muscles or groups. Instead you're seeing more and more people doing things with heavy ropes, kettlebells, even long, heavy, flexible poles. In some ways it started with the focus on "core". Now they realize that it's about how everything attaches to the core and so all can be used at the same time, unified, connected. Any weakness in the chain and the whole things falls apart. So we're back to pushups done in more specific ways, lots of picking up heavy stuff and simply carrying it from point A to B. Swinging heavy sticks trying to control it with your entire body. Trying to put a wave down a long, heavy rope. Etc.

Which is actually more of a return to the pre-exercise machine era than anything radically new. It turns out -- as you said -- that isolation exercises are best used as a supplement to address specific weaknesses, rather than the core of a program.

Katherine

Michael Varin wrote: Maybe, you don't know what you think you know about "externals." The shoulder is a complicated joint with many muscles involved in its movement. Can you explain what you mean by "flex your shoulders"? But, This is why I think this discussion still has much room for progress. I have heard people talk about "tense" or "flexed" muscles, but throwing an object is a classic example of where either of those things will sap your power. It is already shaping up that our former competitive gymnast and sanshou fighter turned "internal" expert has a lot to offer golfers and baseball pitchers. So what are these qualities? If there is no overlap and they are actually antagonistic to each other, why do we see these results?

Apologies for the late response. I've been shoveling out after the latest winter storm.

The comment about throwing a baseball was a tweak about the traditional way to pitch a ball, using a large, visible windup with the hip pulled back and the body mass concentrated on the pitching-side leg, then forward momentum and drop the lead leg, shifting the body weight to the front leg opposite the pitching arm, twisting the pitching-side hip forward, letting that rotation in turn whip around and out the (relaxed) pitching shoulder and arm, and letting that whip-wave reach the hand, where the fingers release the ball. (I learned pitching from a Little League coach a few years ago. )

It’s a set of discrete events that, while it requires parts of the body to perform in a well-choreographed sequence, doesn’t represent the actions of a connected, unified body. Each body part plays a one-step, in-turn role in transferring and building one-directional force (from the ground, out and away) and velocity from motor movements that begin and end – not a continuous, self-sustaining process. The large outer-hip muscles do the rapid turning to make torque, while the legs take turns providing passive support or counterweight (the lead leg provides counterweight when it is raised before dropping, the rear leg does so after the pitch and the full body mass is transferred to the front foot) and push-away resistance against the ground.

I originally came up in the “external” traditions of karate and boxing – hook, uppercut, jab, reverse/cross, etc. The process has many similarities to the baseball pitch for power generation. The basics (with slight variations for the different strikes/punches) involve pushing from the ground while inhaling, drawing back the hip using the outer muscles of the hip, then dropping the hips and center while both projecting oneself forward and twisting-snapping the punching-side hip forward, throwing out the (relaxed) arm, which twists, then tenses (with the fist) on impact as you exhale, and then relaxes and withdraws.

Some martial drawbacks of this approach (from firsthand experience) are the commitment of mass to one side of the body and also to the forward momentum. You’re throwing your entire body mass forward. It makes the puncher vulnerable to having his/her center taken in that moment when he/she is fully committed to delivering the body-mass payload in that punch. You use up your entire power “account” in each punch, and must re-chamber the hip for the next punch, creating time gaps that a quick opponent can exploit. And, on point of contact with the punch, the puncher’s body is also temporarily tensed and rigid and susceptible to unbalancing – another exploitable moment, however brief. If you encounter someone with good grappling skills, you’re sunk once they exploit that opening and get in.

By contrast, IP method is not a beginning-to-end sequential process with such obvious and visible movements; instead, everything is interwoven and interactive. Manipulations of, in part, the center, lower back, outer legs, spine, inner arch of the legs and groin, and even breath, create a dynamic, integrated body state and structure that is continuous as long as you have the willpower/mental intent to hold it, and is characterized by a stability that is very difficult to disrupt, and, a constant reservoir of available power and the ability to utilize it in many ways. You don't have to start-finish-restart. It's just always there.

People who are skilled in fighting with it can hit with almost all of their body mass while maintaining their central equilibrium – they don’t commit their body mass to forward momentum, they don’t double-weight (commit their body mass to one side of the body), they don’t have to chamber and re-chamber. Their limbs and body are relaxed and fluid, which enhances their mobility and quickness, and they can hit you with anything – hands, shoulders, knees, head – with that reservoir of power.

Even when the power is toned down, there is a penetrating quality to the strikes. IME and IMO, it’s very different than the percussive or projectile quality of “external” power generation. Body connection and force from opposing sets of spirals created by manipulations of the lower body are used for off-balancing, controlling and throwing as well as striking. And what’s more, they only need to use a minimal amount of effort to create extremely powerful results, and can receive force from an opponent, augment it with their own, and return it. It’s amazing what they can do with a body that is truly relaxed and connected. All around, it just looks to me like a more efficient and effective way to power one’s MA whether one focuses on P/K or throwing/grappling arts.

“Flexed” shoulders: It’s almost a given that when human beings are confronted, startled, or think they are going to fall, the first thing they do is draw up their shoulders and tense them. Sometimes it’s just a slight movement, sometimes grossly visible. Maybe it’s a throwback to ancestral brachiating as the “flight” part of the “fight or flight” instinct, I don’t know. But people do it. It takes a lot of practice to not tense the shoulders. That’s why those airport masseurs and masseuses do a “stiff” business.

Any good athlete knows that for anything to work – a golf swing, a ball pitch, a swimming stroke, the muscles of the shoulder and upper back can’t be tense, and you use –as minimally as possible- the muscles needed to hold your frame in proper alignment. Tensed muscles are muscles that have used up their potential energy and must relax again before they can be of any use.

In IP training, if you want to transmit force from your center up and out your arms, when power reaches tensed shoulder muscles, it is blocked there, the scapulas can’t rotate freely, and the shoulders become disconnected from the whole-body process of power transfer. Then, the inclination is for the person to use the muscles of their arm, shoulder and upper back to generate the power – instead of a unified/connected body.

Speaking from my own experience, weight-lifting, when you are trying to develop the ability to completely let-go those muscles, is counterproductive because during the peak of the lift those muscles are flexed and taut. It just reinforces what is already an ingrained tendency in most people. I also found it to be true that conventional karate and boxing (including, maybe especially, heavy-bag work) re-enforced the same flex action, and I had to give it up entirely to accomplish even what little I have in internal training. Maybe other people's mileage varies with their individual talent.

FWIW

Robert Roeser wrote: So you just randomly mix together paints with no plan or explanation of what is happening? Or maybe you just proved my point that you don't know what you're doing well to explain it in simple terms?

There is nothing random about it, but I also cannot tell you WHY I select, say an ultramarine blue instead of a cobalt blue to achieve a particular kind of purple, other than many years of experience distilled into/integrated into my brain/body about the relative properties of each paint color lead me to automatically reach for it.

My point is that in explaining/teaching the art of color mixing, there is nothing about the underlying science (optics or pigment chemistry) that needs to be understood or transmitted. I teach by metaphor like "cool color" vs. "warm color." And to teach a student about mixing purples, I have him mix the ultramarine with a red and the cobalt blue with the same read and compare the results. As a young person I was taught dios by master painters, and no, they didn't "know it well enough to explain it in simple terms" either.

And in fact in most aikido dojos I've been in the instructors resort to metaphor to get students to understand because different students receive/process the info differently. For instance with unbendable arm, a student coming from sports or dance will immediately understand what is meant by, and can implement, engaging core, then lats, then triceps, but most people will not understand what it means to engage any specific muscle in their body so need some kind of visualization or metaphor to get them to start approximating the movement.

Cady Goldfield wrote: By contrast, IP method is not a beginning-to-end sequential process with such obvious and visible movements; instead, everything is interwoven and interactive. Manipulations of, in part, the center, lower back, outer legs, spine, inner arch of the legs and groin, and even breath, create a dynamic, integrated body state and structure that is continuous as long as you have the willpower/mental intent to hold it, and is characterized by a stability that is very difficult to disrupt, and, a constant reservoir of available power and the ability to utilize it in many ways. You don't have to start-finish-restart. It's just always there.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the above sounds to me like you don't use store-and-release to power strikes. May I ask why not?

Joep,
That was my lack of articulation. The beginning to end sequential process I was referring to is the discrete set of large-muscle movements in the karate punch or ball pitch. It stops and starts linearly, and when the sequence is completed there is no energy stored for another use until the sequence is started again. In IP, the body is constantly in a state of potential-energy production. Instead of gross motor movements moving large muscle groups in a one-time act, you are continually manipulating less conventionally used sets of muscle and soft tissue, in a dynamic tension of opposing forces, to create potential energy -- that's what I meant about it always being there -- and it is available to be released at will.

There are so many others more adept both at demonstration and explanation,and I did not intend to venture this far with the topic. Only to say that my personal experiences on both sides of traditional athletic body usage and IP, to the extent that I've experienced it, have shown completely different sets of body dynamics.

Cady Goldfield wrote: Joep, That was my lack of articulation. The beginning to end sequential process I was referring to is the discrete set of large-muscle movements in the karate punch or ball pitch. It stops and starts linearly, and when the sequence is completed there is no energy stored for another use until the sequence is started again. In IP, the body is constantly in a state of potential-energy production. Instead of gross motor movements moving large muscle groups in a one-time act, you are continually manipulating less conventionally used sets of muscle and soft tissue, in a dynamic tension of opposing forces, to create potential energy -- that's what I meant about it always being there -- and it is available to be released at will.

I don´t think we're talking about the same store-and-release here. The one I have in mind is largely a sequential process and at the end of it, it's not necessarily so that there's stored energy to release. The store is not always there: it's a specific skill on top of 'regular' internal movement.
And yes, you can train your body to always be in a cycle of store and release in which every release is also a store. But that's not a given. You actually need to train that after you learned how to do a single store-and-release.

There are so many others more adept both at demonstration and explanation,and I did not intend to venture this far with the topic.

No problem, we're near my limits of skill and knowledge anyhow, so I have little more to add.

Chris Hein wrote: Okay, video as I promised. I'll be the first to say, my shikko doesn't look nearly as good as Ark's. I have also only done this exercise twice in my life, for about a total of 60 seconds. If I had a year to practice, I'm sure it would look much better. I wanted to get the video up quickly though, because I promised I would. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMHuWiIquTM

Heh. I have to tip my hat to Chris for putting that video up (I didn't see it at the time he posted). Thanks for helping to keep the bar raised, Chris.

Mike Sigman

Hi Joep,
I think you’re right. I’ve been the recipient of IP power-releases like that, such as from someone splitting the spiraling force from the legs at the kua, using the power it creates, then stopping that process after "delivering." But, the winding process itself is maintained as a continuous process (along with suspending the center and spine in a matrix of opposing forces) for stability and being able to shift and hide center and body mass. The real adepts just move that way all the time, and the spiraling force is available to them to manipulate at will, such as with that force-split.

I’ve found that some of things, you can do continuously and they do have power in and of themselves without a start-and-end point. For example, maintaining a “downward” internal body dynamic keeps a continuous elliptical cycle from and to the ground. The body “becomes” that process, and if it connects to another body, that body will respond to its effects on contact. It makes strikes, punches and kicks very “heavy,” and is great for takedowns.

The only point I'd really wanted to make, was that the methods are different from those of traditional athletic training; it would be interesting to see how any of these concepts might be applied to athletics. I've seen them used only in a martial context, though I've actually found some things to be useful in my horticultural work.

Mike Sigman wrote: Heh. I have to tip my hat to Chris for putting that video up (I didn't see it at the time he posted). Thanks for helping to keep the bar raised, Chris. Mike Sigman

I give Chris a lot of credit for doing a shot to shot remake of the original video. The effects on his partner look superficially similar to the other video, but he doesn't initiate his movement in the same way as the original.

Chris did a nice recreation of ark's demo at the end with the partner on his back. Again its not the same thing. For example I only recently learned that you are supposed to "be under" (I did my best to explan this via a previous post) your own lifted leg, but I have no clue how to actually do that yet as I only recently started to figure out how to be under my own arms. That being said, Chris did a good job of showing what strong muscles and balance can achieve,

If anyone is interested, I can give an attempt to point out the differences and hopefully have others chime in where I might be right or wrong.

Hunter Lonsberry wrote: I give Chris a lot of credit for doing a shot to shot remake of the original video. The effects on his partner look superficially similar to the other video, but he doesn't initiate his movement in the same way as the original. Chris did a nice recreation of ark's demo at the end with the partner on his back. Again its not the same thing. For example I only recently learned that you are supposed to "be under" (I did my best to explan this via a previous post) your own lifted leg, but I have no clue how to actually do that yet as I only recently started to figure out how to be under my own arms. That being said, Chris did a good job of showing what strong muscles and balance can achieve, If anyone is interested, I can give an attempt to point out the differences and hopefully have others chime in where I might be right or wrong.

Well, I look at it like this: Chris hasn't been exposed to internal-strength as we're discussing it, but that's neither here nor there. He's taking some typical "I.S." demonstrations (in this case from Ark, but they could be from anyone) and he's replicating them using good, normal strength. It's a heck of an opportunity to analyse and compare; telling Chris he's "wrong" about anything is beside the point, given the opportunity.

For instance, think of this: Chris when he kicks, etc., is basically tying himself together and hitting with his combined mass. True, he could be questioned about the difference in "muscle" versus "suit", let's say, but his response would rightfully be, "So let me see you kick harder". If you can't kick harder than Chris does, using your internal strength, then he's won the argument (in a limited respect) that there's no real need to spend the time studying so-called "internal strength", right?

So by providing a film of already-known I.S. demonstrations but done with 'athleticism', Chris provides a basis for a good discussion.

I believe that it was Michael Varin that made the point about teaching limited aspects of "internal strength" (read "ki" if you want to stay traditional) to golf and baseball players. To my eye, Chris did a somewhat muscular version of tying his body together as a unit to kick (as an example) and there is a lot more of the spectrum of internal strength that wasn't developed very well. His "explosive power" is pretty far off the mark, IMO, but who cares, he might say, he launched Uke... he laid it out there. Great discussion material if someone wants to provide a counter-video.... like some of the people who told him he did it wrong.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman wrote: Great discussion material if someone wants to provide a counter-video.... like some of the people who told him he did it wrong.

I was wondering if we were ever going to get back around to discussing the videos. Thanks Hunter and Mike for bringing this back up.

I'm sure there are qualities that the IP people are looking for, that I might not have met. My question is, how are these qualities manifested? As Mike said, if you can kick about as hard as I can, and you say you are doing it with internal, and I'm doing it external, why does that matter? If both roads lead to the same destination (a hard kick for example) than why choose one over the other?

Your answer might come in the form of, "internal is ultimately more powerful." That's fine, but lets see it. Let's see some video of things that can not be done with external power. Some video of things that can only be done with IP.

I've been working with structure and alignment more lately, and I've found that I can do somethings that even I thought I couldn't do just a short time ago. But I still don't think it's anything beyond good body use, that could be learned from any good sports coach. Anyways, the video match offer is still available, if anyone wants to put up some video.

Chris Hein wrote: I was wondering if we were ever going to get back around to discussing the videos. Thanks Hunter and Mike for bringing this back up. Let's see some video of things that can not be done with external power. Some video of things that can only be done with IP..

Yes, let's. Hunter? Mike?

Thomas Campbell wrote: Yes, let's. Hunter? Mike?

Let's see yours, Tom.... you always jump into these things using someone else's name, so let's see something you can do. Or Stan. Or Marc. Mark Murray has stepped up and posted some stuff. My stuff is on record in a number of public places (including videos from the 90's). Let's see what a moderator of Rum Soaked Fist can do other than try to provoke people... after all these years of "internal arts" surely you guys have something to show for it.

Mike Sigman

Chris Hein wrote: I've been working with structure and alignment more lately, and I've found that I can do somethings that even I thought I couldn't do just a short time ago. But I still don't think it's anything beyond good body use, that could be learned from any good sports coach. Anyways, the video match offer is still available, if anyone wants to put up some video.

Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier regarding your PM. I'm trying to finish work on my house soon, so my time has been limited.

You might have missed it earlier, but you can try some of demos on this video too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXsMS...ailpage#t=123s

See if you can do what he is doing without your partner regarding weight transfer/flexon, plus pinky wrestling (at 4:27) is always fun too. Cordelli's comments are interesting at 5:25. I have never felt the final demo, so I have no clue how that one works.

I probably mentioned it earlier, but you should be able to replicate some of the stuff in your structure video, without having to use structure/muscle or in a compromised position.

Hunter Lonsberry wrote: You might have missed it earlier, but you can try some of demos on this video too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXsMS...ailpage#t=123s See if you can do what he is doing without your partner regarding weight transfer/flexon, plus pinky wrestling (at 4:27) is always fun too. Cordelli's comments are interesting at 5:25. I have never felt the final demo, so I have no clue how that one works.

Hi Hunter,

I haven't tried the little finger wrestling (but will give it a go) yet, but the final demo I tried out when I first saw it on the TV. It looked almost identical to an exercise I had practiced many times with my teacher. In our case it was to take the oustretched hand and by using co-ordination of mind and body, 'shake' the hand and lower uke towards the floor. It being an exercise, uke is not trying to resist, but if you try to muscle them down, it wont work.

Anyway, I watched what Kuroda was doing and he seemed to put his mind/ki on a particular spot on Crudelli's body, then did the hand shake, the result being as you see. When I tried this with a uke who had no idea what I was going to do, the results were the same.

It's not difficult to do, you just have to use relaxation and an active mind.

regards,

Mark

Mike Sigman wrote: Let's see yours, Tom.... you always jump into these things using someone else's name, so let's see something you can do. Or Stan. Or Marc. Mark Murray has stepped up and posted some stuff. My stuff is on record in a number of public places (including videos from the 90's). Let's see what a moderator of Rum Soaked Fist can do other than try to provoke people... after all these years of "internal arts" surely you guys have something to show for it. Mike Sigman

Let's see . . . asking for a video reference is provoking people? You're a little touchy these days, Mike. If I was specifically requesting video clips showing you demonstrating individually, I would have said so. I think Hunter's reference to Cordelli and Kuroda's video clip is a little more relevant than your reply, since he provided a link to the clip and some helpful accompanying observations. Kuroda's clip does seem to be an illustration of at least some aspect of internal skill without "athleticism." That's relevant to the subject of this thread. So let's see if we can stick to that without getting personal, OK?

I've seen your videos from the 90s. I purchased two sets of them in the 90s (long gone now), for study and for circulation among friends. I don't recall specific segments from those 1990s videos directly related to my request. I assume your understanding and skill have improved since you made those old videos. Your work in recent years is not on video in "public places" though. Since you brought it up, I think recent video clips of you would be good for people to see, because you have real skills, but if you don't want to share it outside of your private forum, that's your prerogative.

As for video clips of me, there is really nothing to show as far as demonstrating the difference between doing something with "athleticism" and doing it with internal skill, because I'm still largely a beginner with internal work--and quite secure with saying so, because I don't pretend to be an expert on this field of endeavor. I do seek out people who I think can help my progress, though, and will probably visit with Chris and Michael the next time I'm in their area, if they'll have me. I've worked with Chris' CIMA teacher, Tim, and learned quite a bit. And I've had the opportunity to work with you and Akuzawa and Dan Harden on occasion as well, also learning different things, all from people with internal skill vastly superior to my own.

Oh, and Mike . . . I'm not moderating RSF any more. Just to save you a few keystrokes on your next post.

To get back to the topic of this thread and illustrating the differences between use of "athleticism" and use of "internal skill," I think it depends on clear definitions of what we are looking at--and even with clear definitions, video clips may not clearly show the difference.

For example, if the following clip showing Chen Zhiqiang taking down a student did not have the English subtitles of Chen Bing's explanations and instructions, would a viewer be able to tell whether Chen Zhiqiang was using athleticism or internal skill . . . or a combination?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAicu-IPjMw

And consider specific instances in Chen Bing's narrative, where he talks about Chen Zhiqiang's avoidance of and borrowing (using) the opponent's force--is what Chen Zhiqiang doing in those parts of the video clip making use of athleticism or making use of internal skill?

Compare--or rather contrast--Chen Zhiqiang's clip above with Wei Shuren's clip below (Wei is the 80-year-old heavyset man in the light gray sweater-vest):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vaogb...0450F1A4917A5A

Assuming that the movement of Wei's partner is not voluntary (and that is an assumption), is Wei inducing it by "athleticism" or by "internal skill"? Wei does not appear particularly "athletic".

I don't train aikido and so don't feel confident in selecting and commenting on aikido clips showing a difference between athleticism and internal skill. There seems to be some consensus here that Ikeda sensei's demonstrations show a level of internal skill.

Thomas Campbell wrote: Since you brought it up, I think recent video clips of you would be good for people to see, because you have real skills, but if you don't want to share it outside of your private forum, that's your prerogative.

You've commented publicly for a number of years on IMA's, Tom. Let's see something from you before you ask others to step up. Then ask some of the people to whom Chris was responding with his video to come up with videos. You're quick to make comments, but I've never seen anything substantive from you personally. And yes, you came to a workshop (I assumed wrongly that "Tom Campbell" in S.F. was just a coincidence in name for the guy in Seattle) and I'm not going to bother trying to tear you down or build you up by making this post about you and your abilities. But you tend to very selectively and partisanly make your comments and requests, so this time I'm bringing your skills into it. Show us something or say something intelligent or accurately analytic, but stop this habit of yours of pointing at everyone but yourself.

Mike Sigman

Thomas Campbell wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAicu-IPjMw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vaogb...0450F1A4917A5A

Those are two very different clips. Chen ZiQiang is demonstrating internal strength within a shuai jiao type context and the partner isn't stooging for him (although of course he's only playing his role in a filmed demonstration). CZQ's jin skills are pretty obvious. The second clip of Wei has a partner who is noticeably reacting after the fact, although Wei is certainly using jin. What we can't tell is how powerful Wei really is because of the cooperation by the partner. If you compare to the way Chris throws his partner away (look at the arm/shoulder/torso), it's pretty obviously different. What Chris is now asking to be convinced is why one way is "superior" to another.

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman wrote: You've commented publicly for a number of years on IMA's, Tom. Let's see something from you before you ask others to step up. Then ask some of the people to whom Chris was responding with his video to come up with videos. You're quick to make comments, but I've never seen anything substantive from you personally. And yes, you came to a workshop (I assumed wrongly that "Tom Campbell" in S.F. was just a coincidence in name for the guy in Seattle) and I'm not going to bother trying to tear you down or build you up by making this post about you and your abilities. But you tend to very selectively and partisanly make your comments and requests, so this time I'm bringing your skills into it. Show us something or say something intelligent or accurately analytic, but stop this habit of yours of pointing at everyone but yourself. Mike Sigman

Mike--

Stop this habit of yours of telling others what they can or cannot post on open forums. It really demeans your otherwise positive contributions to this thread and others.

And remember that you were the one who raised the subject of your own videos (in post #417 on this thread). This thread isn't about you, though--it's about the difference between athleticism and internal skill generally, and is helped by video clips--of anyone--that illustrate the difference. I don't have any of myself, and apparently you aren't willing to show any of yourself here. Since this thread isn't about you or me, though, let's get back to intelligent and accurately analytic commentary on clips and issues, as I tried to do with the post on CZQ and WSR.

Mark Freeman wrote: Hi Hunter, I haven't tried the little finger wrestling (but will give it a go) yet, but the final demo I tried out when I first saw it on the TV. It looked almost identical to an exercise I had practiced many times with my teacher. In our case it was to take the oustretched hand and by using co-ordination of mind and body, 'shake' the hand and lower uke towards the floor. It being an exercise, uke is not trying to resist, but if you try to muscle them down, it wont work. Anyway, I watched what Kuroda was doing and he seemed to put his mind/ki on a particular spot on Crudelli's body, then did the hand shake, the result being as you see. When I tried this with a uke who had no idea what I was going to do, the results were the same. It's not difficult to do, you just have to use relaxation and an active mind.

Mark, I'd simplify it and say that both demonstrations, pinky and pull, were still just examples of "make a firmly-connected unit and the move Uke's body/body-part with your middle". No difference. Same principle that Ikeda is teaching. You can make a firm connection through the bones or through the extended connection: Yang and Yin.

FWIW

Mike Sigman