what is the one inch punch?

[sideslasher9]

What does the one inch punch consist of is is chi or being very strong or what? i know bruce lee demonstrated it. and in several books and articles on it i read that u just have to practice it? how do i do that ?like in killbill??? :laugh:

[shevbo]

I have only seen the video of Bruce Lee doing it :/

I think your meant to punch at full stretch and retract your fist soo quickly that all the energy of the punch is travelling straight into the persons chest without coming back to you. This way this energy is not being wasted by not coming back to you.

Tried using physics there :( poor explanation I know :P

[Jay Bell]

What does the one inch punch consist of is is chi or being very strong or what? i know bruce lee demonstrated it. and in several books and articles on it i read that u just have to practice it? how do i do that ?like in killbill??? :laugh:

Biomechanical physics :D To be able to do shots like the 1, 3 inch punches, you have to have a good grasp of appropriate timing and tension.

And no...it's not chi..

[GodofGamblers]

There was an anecdote i read in a book once by a writer (Joe Hyams?) who invited Bruce over to his pool for a swim. One of the writer's friends stopped by (he was a weight lifter) and laughed when he saw Bruce. when he heard Bruce was a fighter, he expected to see a guy that looked like himself: over 6', musclebound and over 220lbs. when he saw this skinny chinese guy that tipped the scales at 130lbs, he was not impressed and let Bruce know.

Bruce offered to show him the one inch punch. The man would stand by the poolside and Bruce would punch him in the stomach from a distance of one inch. The man laughingly agreed.

Later, the writer went inside to see his friend, soaking wet from his fall into the pool and still breathing heavily. "I can't believe the power of that punch... It knocked the wind right out of me".

uh... yeah... that's the one inch punch.

i can't remember the writer's name but he was married to Britt Ekland. I doubt he made the story up. Joe Hyams, i think his name was. chi has nothing to do with it. forearms and back muscles were the muscles bruce worked on. he claimed those were the muscles for fighting. biceps, chest, the rest are purely ornamental, he said.

[Bugeisha]

Just wanted to take this time to point out that we don't have any purely ornamental muscles...

[GodofGamblers]

he he i guess not. i was just paraphrasing Lee. he found the western preoccuption to work biceps and the chest a waste of time. the back and forearms are for combat. the other ones, obviously are necessary, but not as important, in Lee's opinion.

[hkstone]

You may find many Southern CMA are using inch(es) punch - Pak(Bak/Bai) Mei, Dragon, (Chu and Chow/Chau) Mantis. It's all related to using stance/hip/ground gripping/chi into the dang tin/neck/shoulder all at an instance.

[Bad Karma]

WC 2nd form, but the technique goes way back in time in "soft" art systems. Fa jing is used and it's better concept is the "no inch." I've been dropped where I stood and I've been knocked across the room with it - sucks! LOL! Just wish I could do it successfully.

Peace

[Eye4NEye]

he he i guess not. i was just paraphrasing Lee. he found the western preoccuption to work biceps and the chest a waste of time. the back and forearms are for combat. the other ones, obviously are necessary, but not as important, in Lee's opinion.

Actually, read "The Art of Expressing the Human Body" and you will not find any such reference. Lee focused on circuit training his entire body and actually had perscribed exercises for each major muscle group. He even cautioned against favoring certain groups and causing a "weak link".

[GodofGamblers]

interesting. i don't doubt it. but if you look at his body, you can see that he favors certain muscles, above all the forearms and back. he didn't work the biceps or chest, which is apparent. he doesn't look at all like a Van Damme.

but you're right: he stressed running and circuit training in his writings most of all. running is the backbone of all sport he wrote, or something to that effect.

there is an interesting camera shot in ONG BAK. the hero, a Thai, stands off against a foreign fighter, 'the Bear'. the camera pans to Bear who is flexing his biceps and chest. the camera then pans to Tony Jaa whose musculature is quite slight in that area but then the camera pans back and focuses on his back which is where his strength is. it is quite a statement/juxtaposition of images. i think it was making the same point.

[Bad Karma]

What I always found interesting was how Bruce Lee managed to look thin and small until he flexed. Then, BAM! Where the heck did those come from?! LOL!

Peace

[Eye4NEye]

interesting. i don't doubt it. but if you look at his body, you can see that he favors certain muscles, above all the forearms and back. he didn't work the biceps or chest, which is apparent. he doesn't look at all like a Van Damme.

Indeed, he did favor certain muscle groups, but he didn't neglect any. Just because his chest doesn't look like VD doesn't mean he didn't work it. I would guess that VD followed more of a mass building routine and less of a stamina/speed routine than BL. Most of what I have read of BL says he focused on high rep circuit training which isn't going to bulk him up like VD. He was fanatical about his forearms and lats, though, that's for sure. He wrote about how he trained his forearms and abs every day because of their quick recovery time.

[poetic misjustice]

i've learnt that it's basically an energy punch, you aim the punch one inch behind the target, so you fist is one inch away from the opponent, then you punch (with alot of snap) two inches, the kinetic energy should travel through the body creating a chain reaction all from one point. I've only succeded once and it is effective

[Dan Harden]

Guys

The punch is not a punch. The more you think it is -the less it will be. The force is in your body. Your arms and forearms and chest have nothing to do with it. Think of your spine, your legs and the ground.
What on earth are you guys into mentioning muscles and tings like that. :o

Whether or not it is in tai chi? I will say this.
I was taught how to use my body in ways exactly like the CMA from a Japanese art. This included what we called an aiki-punch. Delivered from no inch...to ...whatever inch. I showed this to a CMA fellow but he could not manage to do it until we trained together at it. After some months of him practicing he suddenly "got it" and drilled me into the ground. While it was not excellent, in time, it will be.
Power generation is paramount in the CMA, is it not? it is formelss is it not?
Stop thinking about muscle work. I have a small guy who could nail you like nobodies business. I am large, 6' with plenty of muscle. So if he can do what I do where does that leave the muscle theory. I also have great difficulty pushing him-he can trap my energy and drop me. I donlt think I will be tellig him to use his muscle anytime soon.

cheers
Dan

[Digi]

but you're right: he stressed running and circuit training in his writings most of all. running is the backbone of all sport he wrote, or something to that effect.

All the techniques and strategies you learn are useless if you're too tired to perform it. Cardio is should be practiced daily.
:bandit:

[TheOmega]

Bruce's 'One Inch Punch' technique is from an old Shaolin principle that was called, Iron Palm of T'ai Chi. As Bad Karma said, I have also been struch with the Iron Palm. It does make you lose footing and launch back quite far if done in the right hands. It is the principle of my Master to "feel what I deal". So many times to learn an art, I must experience it, mostly in part.

[Yang Wei Xin]

I believe the one inch punch does not rely on strength so much as proper skeletal alignment, thus taking advantage of your connection to the ground, and bringing that strength up throught the skeletal structure, and then putting it into your opponents chest, obviously muscle is required, but without proper alignment, muscle doesn't mean much.

[TheOmega]

This is true. Everything is very specific to do the technique correctly, though harboring a true belief in the body's energy I believe Chi does have something to do with it.

[Yang Wei Xin]

[QUOTE=TheOmega]This is true. Everything is very specific to do the technique correctly, though harboring a true belief in the body's energy I believe Chi does have something to do

I agree, I think its funny when I see people debating the existence of something as universal as Chi(Ki), especially on a martial arts website.

[TogaAssassin]

[QUOTE=TheOmega]This is true. Everything is very specific to do the technique correctly, though harboring a true belief in the body's energy I believe Chi does have something to do

I agree, I think its funny when I see people debating the existence of something as universal as Chi(Ki), especially on a martial arts website.

I'm not suprised at all to see it argued becuase there is no concrete evidence to prove that what you call "chi" exists. We can call it energy, because there is no doubt that energy (the potential to displace mass) exists at every bend (be it potential energy or actual energy manifest). Sure you can call THAT chi but until someone can prove without a shadow of a doubt that something like (the essence of someones soul essentially) chi exists I think it is a perfectly valid topic for debate.

It is not impossible that Chi is akin to the valhallah of the vikings. Something that was invented in order to subvert mens fear of death and destruction in battle. It's amazing what you can overcome when your mind refuses to bend to the cold harsh rules of the physical world. When you truly belive your Chi is shielding you from harm etc it's got to be a lot less stressfull to fight an armed opponent.

Remember Chi didn't work so well when the Shaolin attempted to use it to divert bullets during the boxer rebellion.

[Bugeisha]

The "one-inch punch" is nothing more than a regular punch executed from a short distance. When we're commonly practicing (particularly in the air or in sets/kata), we practice techniques through large arcs of motion. In application, these arcs are often shortened. The "one-inch punch" is just a punch executed in a shortened arc. The mechanics are no different from any other punch. There are no tricks, just training.

[kumite]

There is a Shuri-te master in the town I live in that can perform the one inch punch. His old blackbelts have told me of Shihan Barber doing a shuto(knifehand strike) on a fellow wearing a motorcycle helmet with his hand on the helmet.
As the story goes several of them were discussing technique application for a street fight and whether certain types of clothing might give some protection against certain attacks.(such as heavy winter coats, heavy biker jackets, stuff like that.) Shihan Barber overheard them and told them that if their technique was good enough that the blow would penetrate through whatever they were wearing.
One of the guys rode a motorcycle and had his helmet in his hand made a comment like "C'mon shihan, what if they're wearing a helmet?" So Shihan Barber made the guy put on his helmet, he placed the inside if his hand, the thumb/index finger area of his hand, on the side of the helmet and then when the guy said he was ready, rotated his hand over in a shuto. He just basically turned his hand over. The guy was sent a few feet to the side and to the floor. And the helmet had a dent in it. Granted it isn't the typical 1 inch punch we've seen Bruce Lee perfrom, but I still wouldn't like to feel it.

[Bugeisha]

Unless you're relying on the momentum of your hand (not a great plan given the small mass of most peoples' hands) for a strike, the real power of a strike is in the moment where the coordination of the whole body transfers through the hand to the target. In my experience, this largely happens in the final "snap" of a technique, which takes hardly any time at all. The skill lies in the coordination of the body; as we grow more skilled, there are fewer gaps in the transfer of power from one part to the next, so our motions can get smaller and smaller.

I'll try an example: let's look at the coordinaton between the hips and the waist (referring to the band of muscle around the spine just above the hips). To begin with, we might need a large hip motion to create a larger window in which the waist can "pick up" the power, to continue transferring it up the spine. Picking numbers out of the air to show what I mean...Say the waist can "pick-up" the power of 5 degrees of rotation of the hips, but because of a lack of coordination or timing runs 5 degrees behind the hip. To transfer maximum power, you would need to rotate the hips 10 degrees; 5 before the waist activates, 5 more to generate the power that will be transferred.
As we become more coordinated, say we reduce the lag time of the waist to 1 degree. Now we only need to rotate the hips 6 degrees to generate the same 5 degrees of transferrable rotation.

I know that's not a perfect example, but it might get across some of what I mean. I'm just typing stream-of-consciousness, so I apologize for my lack of clarity. Anyway, the point is that the power is focused in a very short time in any given technique. We train the techniques in a larger range of motion to exaggerate the correct path for the power to follow. Hopefully, as our skill increases we will be able to generate that power within an increasingly small segment of the total possible range of motion.

Take this with a grain of salt; I'm certainly no expert.

[Rokto Obotar]

he he i guess not. i was just paraphrasing Lee. he found the western preoccuption to work biceps and the chest a waste of time. the back and forearms are for combat. the other ones, obviously are necessary, but not as important, in Lee's opinion.


Lee trained his chest bicepts and tricepts emensely doing diamond, 1 hand, 2 hand, and even single finger push ups. He worked out on medium weighted punching bag which works many muscles besides the forearm and back. He also benched, curled and at the top of his physical peak he looked to have more chest and bicep then many men in the west today. He never doubted the strength you can still recieve from training your bicepts, chest, and tricepts.

[Kwon Pup Maze]

The one inch punch is actually a lunging punch directed in a upward motion using the last three knuckles of your hand as the apex. The foot on your punching side should hit the ground after the punch lands. The theory is that if the foot lands first it will absorb the energy instead of the energy transferring to the target. Hope I made sense.

[Bugeisha]

The "one-inch punch" is nothing more than a regular punch executed from a short distance. The mechanics are no different from any other punch. There are no tricks, just training.


Yeah, I'm quoting myself.

[Gene Williams]

I tend to agree with Dillon...it is training not tricks. "Secrets" are way oversold.

[Jeff Burger]

But what about chi?

:up: :rolleyes: :D

[TonyU]

But what about chi?

:up: :rolleyes: :D
My chi was strong last night...




after eating too much cheese.

[Bugeisha]

Ooops. Totally forgot about chi. I'm gonna have to rethink this whole "martial arts" thing.

[kenpo123]

correct me if im wrong, but wasnt the 1 inch punch that lee demonstrated more for a show.. Parlor tricks if you will? the strike it self is suppose to go through the agressor not push him away the way lee did it? I can do that too.. infact i have, to a 200 pound man and sent him a good 6 feet back from a 1 inch punch, didnt hurt him at all though.. im sure Bruce could prob have enough power to knock the crap out of someone if he did it for real and the person he would do it on i dont think would fly backwards.. more just drop.. .

[oneinchpunchmaster]

The One inch Punch doesnt have to consist of using chi or anything, you could simply do it if you know the right body mechanics. Also, most people think wrong of the Punch. Your supposed to bend your arm very little, then stretch it one inch forward ONLY. That, my friends, is extremely hard to hurt someone with. When talking about the 3 inch punch, you stretch your arm 3 inches forwards, which gives you more power than the one inch punch. Again, it has to do with the body mechanics. You must use as much of your body as possible ie. Your waiste, the arm you are not punching with, youe feet and your head. Also, the One Inch Punch to some people is more of a push. A Senior Student in my Dojo named Justin Goh(Yes, his grandfather is GrandMaster Austin Goh, in Wing Chun) attempted the One Inch Punch to me and it was more of a push as i went flying across the room lol!It didnt even hurt, which is what the One inch Punch is supposed to do..So when practising it, dont try to push the opponent, rather concentrate on hurting the opponent.

[oneinchpunchmaster]

The Right Body Mechanics:

Here i will explain in as much detail as possible how to do the three inch punch:

First of all, stand with your toes pointing forward to the direction of the opponent. Take your arm out and bend it only a LITTLE, To make sure you have the right amout, put your fingers on the opponents chest, make sure your fingers are straight and your arm is only a little bent, Now close your fingers(this will have your hand three inches away from the opponents chest as your fingers measure approx. 3 inches).

Now for the Body mechanics. Here are some things you must do when attempting the punch:

You must twist your waist rapidly to the left if you are punch with the right hand. This will give you more force. You should also pivot your feet to the left, and you should pull the left arm back as hard as possible. All of what i just explained now will give you extra force in the punch. Without attempting these mechanics, the punch is pretty much useless.

Onto the Execution of the Punch:

You must do all of the Body mechanics i explained at the same time as executing the punch, however you should twist your waist BEFORE doing the punch. Now onto the Three Inch Punch:

1.Keep the arm your going to punch with relaxed. Dont tense your hand or arm. Keep it relaxed.Also, keep your read leg bent and relaxed.
2.When Executing the punch, first twist your waist rapidly to the left if your punching with the right hand. Then pivot your feet to the left and rapidly straighten your leg(You can either twist your waist first, or pivot your feet first).Also, pull your left arm back as hard as possible. Upon doing all these moves you must tense your right arm and fist and then straighten it rapidly. it also helps to jerk your wrist upwards as it provides more force.All the above mechanics should be done at the SAME time expect for the feet/waist movement which should be done ONLY a split second before, as if it was all one move.Also, try to hit with your hands top 3 knuckles.


NOTES:

The One inch Punch is done by straightening your arm by an inch, To get the right amount of Distance, take our your first finger,bend it and put this on the opponents chest, now upon execution of the punch, close your wrist and do as explained above in the 3 Inch punch.

The 3 Inch Punch is good for beginners, as the 1 inch punch is harder.

[Dan Harden]

No...not even close. Sorry. That is external punching. And I find it odd that it does not cover even basic internal mechanics. It sounds like TKD to me. You may be abe to do it well and thats fine, but it is not real power generation nor is it what is referred to classically as the one inch punch.

Once anyone feels it- no explanation or defense of the method is needed. Typical replies I get are "What the hell was that?" or "Do that again!"
Of course the punch can be the same as a shove or throw or lock or choke or resisting of same. Its a body mechanic that can be done with or without breathing techniques that enchance it.
I'm not one for teaching on the net and find it deplorable when people try to. If you find a teacher who knows these internal skills you probably will never go back to what you were doing till you master this type of moving or are at least on your way. Then it fits everything yet it will change your way of thinking about movement and the arts forever.

And before anyone gets defensive or goofy...no this is not some unstoppable power or unbeatable skill. Its just very high level training that each of us can or cannot learn to use martially. I don't think of it as another tool for the tool box- I think of it as "the" tool box that everything else fit in.
Cheers
Dan

[Yang Wei Xin]

its about the coordination and cooperation of the different jings in order to obtain the maximum output of chi in the desired direction.:p

[Bugeisha]

So, in your opinion, how do "internal" power generation mechanics differ from "external" mechanics? What is the difference in mechanism that sets apart "internal" power?

[Iron Monkey]

WC 2nd form, but the technique goes way back in time in "soft" art systems. Fa jing is used and it's better concept is the "no inch." I've been dropped where I stood and I've been knocked across the room with it - sucks! LOL! Just wish I could do it successfully.

Peace


What do you mean WC 2nd form

[Yang Wei Xin]

So, in your opinion, how do "internal" power generation mechanics differ from "external" mechanics? What is the difference in mechanism that sets apart "internal" power?
During spontaneous movement, the stimuli that otherwise release postural reflexes are not inactivated but must be neutralized in another way. The principle of reafference has been hypothesized to account for this. By this hypothesis the functional system is visualized as a feedback loop, whereby afferent nerves carry impulses toward the central nervous system and efferent ones carry impulses away from the central nervous system to the motor areas. Afferences can be divided into receptor excitations caused by internal changes in the musculature (reafference) and those produced passively by external stimulation (exafference). Reafference and exafference are integrated in some manner in the higher centres of the nervous system.

There are a variety of ways to categorize all the types of forces. All the types of forces can be categorized as contact forces or as action-at-a-distance forces. Whether a force was categorized as an action-at-a-distance force was dependent upon whether or not that type of force could exist even when the objects were not physically touching. The force of gravity, electrical forces, and magnetic forces were classic examples of forces which could exist between two objects even when they are not physically touching. In this lesson, we will learn how to categorize forces based upon whether or not their presence is capable of changing an object's total mechanical energy. We will learn that there are certain types of forces, which when present and when involved in doing work on objects will change the total mechanical energy of the object. And there are other types of forces which can never change the total mechanical energy of an object, but rather can only transform the energy of an object from potential energy to kinetic energy (or vice versa). The two categories of forces are internal versus external forces.

Forces can be categorized as internal forces or external forces. There are many sophisticated and worthy ways of explaining and distinguishing between internal and external forces. Many of these ways are commonly discussed at great length in physics textbooks. For our purposes, we will merely say that external forces include applied forces, normal forces, tensional forces, friction forces, and air resistance forces. For our purposes, internal forces include gravitational forces, magnetic forces, electrical forces, and spring forces.

The significance of categorizing a force as internal or external is related to the ability of that type of force to change an object's total mechanical energy when it does work upon an object. When work is done upon an object by an external force, the total mechanical energy (KE + PE) of that object is changed. If the work is "positive work", then the object will gain energy. If the work is "negative work", then the object will lose energy. The gain or loss in energy can be in the form of potential energy, kinetic energy, or both. Under such circumstances, the work which is done will be equal to the change in mechanical energy of the object.

When work is done upon an object by an internal force (for example, gravitational and spring forces), the total mechanical energy (KE + PE) of that object remains constant. In such cases, the object's energy changes form. For example, as an object is "forced" from a high elevation to a lower elevation by gravity, some of the potential energy of that object is transformed into kinetic energy. Yet, the sum of the kinetic and potential energies remain constant. This is referred to as energy conservation and will be discussed in detail later in this lesson. When the only forces doing work are internal forces, energy changes forms - from kinetic to potential (or vice versa); yet the total amount of mechanical is conserved.

When work is done by external forces, the total mechanical energy of the object is altered. The work that is done can be "+ work" or "- work" depending on whether the force doing the work is directed opposite the object's displacement or in the same direction as the object's displacement. If the force and the displacement are in the same direction, then "+ work" is done on the object; the object subsequently gains mechanical energy. If the force and the displacement are in the opposite direction, then "- work" is done on the object; the object subsequently loses mechanical energy.

A horizontal force can never change the potential energy of an object. Horizontal forces cannot cause vertical displacements. The only means by which an external force can contribute to a potential energy change is if the force has a vertical component. Potential energy changes are the result of height changes and only a force with a vertical component can cause a height change.

[oneinchpunchmaster]

If you read my post, i said that i will show you the external way.Its true that The One Inch Punch uses Internal power also, but i never said i'd never said it didnt in my post.I didnt teach you that because im not familiar with the internal part of the punch.. I just explained the mechanics of how the punch is done, the reader can learn about Jing from some other tutorial as i dont have much knowledge in it.Though i believe the body mechanics i explained are exactly how they should be.That was the point of my tutorial.

[Yang Wei Xin]

If you read my post, i said that i will show you the external way.Its true that The One Inch Punch uses Internal power also, but i never said i'd never said it didnt in my post.I didnt teach you that because im not familiar with the internal part of the punch.. I just explained the mechanics of how the punch is done, the reader can learn about Jing from some other tutorial as i dont have much knowledge in it.

Jing-strength of force generated for chi


examples

bung jing-connective energy(baby jing)/any movement contains bung jing
fa jing-explosive energy/think of a powerful reverse punch with lots of snap
chan si jing-silk reeling energy/think of tai chi or aikido

many many more, im not expert either, just a little knowledge in my pea brain.
:bow:

[Bugeisha]

Josh- that's a good set of definitions from a standpoint of basic physics, but I don't think that's how Dan meant "internal/external" power generation. I'm interested to know what he finds the difference to be, and what he means by "real power generation."

[Dan Harden]

Dillon

The internal aspects of these arts are not generally known or practiced-but they are and remain the best potential for power from our bodies. In general it involves you being relaxed and not flexing major muscle groups, the ground, your legs, your hips, diaphragm and breathing patterns, your spine and your mind. Lest I forget- then years of training. Although you can do tricks with internal power; both receiving and giving- and I will be the first to admit I have had my share of fun letting people try to lock me or throw me as I just stand there looking at them- it is highly practical for balance in any endeavor and potent for fighting in any means or art you care to use it in; Judo, Aikido, Karate, jujutsu, whatever. Though a combination of grappling and hitting seems ideal to me.
While many people eschew the internal arts as esoteric and rather heady they are absolutely at the heart of everything most young people were drawn to in these arts in the first place-immovable power and mystery. The mystery as it turns out is just more hard work. Work that can be done alone-but almost no one does it, therefore almost no one gets it. What I will say is that having felt it and then years and years later being able to use it, I would never go back to training without it. Virtually everything else can benefit from it; any art.
For that reason and to borrow from Josh’s long meandering diatribe -it can be formless and the kinesiology may not be readily apparent but it is there and can be taught. I couldn’t finish Josh's lengthy extrapolation-I kept falling asleep-but on the surface I found it meaningless for what I do as compared to external movement.
Within the instant of touch you know whether or not someone knows it- instantly.
So Josh, can you feel light and then can you feel heavy then light again at will?
Can I have two men push you and pull you while you stand there unmoved?
Only internal training will afford this in a person.

Dillon I don’t teach over the net. So that’s about all I will say. I was told that the Chinese arts have it. But from reading and meeting some folks it appears only a few do the work in those arts as well.
I was just re-reading a book written before the war but published after the war due to its controversial title during that altercation and Japans dismal display of Bushido in it. I think it was published in 1955. It is called “The fighting spirit of Japan.” In it, a judoka writes of training with this 6th dan who could, at will, either play Judo and use tai sabaki or in an instant decide to be unthrowable using internal power. When asked –our intrepid writer is told- that only a very few men in Japan knew of this power. He asked if he could meet someone else and he was then introduced to another man-a Mr. Kunishige. He proceeded to push, pull, yank, choke and punch Mr. Kunishige , even pulling his ears to no avail whatsoever. While Mr. khishage could push him over with one finger.
When you combine this with many other references given in books down through the ages you realize the “power” was there. Curious that in every reference offered it is clear how rare it was then.....as it is now.

Cheers
Dan

[Bugeisha]

Dan,
First, let me thank you for the reply. I certainly understand your position on teaching over the internet, so I appreciate that you said as much as you did. I don't really have the brain power to reply intelligently right now, but I'll be back when I do.

[Yang Wei Xin]

Sorry dan, wasn't trying to upset you, a question was asked, i looked it up and posted my findings, they are not my words, but the words of a physics expert.

I didn't make any claims in my post as to my ability to control jing or chi, just stated some basic info on them.

I am not a master and don't claim to be, however i do practice tai chi and chi qong regualarly.

Internal does not exist without external, and vice versa, its yin and yang theory, that is why they put a little female with the male, and a little male with the female, they cant exist on their own.

[Peter Rehse]

Dan what happened to your posts over at e-budo?

[jwinch2]

i was just paraphrasing Lee. he found the western preoccuption to work biceps and the chest a waste of time. the back and forearms are for combat. the other ones, obviously are necessary, but not as important, in Lee's opinion.

In this case Lee was dead wrong. The back doesn't have anything to do with punching forward and everything to do with the chest, shoulders, and triceps. He was though, right about biceps brachii.

[jwinch2]

Guys

The punch is not a punch. The more you think it is -the less it will be. The force is in your body. Your arms and forearms and chest have nothing to do with it. Think of your spine, your legs and the ground.
What on earth are you guys into mentioning muscles and tings like that. :o

Whether or not it is in tai chi? I will say this.
I was taught how to use my body in ways exactly like the CMA from a Japanese art. This included what we called an aiki-punch. Delivered from no inch...to ...whatever inch. I showed this to a CMA fellow but he could not manage to do it until we trained together at it. After some months of him practicing he suddenly "got it" and drilled me into the ground. While it was not excellent, in time, it will be.
Power generation is paramount in the CMA, is it not? it is formelss is it not?
Stop thinking about muscle work. I have a small guy who could nail you like nobodies business. I am large, 6' with plenty of muscle. So if he can do what I do where does that leave the muscle theory. I also have great difficulty pushing him-he can trap my energy and drop me. I donlt think I will be tellig him to use his muscle anytime soon.

cheers
Dan


At the risk of being a jackass, that might be the worst take I have read on here in a while. Muscles produce force period. Without muscle contraction force cannot be applied to anything by the human body. As for your take that power generation is important in CMA. I agree. It would be better however if you understood that power is equal to the cross product of force and velocity. If you do not produce force, you have no power.

[jwinch2]

Unless you're relying on the momentum of your hand (not a great plan given the small mass of most peoples' hands) for a strike, the real power of a strike is in the moment where the coordination of the whole body transfers through the hand to the target. In my experience, this largely happens in the final "snap" of a technique, which takes hardly any time at all.

The mechanical principle you are referring to is called impulse. This whole argument boils down to understaning the relationship between impulse which loosely put is how much force you can produce over a set amount of contact time and momentum which is a product of mass and velocity.

Great posts Dillon! Way to root all of the mumbojumbo!

Jason

[Dan Harden]

Well Jason I have only this to say
I said that the body is the force. Primarily the using the ground, the legs, and the spine and not the arms and chest. This I still maintain.
And while we're at it..... Lee? Was right about the back over the chest and legs.

If I can have you stand there with my arm out and touching your chest and I do not chamber and I do not hip snap and I use my back and breathing and you are thrown back..... tell me how I do it?
And as for foward force. How about if I stand with my arms extended you grab me and push as hard as you can and I remain standing- that would require a resistive force-forward- to stop you.
But if I do not flex deltiods triceps, biceps, or pectorals how is it happening?

I am delighted to find out there are guys in the CMA as well who could tell you in an instant....with no hesitation-not that they will either, and apparently many who can't also. I was surprised to see this deep knowledge in the Chinese arts. I had not seen it anywhere else but in one Japanese art. But after further research it appears it is as rare there as it is in the Japanese arts as well.

At the end of the day I think everyone needs to be honest with themselves and the depth of their abilities and knowledge. Long extrapolations and a lengthy treatise is a way to obscure what people do not know and can not do. It can be described in just a few sentences.


Peter
I just checked E-budo and my posts are intact; recent and old.


Cheers
Dan

[jwinch2]

Well Jason I have only this to say
I said that the body is the force. Primarily the using the ground, the legs, and the spine and not the arms and chest. This I still maintain. You are correct in the fact that you can and do use your legs to transmit force onto another object. However you are incorrect if you belive that you are not using your chest or arms during a punch.

And while we're at it..... Lee? Was right about the back over the chest and legs. nope, Lee was wrong. The only the back would be involved in pulling the punch away but when it is extended, he was using the chest , anterior deltiods, and triceps brachii. You see, a muscle always pulls it never pushes. I have seen Lee's video of him doing this. He was using his chest. Whether he thought he was or not is another manner.


But if I do not flex deltiods triceps, biceps, or pectorals how is it happening?

It depends on how you are standing. If you stand straight up with your arms extended as you described earlier with the weight/strength disadvantage you described in earlier posts and I push you, you are going backwards.

If you stand in some sort of lunge position with your arms out, and you resist, you are indeed using your triceps, pectorals, and deltoids but not your biceps brachii. You are also using your legs, abs and other supporting muscles at that point. If that is indeed your stance in this situation, it is much more of a function of physics then of any sort of mystical ability. Football players can keep from getting pushed around also, but they don't have any sort of profound ability, they have simply been taught proper techniqe, the function of leverage, and trained to be strong, and selected because they were bigger than most other people.

[Dan Harden]

It depends on how you are standing. If you stand straight up with your arms extended as you described earlier with the weight/strength disadvantage you described in earlier posts and I push you, you are going backwards.

....it is much more of a function of physics then of any sort of mystical ability. Football players can keep from getting pushed around also, but they don't have any sort of profound ability, they have simply been taught proper techniqe, the function of leverage, and trained to be strong, and selected because they were bigger than most other people.




Jason
You are talking about what you know.....muscle strength and size and training. Thats fine. I am talking about something beyond that.and it is physics and applied mechanics as well. It is not mystical. Well mystical looking but since there are hundreds of people; Japanese,Chinese, whatever doing- it begs the question of you simply not knowing it.
I have a 160 lb. guy you can push on....I've watched a 270 pound (your proverbial football player you mentioned) try to push him over- to no avail.
But your reasoning; with muscle strength, force vectors, mass and velocity and with muscles pulling not pushing is correct........ and doesn't have a thing to do with this.

The CMA guys were right. These internal skills are not commonly known even in these "internal" arts. I am truly saddened.
I'll let it go. I've no wish to debate. I am happy you know what you know and are convinced of it.


Dan

[Sochin]

Jason sed:

You are correct in the fact that you can and do use your legs to transmit force onto another object. However you are incorrect if you belive that you are not using your chest or arms during a punch

Simplistically, internal power theory says that you only have enough tension in your arms and chest muscles to keep your alignment and structure, and no upper body muscle strength, power or tension is used to fight with.

[jwinch2]

Jason sed:


Simplistically, internal power theory says that you only have enough tension in your arms and chest muscles to keep your alignment and structure, and no upper body muscle strength, power or tension is used to fight with.

If your humorous is flexed and your elbow is extending, you are actively contracting your chest, shoulders, and triceps. Otherwise, such movement is impossible.

Secondly, internal power is an oxymoran. Power is force x velocity. Velocity is displacement / time. If you have no displacement, then your power = zero. In short, no movement = no power.

[GodofGamblers]

Keep this going, gentlemen; it's getting interesting. It is rare that I stumble into a discussion like this where a subject can be discussed in depth without resorting to anger or insult. My hat is off to you all...

As for me, i have always been convinced that the back is used in the punch. Your back (rhomboids?) is the motor for the pistons which are the arm.

Wouldn't biceps be 'brakes' on a punch? the arm shouldn't be flexed when a punch is thrown... There is only tension on impact. Obviously, arm strength is required to actually throw the punch, but working the triceps, chest and biceps won't improve your punching power, will it?

[jwinch2]

Keep this going, gentlemen; it's getting interesting. It is rare that I stumble into a discussion like this where a subject can be discussed in depth without resorting to anger or insult. My hat is off to you all...

As for me, i have always been convinced that the back is used in the punch. Your back (rhomboids?) is the motor for the pistons which are the arm.

Wouldn't biceps be 'brakes' on a punch? the arm shouldn't be flexed when a punch is thrown... There is only tension on impact. Obviously, arm strength is required to actually throw the punch, but working the triceps, chest and biceps won't improve your punching power, will it?

The back and specifically the rhomboids have absolutely nothing to do with punching. Muscles do not push, they only pull. That is why it is called contraction when muscles are activated. The ONLY two functions of the rhomboids group are to retract the scapula and in continuing action, pull the humorous. Answer this question: If I asked you how you trained your rhomboids what would you answer? Probably seated rows, DB rows, reverse flys and that sort of thing. Why? Because that is the action that they perform. The do not push the arm forward in anyway under any condition.

The same thing goes for the latissumus dorsi muscle or the "lats" as people have been calling them on this thread. If you wanted to work your lats, you would perform pullups, or lat pulls of some kind. Why? Because that is their function. The only two movements that the lats contribute to are shoulder girdle depression and pulling of the humorous down and back. They do not push the arm forward in anyway.

The biceps brachii has two functions, elbow flexion and supination of the forarm. Neither of which has anything to do with punching.

The muscles that do have something to do with the arm going forward are pectoralis major and minor, the anterior deltoid, and the triceps brachii.

Now, if you want to talk about bringing your arm back from a punch to get ready for the next one then the rhomboids, lats, traps, and biceps would all be part of the game. However, none of those muscles have the slightest thing to do with the actual punch itself.

[Jason T Gatts]

Are we only talking about jabs and crosses? It seems like the biceps would have a bit to do with hooks and uppercuts.

[jwinch2]

Are we only talking about jabs and crosses? It seems like the biceps would have a bit to do with hooks and uppercuts.

Excellent point! For the purposes of this discussion I believe we have been talking about jabs and the like. During an uppercut or hook, you would definately add the biceps into the mix and remove the triceps. The chest and shoulders would still be involved as the major players and the back would still have nothing to do with anything.

Great post Jason!

[Jason T Gatts]

What does the one inch punch consist of is is chi or being very strong or what? i know bruce lee demonstrated it. and in several books and articles on it i read that u just have to practice it? how do i do that ?like in killbill??? :laugh:

Not to be argumentative (just bored) but I always thought that the 1 inch punch was a gimmick the Lee did for demonstrations - you hold your fist 1 inch away from a board and without first moving the fist backwards you punch through the board. I tried this when I was young and figured that if a 16 yrs old green belt in Tae Kwon Do can do it it's not that big of a deal.

But since we're on the subject I was wondering - if you move from a slightly hunched over position to a fully upright position or even leaning slightly back when executing an uppercut, are you then using your back? If that is the case then maybe that's what some of these CMA practiioners are talking about. It seems to me (only from watching) that some Wing Chun stylists pull their right shoulder back when twisting and punching with the left arm.
Just a thought.

[Gene Williams]

The "one inch punch," as it is popularly called, is not a gimmick. But, it is not some magical secret, either. It has to do with years of training, developing an awareness of the hara, and proper breath control and relaxation. It can't be taught at a party or in the locker room to someone with no training. However, people with some years of training will often have a sudden "AHA!" experience with some simple instruction.

[Jason T Gatts]

Gene, I did not mean to offend.
Maybe I still don't fully understand just what this technique really is.
If we lived closer to each other or if I travelled more I would ask you for a demonstration.
Are there any clips out there or a good reference to read.

[Gene Williams]

I wasn't offended at all. I just wanted to point out some of the misunderstandings about this concept. It really isn't something you can get from clips or books. It just comes with time and proper training. I don't really know how to explain it any better than Mr. Harden tried to do above.

[Bugeisha]

Ted- what you're talking about is the sort of thing I had come to understand with the "relaxation" of the muscles in the arm and chest. They're used enough to support and maintain the structure necessary to transmitt the power that is primarily generated in the legs, kua, and "waist."

That said, I certainly use my arm and chest muscles when I punch. Otherwise my arms would just hang limp at my sides.

I also agree that this sort of thing isn't really able to be "gotten" over the internet. Otherwise we would have no need for the dojo, eh? I just thought it made for interesting discussion.

[Sochin]

I think maybe I am out of my depth here...


Secondly, internal power is an oxymoran. Power is force x velocity. Velocity is displacement / time. If you have no displacement, then your power = zero. In short, no movement = no power.

Yes, but,

but,

if I twist my waist so my shoulder goes forward, and my hand is up and pointing forward, it too will move forward. Not because I tense or use any arm / chest muscles but because of my waist turn.

So if you are trying to hold my hand in place and I use my legs, and only enough tension in the arm so it doesn't fold or lose place, then the power you feel will be not arm power (though it moved) but leg power, neh?

Power generated this way, in the legs and by opening and closing the qua can thus be felt in the hands and can be very fast and very strong.

This is the meaning of internal power, power generated in the legs, qua, and waist but not in the muscles of the limbs.

And so your oxymoron finds the light... :)

[Dan Harden]

The problem with discussig this is that people become to litteral. If you say "Relax"
The smartalecs say... "If I totally relax I will fall down."
If you say "Don't use your arm muscles"
You get..... "Then my arm will not stay up."
In person you just do things to them. When they are at a loss for words to explain it, and they cannot do it. The good ones ask and learn
The smartalecs go home convinced.... and learn nothing.
I suspect its always been this way.

On the net it is just better to hint at the training and that it exists. It will draw those that may be serious enough to learn, and it will keep out those that take up bandwidth and floor space with nothing to say or offer.

I have been reading through my library for a blog. I came across a reference to a judo guy who knew internal power. He separated it from his normal judo. When he used internal strength he could not be thrown. When asked if others in Japan knew this, he said "Very few." This American was brought to one other guy who let him him choke him, punch him, and try to push him over. Then he pushed the American with one finger. I assume others here know what he was doing, so do I. There are dozens of references in various books; not one of which discussed size and muscle strength, vector force, and momentum. What they all DID say was that it is a rare skill and that few know it. I am delighted it is still that way. Hard work is hard work...earned. Internal training will otherwise become the "new jujutsu or MMA fad, with more suburban white boys half-assedly practicing more of the finest stuff on the planet and with teachers and videos springing up all over the place.

Internal skills are physical and applied mechanics. The opening and closing (Chinese terminology for a skill I learned in Japanese arts) when used in grappling can have profound effects that are hard to read for an opponent until they fall down. I have my own theories as to why the breath-power works-outside of the obvious with the diaphragm- to enhance various aspects.

cheers
Dan

[jwinch2]

I think maybe I am out of my depth here...



Yes, but,

but,

if I twist my waist so my shoulder goes forward, and my hand is up and pointing forward, it too will move forward. Not because I tense or use any arm / chest muscles but because of my waist turn.

So if you are trying to hold my hand in place and I use my legs, and only enough tension in the arm so it doesn't fold or lose place, then the power you feel will be not arm power (though it moved) but leg power, neh?

Power generated this way, in the legs and by opening and closing the qua can thus be felt in the hands and can be very fast and very strong.

This is the meaning of internal power, power generated in the legs, qua, and waist but not in the muscles of the limbs.

And so your oxymoron finds the light... :)

Ted,

What you are referring to is called torsion. Torsion is rotation around a longitudinal axis. This occurs through a contraction of the transverse abdominus and the external obliques. The hips and legs would provide the stable base for this power to be generated but are not actively participating in the movement. In this situation, you would still be relying on your chest, shoulders, and triceps rather than your back.

Good discussion!

Jason

[Bugeisha]

Good post, Jason! Thank you for your input!

I think the teminology commonly used in this sort of situation makes it difficult to discuss, as any topic will be difficult to discuss when the people in the discussion are moving from different paradigms. For example, as Dan was saying, "relax" isn't necessarily the right word, it's just the closest english language approximation. I believe he is referring to "song/sung" in Chinese (I'm not familiar with the Japanese term) and it means as state of being loose but strong. Not rigid, but not limp.

Jason, what are the muscles immediatly around the spine? Not necessarily the ones on the back, but the muscles around the spine on the inside of the body? Can those muscles be used for torsion? That is, can you turn/twist the torso using the muscles surrounding the spine? I'll see if I can find my anatomy books and get the names of the muscles I mean.

[Sochin]

Torsion is rotation around a longitudinal axis. This occurs through a contraction of the transverse abdominus and the external obliques.

Ok, I see that,

but,

Master Chen talks about rotating different parts of the body in same and different directions all at the same time, far from the muscles you mention He lets us feel his muscles as he does this and it is very strange.

It is the same idea as in your quote but much more complicated with all kinds of rotations happening,

which is why we joke, "We only do one thing: rotate!"

[jwinch2]

Ok, I see that,

but,

Master Chen talks about rotating different parts of the body in same and different directions all at the same time, far from the muscles you mention He lets us feel his muscles as he does this and it is very strange.

It is the same idea as in your quote but much more complicated with all kinds of rotations happening,

which is why we joke, "We only do one thing: rotate!"

This not an unusual idea Ted. The entire body moves on angular or torsional movement. There is no such thing as linear movement withing the human body itself. Every movement is related to a fixed joint...

As for feeling muscles and thus trying to determine activation. Don't confuse activation with contraction. The muscles such as the biceps can contract and at the same time the triceps may activate to small degree due to a response from various proprioceptors withing the muscle and tendon. This is commonly called cocontraction within the scientific community. Over time, with training this phenomenon is reduced but probably never all together gone unless you are at the elite athlete level.

The take home message is, muscle can be activated without actively contributing to a particuar movement.

[Gene Williams]

Well, folks, it is easier to practice your way to it than it is to talk your way to it. :bow:

[Dan Harden]

With the movement Ted is talking about you can have someone try to throw you and you can basically just stand there looking at them and then throw them. More than muscle though you can acitvate fascia this way and with breathing It is a VERY confusing feel to people playing with you. Think of like pushing on a slipping sliding surface over steel or a rock. Took me years and I have years to go.
As for rotationin a single plane; foward or back: Think of a train with the wheels pumping the long arm.
1. a circle can push a line straight.
b. a straight line can make the opponents body recieve and activate "itself" in a circular way. Just like with the kids game stick and hoop. THeir body acts as the hoop.

Now, there are far better uses for moving in all direction than that one plane-but it gives an idea.
At the end of the day all I care about the exact science of it as that it is very hard to damn near impossible to throw me and I can throw poeple rather easily. Works for lots of other interesting things as well from punches to chokes to being unlockable. I've had an engineer and one math prof. and two med students... as students. They can't explain it either.... but they can do it to various degrees.
I've met only two men who can do this well. I am sure there are more...just haven't met em yet.
cheers
Dan

[Bugeisha]

Well, folks, it is easier to practice your way to it than it is to talk your way to it. :bow:

Always cutting back to the heart of the matter, eh Gene?

[Peter Rehse]

Peter
I just checked E-budo and my posts are intact; recent and old.

Appologies Dan - I was confused between two threads on different boards with the same title. My bad and all is fine.

[Rasputin]

At the end of the day all I care about the exact science of it as that it is very hard to damn near impossible to throw me and I can throw poeple rather easily. Works for lots of other interesting things as well from punches to chokes to being unlockable. I've had an engineer and one math prof. and two med students... as students. They can't explain it either.... but they can do it to various degrees.

We DO have another Budoseek get-together planned for next year, you know. I am certain that the powers-that-be would LOVE an opportunity to see this in action. I know that I would.

Oh, and, just to throw my fly in the ointment, can you or anyone possibly come up with a scientific explanation for how one might "activate fascia"? I admit my curiousity is overwhelming.

[Dan Harden]

Yeah I can well imagine. But I am not alone, not by a long shot
I am used to the fact that I can't find it in Judo, jujutsu or aikido. When I started playing with CMA guys I found a common "language" with terminology that I had not previously used. Now, however I find the skills are just as rare with people lost in "forms" as well. Seems no one trains this in any large numbers. I have been lucky enough to get some names of guys who train it and I will be meeting them this year.

Guys
Lets not get crazy. This is not beyond you or anyone else. It has, and can be- taught. It is applied mechanics and while being ridiculously hard to learn-in that it takes alot of repitition, time and solo work or practice... it is just more hard work that brings about skill. Whoopy.
It is not "my art is better than yours." it is "Lets make all arts better." I will say this. I have not taught anyone who didn't say it was the best thing they learned from me. It is separate though from applied skill sets; throws, chokes, locks, boxng etc. It can be applied to anything.

History
I have references for this type of training from the American indians to India, to China to Japan. Odd that in all cases whenever internal training is referenced it is actually said -then and there- how it is a rare skill.
I just thought that here in the "internal arts forum" it would be ho hum shop talk.
If you read the same books.... what explanation do you have for those men encountering the same thing. They were judoka and wrestlers and Sumo guys who were very pragmatic and hands-on... like me. I have never been a granola crunchy chi searching hippy. I am more of a kick-*** and take names type. In my small world- if this type of training convinced me and the other guys like E.J. Harrison who came before me, maybe you should be a little more open to it. Granted I am not going to be wrist grabbing or wearing silk pajamas anytime soon. But the training behind it all can be used in a manner to fit....you too.

Fascia work and breathing
I'll leave that up to the guys who like to debate things they cannot do themselves to figure that out. When it was taught to me my teacher called it "long muscle" work. That is wrong too. But he is amazing and I don't care about the scientific explanation as much anyway- just the skill and effect. I've yet to hear a rational explanation for the breath work, yet it can felt and taught. I've heard "the feeling" described as soft steel, eraser on a steel rod, jello over granite, all kinds of things for when you hit someone with these types of skills or try to throw them-or they hit or throw you- it is how it feels. Why do poeple who are disimillar and do not know or train together have the same odd descriptions and have been talking about it for hundreds of years?

cheers
Dan

[Dan Harden]

Peter

I pulled them because that blog (which partly came about from a series of private discussions with the author) changed into something else from its intent. From discussions of history to..... how-to.
Giving details and teaching on the net is just ridiculous.
One fellow told me to "put up or shut up."
Good choice. I picked one.

Cheers
Dan

[Cliff Hargrave]

We DO have another Budoseek get-together planned for next year, you know. I am certain that the powers-that-be would LOVE an opportunity to see this in action. I know that I would.



I volunteer to test this.

[Karen Session]

Don't forget to get it on tape please.

[Sochin]

I've trained with Darren Laur - he's the LEO who studied hypnotism and has given us a fine critique of chi style knockouts as the power of suggestion. That's why they don't work on the uninitiated.

I've trained with Peyton Quinn who teaches light pressure knock-outs that are completely different. They work an anybody.

And I've trained with Joseph Chen. When he says, "Push me, harder." I know I'm expecting something but he never sets up my response by telling me ahead of time what to expect. He says "This is wrong." and pushes back a few times and then he says "This is right." and the feeling is quite different and very strong. I will be able to do this someday! :)

[jwinch2]

I volunteer to test this.\

Booya!

[Dan Harden]

Gents
There are a few guys who are interested in "learning" these skills and where they may be able to apply them in their own training. I will be training with a few of those like minded souls. In the Chinese arts they at least know what you’re talking about even if it is not applied to MMA context. But then again The Japanese gentleman Akuzawa; is pursuing that venue as well.... as have I for that last fifteen years.
I had hoped to find like minded researchers in the internal arts forum. Oh well.

In the mean time.....
Ya know there is wisdom in nay-saying with cause. There is also a profound ignorance implied in turning up your nose at something you have not researched and that has centuries of precedent behind it.

I find this tag line quote interesting
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance. Hippocrates (460 - 377 BC)
And I offer this in return
Having a (negative) opinion about a culture’s science you do not yet understand leaves you ignorant and them knowledgeable.

Cheers
Dan

[Gene Williams]

Oh, boy...look ya'll, "one inch punch" is a method of teaching a principle or concept much like the old "unbendable arm" technique of aikido/jujutsu. Everyone focuses too much on the "punch" aspect of it or the "arm" aspect of the other method. It isn't about punching and bending arms. Now, Mr. Harden is guilty, I think, of "messing with you" just a bit :D If I am correct, his background is aiki/ken. You traditional Okinawan karate guys are practicing many of these same principles when you practice kata, especially if you practice the Naha kata (such as Sanchin, Tensho, Seisan) and hit the makiwara. If you do drills such as kakie, sanchin dai, ibuki, nogare, etc. and train Sanchin with a partner, you are working on it already. It does help if you have access to a senior instructor who understands these things.
Now, as to demonstrations...I view them as helpful drills. Sure, in the dojo I can teach you to keep someone from locking your arm with ude garami or juji gatame, or make it difficult (not impossible) to unbalance you in seiza or sanchin, but the only part of this that translates to street self-defense or free style fighting is the principle involved. Good atemi and "kuzushi" will break the center and unbalance anyone (even Mr. Harden). That is why in jujutsu and karate dojo there is most often a strike, slap, kick, or pinch as a technique is applied.
So, what you are learning and practicing is principles... "rooting," proper breath control, strong hara, proper relaxation, and zanshin...things which make you harder to kill. "One inch punch," "unbendable arm," etc. are not fighting techniques, they are teaching methods.

[jwinch2]

Having a (negative) opinion about a culture’s science you do not yet understand leaves you ignorant and them knowledgeable.


Show me some scientific data which examines this phenomenon and I am listening. In the mean time, all I have seen are stories presented by you and and "according to so and so"...

Also, if you want to get started on personal attacks we can certainly go there. However, I prefer to attack the argument rather than the arguer. Other members have managed to do that while disagreeing on this very thread.

If you have data, actual evidence to present then lets see it.

Otherwise, lets move on.

[Dan Harden]

Jason
What personal attack? Was your tag-line aimed at me personally? Neither was my reply aimed at you. I don't know you from the next guy.
As a group it seems none of you are versed in the internal arts, on the internal arts forum. So, as a group, I was discussing "nay saying" without at least some experiential evidence.
Everything done in the internal arts is explicable and what's more is teachable. Heck, my engineering student told me it was impossible to not be pushed over from a horizontal force with him in a vertical plane. And indeed with a moderate force... over he went. After I taught him to do it he then renaged and said "Of course! I didn't realize you could transfer force through the body to....yaada yaada yaada. Key phrases being...."I didn't realize."
The only difference I saw between him being "sure of himself" before-then equally "sure of himself" after- was his ignorance of principles he knew but could not see at work in the body.
I could have left him "convinced in his ignorance" but I likes him so I decided to show him a better way to move

I feel no compulsion to convince you of anything. I am glad you are so sure of what you know. There is an old axium about a cup of water. Many guys leave with what they arrived with.

cheers
Dan

[Bugeisha]

Dan,
I think the key is that most of the people here would like to see this discussed in scientific terminology rather than metaphorical terminology. I don't know that anyone would argue with what internal arts are doing if the terminology used was more rational. Sometimes the way things are described doesn't make sense, even if what is actually being done does.

[jwinch2]

Dan,
I think the key is that most of the people here would like to see this discussed in scientific terminology rather than metaphorical terminology. I don't know that anyone would argue with what internal arts are doing if the terminology used was more rational. Sometimes the way things are described doesn't make sense, even if what is actually being done does.

Nice post Dillon. You did a better job of stating it then I did.


:bow:

[Yang Wei Xin]

A horizontal force can never change the potential energy of an object. Horizontal forces cannot cause vertical displacements. The only means by which an external force can contribute to a potential energy change is if the force has a vertical component. Potential energy changes are the result of height changes and only a force with a vertical component can cause a height change.

your engineering student was correct, you did not move him with a horizontal force, you redirected the energy thru your body and added a vertical element to the movement.

[Dan Harden]

Part of the reason it is difficult to apply scientific explanation to physical movement is that many factors are not discussed, noticed or considered. My "own" engineering student was an example. "That can't be done, then when he does it himself "oh I see I didn't think of.........

With the physical body there are many complex mechanics involved. Although completely rational and explicable, each unto its own; the combinations become almost inexplicable.
A horizontal force in its purest form you say cannot produce vertical movement. But if the horizontal force is hitting a circular or spherical object it can cause that object to move in a rotation. Combine that with stacked rotational axises -as in the human frame- and you can get vertical movement.
You have to add to that complex responses of multiple rotational axises -something my student never thought of in his explanations to me.
The engineering examples apply to inanimate objects requiring force to move them. There is no inherent energy in the object to animate it.
But there are other factors
1. In a much celebrated case a horizontal wind set up resonant frequencies in a bridge causing a catastrophic failure that included "vertical" rising and lowering, and horizontal movement perpendicular to the line of force.

2. The human body is not inanimate. Results and measuring of re-action are not immutable because the human mind "creates" and initiates action on the muscles and skeleton that are by and large indepedant and variable based on each person reaction and sense of balance and training etc. And even THAT re-action differs in results of that movement from each person to the next.

3. Perception is the most confusing of all. Some have trouble describing just what it is they are doing or what others should be doing (the reason we have good and bad coaches and teachers) therefore, even though what is being done is actually being done –an argument may arise out of what we are each “seeing” in the first place.

4. Last even after seeing and feeling…the complexities may escape us to explain at the moment. Without explanation rooting and six direction training, closing etc, can feel very….very… unusual to a person. Sometimes causing a very potent “compelling" force that pulls. This force can "cause" a lack of resistnce in the person becuase he is not used to NOT being pulled with muscle in a way he is wired ro feel used to. In others we find a weird stopping of muscle tension and leverage when they are pushing and encountering these uses in the opponents body. This was another of my students dilemmas.
“What am I doing?” I ask.
“I have no idea but that’s a weird feeling”
This brings into play the whole other half of my argument. The force begin used in all the above examples is not a pure horizontal force either…it’s a human body and mind with all the same complexities and with all the same re-actions as in the recipients body he is aplying force to in the first place.
Thus there is no “pure force” nor pure “re-action.”

Cheers
Dan

[Dan Harden]

Edited ending

This brings into play the whole other half of my argument. The force being used in all the above examples is not a pure horizontal force either…it’s a human body and mind with all the same complexities and with all the same re-actions as in the recipients body he is aplying force to in the first place. When he pushes and I disrupt and displace that force there is a known and measurable nervous response when you can close down his means to fire his muscle in response. His attention and auto-responses cannot be in all places at all times. So you can do things to deconstruct his posture. Think of it like a low level of "shock." There is no "force" and "mechanics" there to actually explain this lack of response. It was the mind and nerves.
Thus there is no “pure force” nor pure “re-action.”

The above examples do not directly apply to the one inch punch, other than it defies typical explanation of what we normally "see." I am actually moving only part of my body (which you can't see) in the opposite direction and loading it before launching it. And I can do this with my arm out straight and my chest relaxed and with my hand resting on your chest or face before I move...guess that makes it a no inch. It's hell of throwing technique as well, and done released slowly it can resist a tremendous amount of applied horizontal force as well-althouth there are other ways for other things.

Cheers
Dan

[Yang Wei Xin]

if a horizontal force hits a round object, it is no longer a horizontal force, because the round object will start to spin and redirect the energy either up or down, adding a vertical element to the force, and wind can not be considered a horizontal force, it is actually caused by changes in pressure which force cold air and warm air to move up or down, a vertical force.

and physical mechanics are explained quite properly by the chinese in the form of jing, which i stated earlier.

[Dan Harden]

if a horizontal force hits a round object, it is no longer a horizontal force, because the round object will start to spin and redirect the energy either up or down, adding a vertical element to the force, and wind can not be considered a horizontal force, it is actually caused by changes in pressure which force cold air and warm air to move up or down, a vertical force.

and physical mechanics are explained quite properly by the chinese in the form of jing, which i stated earlier.

But that's my point John. Measured in exact degrees a human cannot deliver a pure horizontal force in the first place. Further-that upon delivering it and encountering force and resistence it will not be maintained in a pure form due to the frame that delivers it receiving input from the medium it is applied to; static or moving. Second, the medium he enounters -were it a human- is animate and can and will create movment -articial or natural- to the force offered.
There is allot that can be said for subject a.'s ability to deliver power VS subject b. and the the different ways to do it...but that's a whole different topic.

Were these discussions worth anything, anything at all, then engineers could help boxers be better knockout artists. So the *exact* mechanics- while applicable are extremely complex to the point of making an argument moot.

The forces everyone tries to describe in neat little packages are complex due to the object applying the force and that recieving it. It is most assuredly all explicable just difficult to do so if one were so inclined. Shared with those doing it there are things that can be dicussed if people choose to do so on the net.

At that end of the day it is like Army Rangers playing a war game on line with these awesome opponents..only to find they are twelve year olds who are good at video games. The net is full of people who can deliver who may be arguing with those who can't hit or fight on any real level-but who are great writers and can jibber jabber all day about the best ways to do the very thing they are so inept at doing. We meet them in Dojo's all the time. See that guy over there? The one who moves like a putz? Ask him-he'll explain this to you!
Here......just who are we debating anyway? Everyone can decide just which of those they are.
Oh well.

Cheers
Dan




Dan

[Yang Wei Xin]

Were these discussions worth anything, anything at all, then engineers could help boxers be better knockout artists. So the *exact* mechanics- while applicable are extremely complex to the point of making an argument moot.



actually they can.

these days they attach electrodes to athletes body, everyone from boxers to baseball players, and map out the path of their punch, batswing, golf swing etc, then use specific training methods to alter the path to make a more efficient movement, they've been doing it for at least 10 years now.

[Dan Harden]

Yes I see all the better golfers all the time......not. Well I do see allot of nice equipment and videos and gimmicks.

And just like the Universal nautilas (sp?) company who gave the machines to the football players who actually lost mass while using them.
All the applied mechanics and kinesiology of the cam at the pinnical of flexation movement..out the window.

Yep....sure. Martial arts defined, understood and taught through engineering. Instinct and abiltiy to deliver while not being hit ...by design. :rolleyes:


Dan

[Yang Wei Xin]

And just like the Universal nautilas (sp?) company who gave the machines to the football players who actually lost mass while using them.

Dan

they lost mass becuase nautilus machines force a restricted motion through the same path at all times, which reduces the use of support muscles and focuses solely on the larger groups.

however, by analyzing your motion on a computer, and finding where you are inefficient, you can make you motion more conservative, but still produce the same force, just like a nautilus machine. the machine made the movement more efficient, so now a weight lifter can lift the same amount of weight with less effort, so they don't gain as much mass becuase they are not working as hard, but if you are throwing a punch, you dont want to work harder, you want to gain the maximum force through the minimum work, just like a nautilus machine.

[Dan Harden]

Why they lost mass is well known- but they also lost overall strength. Maximum efficiency in exercise is NOT what you want to build with. Inversely if you look at farmers, fisherman, heavy construction workers they can build an overall strength that is efficient and powerful.

...however, by analyzing your motion on a computer, and finding where you are inefficient, you can make you motion more conservative, but still produce the same force, just like a nautilus machine.

Oh I disagree John. Economy of motion does not cover it either. In fighting there are ways to move that have cause and effect that are most assuredly abnormal and not to be found in a pure "economy of motion" scenario but are very sound ways to move for......fighting. Either in power generation or meeting force. Dancers do not always move the most efficient way either. But it is the best way to.....dance.
Neither does Circ de sole in their aerial girations. But I'll go see them and skip the lab.
Dan

[Yang Wei Xin]

Why they lost mass is well known- but they also lost overall strength. Maximum efficiency in exercise is NOT what you want to build with. Inversely if you look at farmers, fisherman, heavy construction workers they can build an overall strength that is efficient and powerful.

obviously, but were not talking about excercise for strength building, we are talking about throwing a punch. build up excess strenght while excercise, then use that strength in the most efficient manner possible to produce the most power, that is a punch.


..however, by analyzing your motion on a computer, and finding where you are inefficient, you can make you motion more conservative, but still produce the same force, just like a nautilus machine.

Oh I disagree John. Economy of motion does not cover it either. In fighting there are ways to move that have cause and effect that are most assuredly abnormal and not to be found in a pure "economy of motion" scenario but are very sound ways to move for......fighting. Either in power generation or meeting force.
my name is Josh, not John. and we are not talking about fighting either, which obviously has a lot of freedom of movement, we are talking about throwing a single punch and producing the most power possible with it. To do that you would want to take the strength that you currently posses, regardless of how much, and use it as efficiently as possible to produce the most force.
http://home.hia.no/~stephens/effiperf.htm

please take the effort to read the whole thing, as you will see it directly relates to what we are talking about.

[Dan Harden]

Josh
Sorry about the name confusion
The paper presupposes that there are only common movements to compare to measure maximul force. Or that it can define maximul force for something like a punch. Yet if I stand there and have men all weighing the same throw a punch then have a guy well versed in internal mechanics do the same and increase the measure of force. Who is going to explain how he was more effiecient using a completly different method.

example from your cited paper:

However, even on a stationary ergometer, elite rowers are more efficient than well-trained but non-elite oarsman. This is not due to a difference in fiber composition. So, it appears that subtle changes in rowing technique can continue to contribute to improve rowing efficiency and performance with additional years of training.

Edited for my point
However, even on a heavy bag, elite internal artists are more efficient than well-trained but non-elite boxers. This is not due to a difference in fiber composition. So, it appears that well defined differences in how they generate force can continue to contribute to improved hitting efficiency and performance with additional years of training.

same paper on swimming
In no sport is efficiency more important than in swimming. The best swimmers in the world do not stand out in physiological tests of raw endurance capacity when compared to other endurance athletes. This suggests that high efficiency, achieved through a combination of ideal anatomical structure and technical perfection of the stroke is critical


Again it presuposses that there is a way to measure a comparative "swimming stroke." The methd to perform punches or throws are not all the same and some are not even able to be compared and in the end some are more efficent. I have yet to meet many guys..well I only know two, who can generate a considerable force with a one inch punch.
So in your study;

If I line up 4 men who say they can deliever force in a 1" punch and lets say they fail and the 4th one does deliver measurable force.
Then I line up 4 boxers who cant do it all either.
Where does that leave us?

The testers and you still don't know how it was done with the "evidence" of your measured *economy of motion* test staring you in the face. ALl you "know" is one guy was better or more economical than 7 others.

Those results and about $4.50 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks
Cheers
Dan

[Yang Wei Xin]

you measure the power of a punch in psi (pounds per square inch), they have been doing it for a long time.

and basicly, from your post, it seems that you are saying a person who has trained to do something will be better at doing it than a person who has not trained to do that thing.
basically, duh!

my point comes down to this:
internal energy is not some great mystical magical force that works for unexplained reasons, it is a concept of physics that can be explained if you understand it properly and know the underlying principles. in addition, internal energy by itself can not cause your opponent to move, it must be combined with external energy, in the form of bodily contact (the punch) in order to do damage. the chinese explain this with the concept of jing (roughly translated as force, power, or energy), of which there are about 8 different variety's with subjings for each. the key to maximizing energy output(chi) is using the correct types of movement(jings) in coordination with each other. also, a container(you) can only hold as much energy(chi) as it has capacity to hold, this is why there is so much strength training in traditional kung fu, to increase the strength of the container, so that it can hold more chi without bursting or causing yourself injury(pulled muscles, strains, aneurisms).

The one inch punch is a combination of both external (it does touch the person, so it has to be external), and internal (your body uses the latent energy which already exists whithin you), and can only be accomplished when you have enough of both.

[Dan Harden]

we are talking about throwing a single punch and producing the most power possible with it. To do that you would want to take the strength that you currently posses, regardless of how much, and use it as efficiently as possible to produce the most force.

Josh we you are talking in circles. I argued there are better ways to do a single thing but there are also ways (external power) that will not accomplish others (one inch punch).
You argued everything is comparatively measured; your article. WHich only highlight equal ways to to do a thing then make -that way- more efficient


next you say
and basicly, from your post, it seems that you are saying a person who has trained to do something will be better at doing it than a person who has not trained to do that thing.
basically, duh!

Thanks by the way. Can you find a way to debate an idea without being insulting?
But no the Duh!! goes back to you. That was the thrust of your own cited article. Now your arguing with yourself.
I have been saying somethig different. I've been stating that the 1" punch is not a standard muscle hip driven punch ...it is different. At the end to all this you apparently still don't get I am talking about a different way to do a single thing not a better, common approach. The power generation for a no inch /one inch punch cannot be accomplished the way you do a boxers punch or karate punch. The end result is equally measurable but the method not comparable.
Its like saying the Fosberry flop was the same as all the other high bar jumps because the guy went over the bar. Or that the Wankel engine produces foot torque, so does an elelctric motor so they are the same as a gas powered in-line 6.
I'm done here.


Dan

[jwinch2]

you measure the power of a punch in psi (pounds per square inch), they have been doing it for a long time.


Quick thread hijack...

Psi is a measure of pressure not power. Power is measured in watts. And if we are arguing how this would be measured in the scientific community they would not even use psi for pressure as they would most likely use SI units where Newtons (Mass x a(gravity)) are the measure of weight or force not pounds.

End of hijack...

[Gene Williams]

Oh, boy...look ya'll, "one inch punch" is a method of teaching a principle or concept much like the old "unbendable arm" technique of aikido/jujutsu. Everyone focuses too much on the "punch" aspect of it or the "arm" aspect of the other method. It isn't about punching and bending arms. Now, Mr. Harden is guilty, I think, of "messing with you" just a bit :D If I am correct, his background is aiki/ken. You traditional Okinawan karate guys are practicing many of these same principles when you practice kata, especially if you practice the Naha kata (such as Sanchin, Tensho, Seisan) and hit the makiwara. If you do drills such as kakie, sanchin dai, ibuki, nogare, etc. and train Sanchin with a partner, you are working on it already. It does help if you have access to a senior instructor who understands these things.
Now, as to demonstrations...I view them as helpful drills. Sure, in the dojo I can teach you to keep someone from locking your arm with ude garami or juji gatame, or make it difficult (not impossible) to unbalance you in seiza or sanchin, but the only part of this that translates to street self-defense or free style fighting is the principle involved. Good atemi and "kuzushi" will break the center and unbalance anyone (even Mr. Harden). That is why in jujutsu and karate dojo there is most often a strike, slap, kick, or pinch as a technique is applied.
So, what you are learning and practicing is principles... "rooting," proper breath control, strong hara, proper relaxation, and zanshin...things which make you harder to kill. "One inch punch," "unbendable arm," etc. are not fighting techniques, they are teaching methods.



Just to reiterate. I'm not sure why Mr. Harden has been seized by this issue.

[Yang Wei Xin]

Quick thread hijack...

Psi is a measure of pressure not power. Power is measured in watts. And if we are arguing how this would be measured in the scientific community they would not even use psi for pressure as they would most likely use SI units where Newtons (Mass x a(gravity)) are the measure of weight or force not pounds.

End of hijack...
i was actually referring to the pressure sensitive striking pads that were invented about twenty years ago (see the movies rocky and best of the best) which measure the impact of a punch or kick and analyze it in psi.

In rocky IV they show ivan drago getting 1200 psi off of a punch.

[jakmak52]

I think I saw a video of Bob Wall doing it....

[Yang Wei Xin]

Ohara has disgraced us with his treachery.
:)

[4 winds]

The one inch punch is actually an ancient kung fu technique utilized by the Shaolin monks. When delivered correctly the recipient feels no pain but will die exactly 2 minutes after being dealt the deadly blow. You see, the body is made up of something like 80% water. If you apply the right pressure in the right place you can cause a wave of death inside the body that stops the heart from beating. My master (who wore one of those large circular oriental hats like that guy in mortal combat) was well versed in this secret technique and of coarse if I said exactly where and how to apply this technique I would be banished forever from my clan and forced to live out the rest of my existence as a traveling nomad on the run from ninjas hired to assasinate me.
:bow:
......Of coarse I just made all this up but I figured it was as good as any explanation of these kinds of martial arts myths. These myths and some good parlor tricks give martial arts a kind of mysterious quality that gives lay people the perception that martial arts have a magical element to them. This is actually good for all practicioners because mystery often breeds fear and fear brings respect and a hesitation to challenge or attack. In that respect many fights are won by being averted altogether once the would be attacker learns or thinks his potential victim is a martial arts expert. Unfortunately these myths and parlor tricks are also good for the business side of martial arts because people will pay more if they are conned into thinking they will be superhuman. :bandit:

[jakmak52]

The one inch punch is actually an ancient kung fu technique utilized by the Shaolin monks. When delivered correctly the recipient feels no pain but will die exactly 2 minutes after being dealt the deadly blow. You see, the body is made up of something like 80% water. If you apply the right pressure in the right place you can cause a wave of death inside the body that stops the heart from beating. My master (who wore one of those large circular oriental hats like that guy in mortal combat) was well versed in this secret technique and of coarse if I said exactly where and how to apply this technique I would be banished forever from my clan and forced to live out the rest of my existence as a traveling nomad on the run from ninjas hired to assasinate me.
:bow:
......Of coarse I just made all this up but I figured it was as good as any explanation of these kinds of martial arts myths. These myths and some good parlor tricks give martial arts a kind of mysterious quality that gives lay people the perception that martial arts have a magical element to them. This is actually good for all practicioners because mystery often breeds fear and fear brings respect and a hesitation to challenge or attack. In that respect many fights are won by being averted altogether once the would be attacker learns or thinks his potential victim is a martial arts expert. Unfortunately these myths and parlor tricks are also good for the business side of martial arts because people will pay more if they are conned into thinking they will be superhuman. :bandit:

Great post... do you actually study martial arts? :rolleyes:

[jwinch2]

i was actually referring to the pressure sensitive striking pads that were invented about twenty years ago (see the movies rocky and best of the best) which measure the impact of a punch or kick and analyze it in psi.

In rocky IV they show ivan drago getting 1200 psi off of a punch.

Those are movies. In the real world force is measured in Newtons. In addition, in Russia and the former Soviet Union, they use SI units and do not use pounds for measurement. If anything they would have said Kilograms in real life. Again, they are movies.

[Bugeisha]

Jason, you took the words right out of my mouth.
I actually had someone at the dojang ask me today how many PSI I put out with a punch. I just looked at him funny and kept punching the bag.

[jwinch2]

Jason, you took the words right out of my mouth.
I actually had someone at the dojang ask me today how many PSI I put out with a punch. I just looked at him funny and kept punching the bag.

Next time hit him and ask him for a rating!



Just kidding!
:laugh:

[jakmak52]

In the movie "Best of the Best", did they really monitor Phillip Rhee's kick?

[Gene Williams]

Great post... do you actually study martial arts? :rolleyes:
.............
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :D :bow:

[4 winds]

.............
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :D :bow:


I train study and teach as many martial arts as possible. However, it is sometimes difficult to determine which martial arts to devote my time and money to study and train. I think all martial arts are worthy of study because they all have some good to offer on many different levels (psychologically, physically, practicality, philosophically etc) if the teacher is knowledgable and a skillful teacher. Which one's do you study and what are you getting out of it?

[jakmak52]

Oh my, this is getting good, I think Gene and I study the martial arts listed by our avatars. I can't speak for Gene, but I get alot out of my particular discipline and style, specifically discipline, self respect for myself and others, self control, a little self defense, loyalty, integrity, perserverance, but I still need to work on my sarcasism and smart a_ _ niss :bandit:

[4 winds]

Oh my, this is getting good, I think Gene and I study the martial arts listed by our avatars. I can't speak for Gene, but I get alot out of my particular discipline and style, specifically discipline, self respect for myself and others, self control, a little self defense, loyalty, integrity, perserverance, but I still need to work on my sarcasism and smart a_ _ niss :bandit:

So thats why you chose to study the martial arts listed in your avatar? Your obviously very successful in your art. That would explain the self respect. I'm not sure about respect for others but I think being a successful martial artist does flatter the male ego thus there is no need to "prove" yourself by starting fights by disrespecting the local townsfolk. Therefore, your not blatenly disrespectful your more witty in your smart a_ _ ness. THis may be considered self control. But, if someone is smart enough to get P O'd at least you can defend yourself. Your limitation to those arts in your avatar is evidence of your loyalty. As for your integrity and perserverance I guess I'll have to wait a bit for evidence of that. :karate:

[Bugeisha]

I'm sure Jack was waiting with baited breath for your approval. :rolleyes: ;)

[Jeff Burger]

Well I guess this thread should come to an end.


Jeff