Hi Tim,

Usually, styles are broken down into two major catagories (for discussion sake), striking or grappling (standup or ground).

Usually, a person from a particular school of martial art learns what that style stresses, for example Karate places a tremedous emphasis on striking, whereas Greco-Roman emphasises grappling.

If a person were to start the study of Shen Wu, what could they expect? How would you catagorize Shen Wu?

Macaco fino

Students just beginning the Shen Wu combined training are first taught about body alignment, and then basic exercises designed to coordinate the body and develop natural (whole body )power. There is a great emphasis on learning how to breakfall and roll (the most practical "self defense" training one could ever learn). Next ground exercises are introduced as well as more difficult conditioning exercises. Concurrent to the above, the student begins to learn footwork, basic body covering (how to deflect and absorb blows) and basic defensive grappling skills (how to counter the most common holds one would be likely to encounter in the street; headlocks, waistlocks, chokes, the mount...). After the student is familiar with the basics, each class covers standing striking techniques (open and closed hand strikes, kicks, how to strike with the body...), wrestling (throws, takedowns and/or joint locking techniques) and ground fighting (primarily geared toward non-sportive situations). The average student will begin sparring drills by the third week of training. The training is geared around a set of foundational principles which apply to all the various aspects of training (striking and wrestling, stand up and ground fighting). Although the training is often divided so that specific skills can be improved, there is really no division between striking and wrestling in application, all the techniques flow from the same movements, and are based on the same principles. In a nutshell, the Shen Wu training is based on cultivating natural power, and its application to fighting as a whole.

At what point, if any, do you place an emphasis on forms? Are you going to diregard them completely or are you going cover them when you teach body alignment? Also, would you still use circle walking to teach body alignment and to generate power?

Thanks Tim,

Could you elaborate on this a little more, I believe it's extremely important:

"Although the training is often divided so that specific skills can be improved, there is really no division between striking and wrestling in application, all the techniques flow from the same movements, and are based on the same principles."

If all the techniques flow from the same movement, how does the student 'know' what to do at a specific time? Is the most efficient technique presented so the student doesn't have to react but only do?

I'm not trying to bust chops but I think it's important for people to understand this concept. Maybe a physical example would help.

thank you,
Macaco fino

I've been watching this discussion for a couple days and I gotta jump in.I boxed as a kid and did a little judo but then in my 20's and 30's I did exclusivly chinese arts,(7* mantis)then the past few years back to hsing-i,(also some shuia jiao during my mantis training).In the western arts and in alot of non chinese oriental arts,punching,locking,grappling,weapons,etc... seem to be catagorized and taught seperatly but in mantis,shuia jiao,hsing-i they are all taught together.For instance if I'm using mantis fast hand techniques,you throw aright reverse punch,I intersept with my right hand and shoot my left palm accross your elbow.I can arm bar,break the elbow,palm strike to the face,finger jab to the eyes or with the arm bar,take you to the ground and follow with a choke,or an elbow to the back of the head.It all depends on how much you weigh how dangerous or malicious the situation is.Then internal kung fu takes it to a whole other level with energetics and using whole body power in the strikes,the finess of the locking and throwing goes to another level.It's interesting as well that every one of the arts that I mentioned has sticking practices connected to it which is where what Tim is talkiing about comes from personally I think arts that don't have those "flow,stick" drills can not evolve the fighter to as high a level of skill.Just my opinion.Am I on track Tim with what you are saying? Thanks Ed H

Hi Ed,

Great point! The 'flow, stick' stuff is extremely important. I agree.

I think there is a misconception of what sticking and flowing is. Tim, how about an explanation please?

Also, is the Shen Wu training camp going to be in early spring of 2001?

Macaco fino

"Flowing" and "sticking" are terms I've encountered a lot with taijiquan (and other arts more marital than martial in nature). Wrestling also lends itself to thinking in terms of flowing and adhering. I'd be interested in hearing about examples of flow from the more impact-oriented arts like karate or xingyiquan (I know, I know, complete martial arts deal with grappling and groundfighting too).

It would be interesting to hear about Shen Wu "forms," too. I've been taught to emphasize single-movement practice, with applications to focus on what I'm doing. The longer taijiquan forms, I was taught, serve a number of simultaneous purposes: as a library of specific techniques, as examples of short technique sequences, and as conditioning/alignment training. The little bit of xingyiquan Wu Xing training I've had takes a different approach, with high repetition of individual techniques (wood, metal, water, earth, fire)for conditioning and reaction training, and applications taught right along with them.

Hi Tom, Thats probably how I would term my early tai chi training,what I learned in the early 80's but in the last 7-8 yrs.I've been runing into people who really know how to mix it up with thier tai chi,alot of them have trained grappling and throwing arts and play push hands at varrying levels of intensity depending on your experince,"you better know how to fall when you play with these guys".I think it's the difference between tai chi"chuan" and tai chi taught for health.Anyway I said all that to say this;in the hsing-i system I'm in,we have very similar san sao flow drills to the tai chi plus various 7* drills for sticking,flowing & conditioning and they are played the same way,in varrying degrees until you are free fighting.I don't know much about Shen Wu other than we have a common lineage,but I also would like to hear from Tim.

Great posts gentlemen! In response to Ed's excellent post; when people ask me the difference between so-called "external" and Internal" martial arts techniques (althought I dislike the categorization) I always answer that all Internal styles base their techniques on sticking to and following the opponent. Sticking starts in the mind, and is extended to making actual contact with the opponent's limbs and body. To stick and follow basically involves maintaining various amounts of pressure on the opponent to control his movement, limit his options and eventually control his center. All the techniques I teach (including striking, wrestling and grappling) are based on this principle.
Herein lies my problem with labelling arts as "internal" or "external." "Martial Arts" don't exist until someone moves, and only the points of commonality in body motion and technical application allow us to even have a point of reference to call these movements and techniques a certain style. The Arts that I teach are all taught based on a set of specific principles (natural, whole body power, avoidance of force against force, sticking to and following the opponent...) which I learned from practicing arts generally labelled as "Internal" in China. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu follows the exact same principles, as do many other arts. The point is this, ANY martial art can be considered Internal OR External, based not on the name of the art, but on how each individual practices and applies the art.
So, I make no distinction between striking, wrestling or grappling as far as how the power is generated or the techniques applied. Look at it this way, there is only one 'best' way to use the body (like any machine, using it according to its design will produce the most efficient results). Discover which alignments and movements are the most stable and produce power most efficiently, and design your solo training around these parameters. A bigger, stronger man will always beat a smaller weaker man, there is no 'Art' to it. So, a "Martial Art" should allow a TRAINED smaller man to defeat a larger and stronger man. Figure out what strategies and techniques will give the little guy a chance, and practice them. The Chinese chose to call these arts "Internal." I call them martial ARTS, you can call them whatever you want. But realize they are principles of body use and application, not "styles."
As far as teahcing forms in the Shen Wu curriculum, any movement one makes with a specific intent (in our case, to produce whole body power applicable to our techniques) IS a form. "Forms" don't have to be linked together artificially and named after animals, bugs or drunken immortals to be effective (although labels are convenient, and it's probably a lot of fun to think up those fancy names). I don't teach any linked "sets" of forms in the Shen Wu class. I teach single, repetitive movements (both standing and on the ground), footwork and tumbling skills, which serve both to develop whole body power and condition the student. Combinations are taught as techniques (although I do encourage free form 'shadow fighting').
Every movement taught has potential applications as a defensive movement, a strike (usually many strikes), a chin na technique, a throw... Cultivating power in specific, generic movements is like earning money, once you put in the effort to earn it, you can spend it however you like.
Finally, Tom asked about stiking in the percussive based arts. Xing Yi Quan has a famous saying: " Never reach out without finding a target, and never return empty handed." Strikes are made usually with the closest available anatomical weapon, without beaking the forward momentum, and almost invariably both hands (or other parts of the body) are active and in contact with the opponent at all times (one hand or other body part striking while the other hand checks, pushes, pulls...). The basic concept is to leave no 'space.'

Thanks, Ed and Tim. The more I practice and learn about xingyiquan, the richer an art it seems. The way you describe "flow" in connection with the striking arts/techniques makes sense, although "flood" maybe applies more to xingyiquan than "flow".

Tim, I like your bit about "(c)ultivating power in specific, generic movements is like earning money, once you put in the effort to earn it, you can spend it however you like." I like training with high returns on effort invested.

Tom,That is great wording,if I had to describe the difference between hsing-i and mantis,that would be it.Hsing-i floods,it leaves no gaps.Mantis is very similar in it's ideas and approch but it leaves more gaps,it floats more,which is what I meant when I said,the internal arts take it to another level.My arms got like iron bars from doing shaolin yingong but after doing hsing-i for a while,my arms have gotten more like lead and it connects through the body,"hsng-i man strikes with the whole body".The nature of shaolin,sections the power off and power and chi are stored in the joints and I found as I aged that that can cause some physical problems.However,I'm happy to say that most of them have cleared up from doing internal arts.

Ed:

Thanks for explaining your experience of (some of) the differences between hsing-i and mantis. I was particularly glad to see your comparison of how your arms got like lead with xingyi training. Bruce Kumar Frantzis, whatever his virtues and flaws, put a lot of interesting anecdotes into his megatome "The Power of Internal Martial Arts," and I remember one of his statements being that the Mantis fighter fears only the heavy arms of xingyiquan, which cut right through the rapid-fire arm attacks of Mantis techniques. Or something to that effect. Your comparison puts that in perspective.

My xingyi teachers have noted how practice of Chen style taijiquan have improved their sense of connection and chan su jin in the tight coiling motions of their xingyi Five Elements forms. It's interesting how training in one art can influence another.

Is Shaolin yingong their iron-bar arm training, akin to iron palm training? What sorts of conditioning did your yingong practice involve?

Hi Tom

>Bruce Kumar Frantzis, whatever his
>virtues and flaws

what do you think are his virtues and flaws?

Hi Tom,the iron arm training we did consisted of a series of things,varios types of push ups,isometric type exercises,coilig and curling the forarms and then plenty of hard 3* exercises and lots of dit da jow,oh yeah,exercises with bricks and bamboo twisting.In fact any iron kung traning is pretty much the same,start off slow and get more and more intense and of course medacine and breathing into the area.

Anonymous,
I don't know what his virtues would be, but anyone that thinks you can move your skeleton without moving a muscle has defininately got a screw or two loose!

It's qi, Bob, it's all qi ;-] .

I have never met Mr. Frantzis personally, Anonymous. When I referred to "whatever his virtues and flaws," it was just a generic phrase. I have studied two of his books, "Opening the Energy Gates of the Body" and "The Power of Internal Martial Arts". "Opening the Energy Gates" seemed like a decent introduction to interesting warm-up exercises that might be considered qigong. I actually like the vertebrae-by-vertebrae spinal stretch that he describes in there. But I don't know much about qigong, nor is it a major part of my daily practice.

"The Power of Internal Martial Arts," like I mentioned in my previous post, has a lot of interesting anecdotes in it. I've heard some people criticize Kumar Frantzis as a big name-dropper, and others wonder how he was able to afford all that "time off" to live and practice in Japan, Taiwan and mainland China without apparently having to work at another job to pay the expenses. I guess I just figure that's his business, and more power to him for pursuing overseas martial and healing training like he did. I wish I'd had the resources to do that in my salad days (I'm well into the dessert phase of my life now).

As far as whether Mr. Frantzis is "the real thing," either as fighter or healer, I have no way of judging. I've only seen his videotape on Yang-style taijiquan fighting applications. Some of them looked pretty good, others I couldn't see well enough to tell. Mike Patterson, whose martial abilities and sense of judgment I respect, seems to think well of Mr. Frantzis. As a healer, one of my teachers was injured in a tournament several years ago and swore by the treatment that one of Mr. Frantzis' senior students gave him.

In any event, my main reason for even bringing Mr. Frantzis up is his use of the phrase "heavy xingyiquan arms" vis-a-vis a Mantis fighter. Ed is the first person who's put that into context for me.

Hey Original Macaco Fino,
Here's something to ponder about arts & "emphasis:"
Karate (Okinawa-te) doesn't necessarily mean a striking-based art. Karate is full of great chin-na-type leverages & throws! Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) few realize this. Part of the ignorance problem can be seen by looking at Brazilian Ju-Jitsu as many practice it in the States today.
BJJ (specifically Gracie BJJ) is being called a "grappling" art & a "ground-fighting" art. And it is; but it's so much more -- and few realize this because they only spend a little time in the art before they stop. The art was developed by a boxer who modified some Japanese Ju-Jitsu he had the good fortune to be exposed to; so BJJ has BOXING skills -- that's right: STAND UP (& TRY TO REMAIN STANDING BOXING SKILLS). I paraphrase Mr. Rickson Gracie when I write that most BEGINNERS end up on the ground in a fight -- & that's where the ground-fighting portion is quite important, so such skills are emphasized IN THE BEGINNING of the study of BJJ. Ground fighting is but a small piece of the total art, but it's important for the beginning student & it takes time to learn (much practice/mat time).
BJJ has wonderful throws, locks, etc. It's a fine art -- a complete art, but few stick around long enough to realize that.
Likewise karate is called a "striking art." It is; but it's also a "wrestling" art in the sense that rear hand on the hip or near the chest in any given form usually indicates a grab & pull while simultaneously striking or leveraging -- or doing both -- with the lead hand. Many instructors don't even know this (I'm giving you pearls here); such instructors can be excellent fighters & can train excellent fighters with only half the art -- but having the whole art adds to ones ability to use MARTIAL VIRTUE/MERCY. Think about it: one basic body movement can be a strike, a gentle or not-so-gentle hold, or a tendon-tearing, joint-destroying "technique" once you realize its many uses; but if all you see & know is the strike, then how are you going to be merciful (are you going to strike less hard: more slowly or with improper body mechanics to soften the blow)? If you also knew the same could be used to control with a degree of gentleness, then you would have a more merciful option (as you might need to restrain a loved one -- not wanting to crush them with an efficient karate strike).
There are many reasons that whole martial arts are eventually taught/learned as partial arts -- sometimes some parts of an art are kept "secret" (for a time, or from certain individuals or groups of people). Some arts have even been deliberately modified & have become sport to those who practice as such (a deep subject I won't dive into right now).
Now for the mind blower: karate (a so-called "external" art), used in its completeness (of grabing, twisting, pulling, striking, etc.) can be practiced as an "internal" art. Karate forms can be practiced as slowly as a tai-chi form or at a moderate ba-gua-type speed; they can be practiced with crisp, linear movement or with free-flowing circular movements (or some such combination). Many old karate masters stuck to their opponents -- one was infamous for grabbing an opponents arm with one hand & repeatedly striking one general area with the other until death occurred (the Okinawan people chose not to send him as a representative & ambassador of karate to Japan proper -- instead they sent the more mild & merciful G. Funikochi, who did teach the whole art for a time to the Japanese).
Enough to ponder for now; now I ponder just how much good practice I coulda/shoulda done instead of typing all this stuff {:o) {:o( {:o)

Interesting read Mike. One of my students use to practice Shotokan. I have to agree with you, although I've never seen anyone practicing it as an internal system, I'm convinced Funakoshi must have. I practice San Soo with an internal slant. I think the difference between internal or external application all boils down to an individuals application of the art they practice.
I've seen soft and yielding Karate stylist's as well as rigid Aikido practitioner's. I think it all boils down to thinking. If the person practicing the art uses their mind they will ultimately discover the soft approach.

To Tim
I have a question about how to defense the Muay
Thai 's high round kick,cause I fight with the Muay Thai guy yesterday.I got some takedown and do the ground fighting(foot lock) too,but it's just for sport so I have to let him go when he tap out,and start fight again.I got two kicks at my jaw by him and inside my knee too.

To Tim
I have a question about how to defense the Muay
Thai 's high round kick,This kick looks like High round kick and turn the foot down to the face,cause I fight with the Muay Thai guy yesterday.I got some takedown and do the ground fighting(foot lock) too,but it's just for sport so I have to let him go when he tap out,and start fight again.I got two kicks at my jaw by him and inside my knee too.