I agree, very interesting.

But, as you point out, Muay Thai isn't 'internal'.Why?

In Tahiboxing the use of the body as a whole is notorious but, at the same time, thai fighters rely upon hitting as hard as they can with bony parts : overpowering their opponent. This can work fine when our opponent is more or less our size (sport) and we trained daily since childhood (sport) but definitely unpractical when enemy's twice our weight (real life) and we started training when adults(real life).

Plus, the energetic paradigm is absent in M.Thai, since magnificent deterioration of thai fighters' bodies interests nobody (sport).

The superb art of Thai kickboxing is for young lions who want to compete in the ring and do not care much about the rest.

European,

You're agreeing with me. It's the second half of the puzzle that makes Muay Thai's approach Non-internal. Their bodies take a beating not because of HOW THEY STRIKE but because of how they respond to their opponent's force. Were it not for this they are as fit as any other professional athlete. Take a Muay Thai boxer and show them an internal approach to dealing with opposing force and you have one hell of a stand-up fighter. Perhaps it's why Brazilians and others adopt it as their stan-up method, albeit with a few modifications.

But I'm not on the board to champion Muay Thai. I'm just using an example of well known "whole-body power" strikers. For argument's sake you could substitute any number of of other fighting arts for my "Muay Thai" example. Whole body power, whether systematically trained and developed, or as a by-product of years of banging away trying to develop as much WHACK! into a bag or opponent is still whole body power.

Xing Yi, most notably, as well as other internal arts also use hands, fists, knees, elbows, head-butts, etc. - bony strikes the same as Muay Thai yet the strategy for when and how to apply these range from looking similar on the surface to being radically different. Max referred to whole-body power in striking as an approach to internal training. My response is yes and no. It's also an approach to external styles too (although maybe not so systematic)and I've seen reputable "Internal stylists" that couldn't come close to the power of a good amateur boxer's overhand right because their approach to striking wasn't realistic. Or be able to bob & weave and move to avoid force either for that matter.

I don't know if Wing Chun is APPROACHED as an internal martial art or not but Xing Yi most definitely is. I think the approach makes a huge difference.

I'm simply saying that whole-body power has to be coupled with non-opposition of force or more specifically, from the Internal perspective, sticking and following. Perhaps techniques and applications are a bit different but in my opinion if both styles are doing that then there's not too big of a difference. Wing Chun would be just as "Internal" as the other more widely accepted internal arts. But without those it's miles away. I reckon it all boils down to the APPROACH - how each art is presented by the person teaching balanced with how it's percieved by the student. From one perspective you can say they are the same. From another they are entirely different.

I'm wondering if the original question was meant to read "do you consider Wing Chun to be internal?" or "What are the stylistic differences between the two?".

At quick glance it looks as though they are similar in that they take a small defensive angle, are heavily striking based, and involve sticking & following. But hell you could say that about a lot of other arts too. Cheers

Assuming TC, H-I & BG have something that makes them internal & other styles not - I would agree that the lack of direct resistance should be one of several crucial factors. There is also a more refined use of balance and power generation, that does not require leaning on the opponent while striking and facilitates breaking their structure. This requirement leads to the particular version of whole-body useage, not present in most other training systems.
All in all, the concept of not fighting oneself while fighting the opponent is, in my opinion, important.

Erik,

again I agree with you. Wing Chun is an internal style, of course, a taoist internal art.

What is internal? When explain something that has much to do with a feeling, it's extremely difficult doing it with words but easy when actually felt. More or less like explaing 'how' is the taste of chocolate to somebody who hasn't tried it yet. In Internal arts a lot of attenction is payed to what happens internally (tendons, ligaments, posture etc.).

I try: Internal arts are taoist arts, based on the yin-yang taoist paradigm, arts who benefit of a profound knowledge in anatomy and are designed to create a class of fighters from a particular stand point: energy.

These arts' motion is often subtle or slow, 'cause a deep mental activity is used. I.arts are able to generate power where isn't suspected (skinny, low-profile men).
Experts of these arts never oppose power vs. power( i.e hard blocks) but evade and strike vital points with whole body power.Tactile sensitivity is developed.

Masters of the internal arts are capable to emprove their health while aging, keep moving nimble and display lots ov vitality. Control of breath and integrity of motion allows them to do so.

Wing Chun is in my opinion the most streetfighting oriented internal art, designed to create a formidable fighter in a short time while the health aspect is less considered than in similar arts.

European,

The internal arts are not 'Taoist' arts. Certain attributes were adopted by Taoist long after they were in use. Saying the Internal arts are Taoist arts is like saying Wine is a Christian beverage.

Plenty of Taoists don't practice a martial art- and plenty of Internal Artists don't follow Taoism.

Shane, interesting. You approach Taoism as a religion? (or "do not approach it", as the case may be

hmmm, I respectfully venture, that something can be said to be Taoist in origin (2500+ history) without being connected to Taoist organized religion ("TaoISM"?) - at least it holds, if we speak of the history of it's socially espoused use.
Of course, it is probably clear, that IMA are being taught today in ways, where there are almost no mention of taoist metaphysical theory/figures, etc. - does that make it into a non-taoist art? Does seperating an apple from it's tree, and then selling it as a "WinSux", remove it's quality of 'appleness'? Or does changing the explanations, change the intentions, and thusly make it into another game, another art entirely?
-Sorry, got a little carried away there... (PINE Is No-longer Elm) Come to think of it, this is probably an old topic...?

As an aside, I approach Taoism as a minor or nomad science - it's about following the flow of forces, not watching the river from it's banks, etc.

I think what Shane means is that the whole notion of "taoist arts" is a misconception, Jens. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon of Tim worshippers, I say this quite objectively: Tim seems to have studied deeply the three main "internal" arts, and though I don't consider competition true combat, after a little experience with it (as opposed to the typical karate "tippy-tappy" tournaments), I gotta say that it is a lot more use of one's art than most chi-huggers and cloud-wavers ever give their arts, other than running their mouths. But don't get me wrong, it isn't just a testosterone thing, Tim has apparently researched his favorite past-time exhaustively with sources most of us could never hope to uncover. Read "Xing-Yi Nei Gong" for its history of supposed "taoist" arts. I once said on this forum that one didn't need to waste one's time studying the 8 trigrams to master Bagua, and boy, some people came unglued at this sacrilege, but Tim isn't the only source that hints at later scholars trying to make "respectable" the martial arts once they became a more widespread necessity. Bottom line: you won't stop a head-bashing with philosophy. My instructor talked about how our art came from Shaolin. I respect his beliefs, but I have a brain of my own, and realize that most chinese systems say this to get a level of respectability while, in fact, they are basically local village styles, including my own. Sorry of this seems too down-to-earth, but I believe as Stephen Hayes, that a philosophy composed of much empty thought without application to the real world is useless. And somehow, I don't think true taoists would be that way.

I admit I'm in over my head... and/or I do not cleary understand your post.

I did not, in my previous post, refer to 'Toaism as a religion' I did say that calling the IMA Taoist arts is like calling wine a Christian drink. I did, until reading your post, consider a Taoist someone who practices Taoism; a popular Eastern religion. I guess now I'll need to brush up on my knowledge of what Taoism and Taoists are.

Having said all that, I still believe that Internal Martial Arts were fighting arts practiced with the same principles and applications long before any Poet, scientist or religious scholar decided they could be associated with Taoists or Taoism.

Does gluing an apple into an orange tree make the apple and orange?


(by the way- I'm not a "Tim worshipper". He's the greatest teacher I've ever seen and the best martial artist I've ever met and I consider him one of my best friends, but I'll never pray to him. Hell he can't even levitate!)

Nor would I suggest that you were, Shane. I just miss Bob#2's cloying babble, and thought that was one way to bring it back (heehee)!

Last I heard Bob #2 is experiencing a Federally funded "time out" after an unfortunate incident with a couple of off duty officers in an LA bar.

As he put it in a letter he'll "... walk the streets a free man before either of them chew solid food again!"

He's one ornery mo-fo AND a devout Taoist.

Just don't mess with his peace.

I understand why you guys use chi-huggers as a knock against new-agey types. But why cloud-wavers?

I don't get it. Could someone explain it to me?

(Dragonprawn.... should this be a new thread?)

I assume he is refering to the dolts who think limply performing 'cloud hands' (the Nei Gung excercise) over and over will achive some amazing Martial Arts skill. The 'cloud hands' application is really powerful- but until you learn to apply it under real pressure (actually sparring or fighting) it's just a friggin excercise. I think Kenneth, like most IMArtists who spar, like to poke fun at those chi-hugger types... because, I mean... COME ON!

*a note I'd like to point out for the record:
Bob #2 invented the phrase 'ChiHugger' and it has since popped up all over the place. If it weren't for, as he put it "...the man keeping him down" he'd admit it.

And I bet he'd really give EuroPeeOn a hard time about saying (or even thinking) "These arts' motion is often subtle or slow, 'cause a deep mental activity is used" because, I mean, COME THE FRICK ON! Does he really think that is true?
That's the chi-hugger mindset wrapped up like a Christmas gift right there. That single phrase is exactly what is wrong with chi huggers.

Thanks, Shane, that is exactly what I meant; sorry, dragonprawn, no offense meant to those who can actually apply cloudhands.

Going back to the topic (isn't what a board is for?) I would like to recall:
wing chun is similar to xing yi in many ways.

Both arts come from a taoist background, emitt a similar energy (:feeling when hit) and adopt a very aggressive way of attacking the opponent's guard.

IMHO Wing Chun is (a general rule)more streetfighting oriented while XingYi pays more attention to the structure of energy (health).

As everything in life, may everyone practice what he likes better.

And yes, often motion in IMA is slow because intense mind activity is working. This does not exclude to move fast, quite the opposite is true.

WC is shaolin.

Its comparing apples to oranges. What you see, is not what it is really. You're dealing with 2 completely different arts. The easiest way to tell is to ask a WC guy to try hit you with a few punches to the chest while you defend the best you can. Then ask a XY guy to do the same. Do the WC one first because you might have to go to the hospital after the XY cuts right through you defense, through the frontside and out the backside.

that is the difference: the ability to bypass defense as a knife through hot butta

I guess that intense mind activity is what makes you sort of 'slow', European.

I always thought the IMA forms are practiced slowly because moving through them slowly lessens the chance of cheating your own balance while helping engrain the proper alignment into muscle memory.

I also thought Xing Yi was a proven battlefield art. Armed and Armored soldiers doing as much damage as possible to each other as quickly as possible... and it's health benifits were a by product. How did Wing Chun earn it's reputation?

Have any Wing Chun practicioners won any of the open class full contact tournaments in China? (I'm genuinely curious).

Shane,
I think the intense mind activity is exactly what to use to check that the balance and alignment are there.

When you train do you just let your mind check out? Or do you use it to check your alignments? Do you imagine forces that you're moving against for instance?

I don't agree with everything European says, or his dress sense, but it sounds like his training is too sparring oriented to be classified as a chi hugger. He may not have mentioned sparring in this thread, but he has in others.

European: I know there is a lot of inane babble about Hsing-Yi's supposed health benefits, and perhaps it is even true. I also admit I am not a Hsing-Yi expert, but what I have seen of it looks very different from the typical tai ch-for-health training, much more combat oriented. Also, you have mentioned on this forum before that WC was taoist. You are the only one I have ever heard that from. I'm wondering what leads you to believe that.

Edward,

I agree that mind activity is there- but it's not the reason the movements are slow. The converse is true; intense mind activity is there BECAUSE the movements are slow- (to me it looked like Eropean was exhibiting a profound misunderstanding of a very basic concept). I don't just let my mind check out during forms work.

I should appologize for being harsh and jumping on chi huggers... (I'm no expert but I'm good enough to recognize BS when it's espoused)... But because Mr. Dos knows where I live and will probably turn up at some ungodly hour after freeing himself from the clink,
I worry I'd never hear the end of it if I showed any mercy on a chi hugger.

Shane,

maybe I'm slow, yes. My dai-sifu Leung Ting could say it. Even my si-pak Emin Boztepe could. I don't know you, so I wonder I fast are you.

Ed,

I sparr with boxers (I coach boxing), tahiboxers, sanda boxers, kyokushinkai karatekas, wrestlers, jujitsukas and any other thing than can come to our mind.
Two days ago I put to sleep a thai fighter -conditioned and young, which I'm not- with a hook to his midsection.

Wing Chun earned its fame in mild chinese vale tudos (leitai)during the 50's-70's. Anyone interested can search these:
"Dynamic Wing Tsun" VHS
"Authentic Wing tsun" VHS b
oth by dr. Leung Ting

and
"On single combat", book -Pfof. K.R.Kernspecht
"Roots and branches of Wing Tsun", book, L.Ting
about the taoist heritage of this art.
Of course there is a big number of articles about taoism in WT in the last 15yrs martial arts magazines and on the net, i.e:

http://www.wtny.com/what_is_philosophy.php

(note: among pratictioners in Europe, where Wing Chun is very popular, the taoist nature of this art as OPPOSED to Shaolin hard styles is well known)

Anyone interested in the details can email EBMAS, IMHO the bet in Usa. They are quite nice guys.