Kung Fu or Tai Chi. Classes on the Northside

Anana

Can anyone recommend somewhere where I can start learning Kung Fu or Tai Chi near Portmarnock on the northside of Dublin. I am a total beginner. Also, is Tai Chi a good exercise? good for building up strength? Thanks

kenpo_dave

You might have a look here http://www.pslc.ie/clubs.htm theres a Kenpo Karate and Tai Chi club there. And if you dont like the place Im sure the instructor might know about other clubs in the area.
Anyway, good luck in your search.

Colm_OReilly

Also, is Tai Chi a good exercise? good for building up strength?

No, Tai Chi will not build up strength. For a list of the components of fitness check out this thread.

Tai Chi probably won't build up a lot of cardiovascular or locomuscular endurance as it is generally performed at very low intensities, so unless you are quite out of shape I don't believe it will offer a lot of benefits.

Good luck with your search,
Colm

kenpo_dave

Actually Tai Chi will offer a lot of benefits. The only thing with Tai Chi is that due to the nature of the training these benefits take much longer to become apparent than with other styles. Tai Chi is a 'life-time' martial art. From what I understand about the style, in most cases it can take 10 years before you start to learn the practical applications of Tai Chi techniques. Until then the training is about developing an effortless flow of motion and of course developing the internal power.
In my opinion, Tai Chi suffers criticism as much as Tae Kwon Do. So, if you are serious about studying Tai Chi you need to make up your own mind about it, and ignore what everyone else has to say about it.

For more information on Tai Chi you could read as much as you can find on the Internet. You might also try www.ymaapub.com for books, videos and dvds.

Colm_OReilly

Dave,

The OP asked if Tai Chi was good for building up strength, and I think I showed why it won't help you in that regard and directed Anana to a thread concerning the fitness benefits of martial arts, and what fitness is all about.

I didn't say Tai Chi wouldn't offer any benefits.

Peace Out,
Colm

kenpo_dave

"so unless you are quite out of shape I don't believe it will offer a lot of benefits"

Sorry, I was responding to this line mainly.

Anana

I have heard of a guy trained in tai chi beating a judo champion in a fight. He had been doing tai chi for a few years by then.

Anana

Anana wrote:

I have heard of a guy trained in tai chi beating a judo champion in a fight. He had been doing tai chi for a few years by then.

Any more details? Doesn't sound very likely

Sure you didn't hear thai boxing/muay thai?

Cabelo

Ah now, let's be fair here. I know a lad of Hong Kongesian decent who practices Tai-Chi and he is absolutely incredible. I admit I'd have doubted the legitimacy of the scéal if I'd not known him... but having seen him get into a scuffle once he's a force to be reckoned with. Quick and efficient is what all that flow stuff builds into I reckon.

vasch_ro

Anana wrote:

I have heard of a guy trained in tai chi beating a judo champion in a fight. He had been doing tai chi for a few years by then.

There is a martial art style(as oppsoed to the health type normally taught) of Tai Chi known as Practical Tai Chi run by a guy called Dan Doherty, as far as know they enter full contact competitions
http://www.taichichuan.co.uk/

on Dan the man from the above site
Dan Docherty was born in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1954. He graduated LL.B in 1974. He served as an inspector in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force from 1975 - 84. He has been training in Tai Chi Chuan under Cheng Tin-hung since 1975.

He has represented Hong Kong in Full-contact Fighting, in 1980 winning the Open Weight Division at the 5th South East Asian Chinese Pugilistic Championships in Malaysia.

hope this helps, they teach practical Tao Chi in UCD as far as I know
which although not north side is easy to get to.

Clive

Just returned from the 2005 IMAF & PWKA World Cup in Milan. 3 of us headed over from Ireland, in our respected categories we faced opponents from the UK, France, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, Moldova, Russia, Norway, U.S.A., China, Taiwan, India, Azerbaijan, Morocco, Argentina, Brazil and Peru. 3 Days of competition with over 450 competitors, representing 67 countries.

Paul Allen competing in Shuai Chaoi (Chinese Wrestling) was unlucky enough to be knocked out early on, in a deciding round due to a penalty point.

For myself I fought through the preliminary rounds and reached the final day and the semi final of the -85kg pro-San Da event (professional Chinese kickboxing), ended up 4th over all.

But the man of the hour is my coach Paul Mitchell who received Gold in the Shuai Chaoi event; by the way he did this without conceding a single point in the final!!!!

A good week for Ireland!

Niall Keane

MMA fighter Sami Berick also trains in the same style.

pma-ire

vasch_ro wrote:

There is a martial art style(as oppsoed to the health type normally taught) of Tai Chi known as Practical Tai Chi run by a guy called Dan Doherty, as far as know they enter full contact competitions
http://www.taichichuan.co.uk/

on Dan the man from the above site
Dan Docherty was born in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1954. He graduated LL.B in 1974. He served as an inspector in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force from 1975 - 84. He has been training in Tai Chi Chuan under Cheng Tin-hung since 1975.

He has represented Hong Kong in Full-contact Fighting, in 1980 winning the Open Weight Division at the 5th South East Asian Chinese Pugilistic Championships in Malaysia.

hope this helps, they teach practical Tao Chi in UCD as far as I know
which although not north side is easy to get to.

I think that the group in McCurtain Street in Cork are with Dan? They are linked to John Ding also? Or had been?? I hav'int seen or heard anything about them in a while??

Niall Keane

Anana,
There is a Practical Tai Chi Chuan class run by Clare Sheehy in UCD between 8 and 10pm on Wednesday nights. I give a class myself, but it’s in Churchtown. Here’s the link:
http://www.freewebs.com/sanshou

Some myths and misinformation about Tai Chi Chuan you’ll probably come across:

• “It takes 10 years of practice before learning applications”, if you hear this then your instructor doesn’t know them.
• “Tai chi chuan is all about softness and yielding.” Tai chi is the name of the yin-yang symbol, so we’re talking yin-yang boxing, both hard and soft, all soft yin training with no yang training leaves you with what the Chinese call “tu fu chuan” bean curd boxing. With techniques in the form such as “break arm style” and “parry and punch” clearly it is necessary to have the power to do so.
• “Tai Chi Chuan consists of only the hand form and chi gung.” Traditionally there are 5 aspects to the practice: The hand form. The weapon forms. Tui shou – 8 major sets of drills practicing martial movements and strategies also in free style we are basically practicing stand-up wrestling. Nei Gung - a set of 24 exercises practiced to develop what we could call muscle memory, training yourself how to move with correct structure and with aliveness and efficiency, these exercises also allow you to build up the ability to receive a fair amount of force, traditionally after 100 days the practitioner undergoes a test where someone jumps from a height of 6 feet on to his abdomen 3 times. San shou - this means scattering arms, i.e. self defense, in other words practicing applications and sparring.

Colm,
I can understand the usually negative opinion towards Tai chi Chuan’s martial benefits as most “players” who claim to teach it couldn’t deal with an attack even if you told them the limb you would use and when you would strike. These guys are basically playing boxercise. Now don’t you think it would be a little unfair to announce that western boxing was rubbish just because you’re understanding of it came through watching some middle aged women trying to shed a few pounds?

As for building up strength and power, I have regularly beaten opponents at international level competition in both wrestling and kickboxing who have out weighed me by over two stone. My ego might certainly like to believe that it comes down simply to superior skills, but clearly a degree of strength and power might be needed what do you think?

“The OP asked if Tai Chi was good for building up strength, and I think I showed why it won't help you in that regard”

What complete Tai Chi Chuan system have you mastered that you can make such a sweeping statement?
Personally over the past 7 years I have competed internationally I have met both good and bad fighters from too many different styles to remember and I’m a little too long in the tooth to believe that everyone who practices BJJ is on par with the Gracies, although for many that seems to be the selling point. What was it Mao said?, oh, yea “no evidence, no right to speak!”

Happy New Year man, and to the rest of yis!
Niall

kenpo_dave

"it can take 10 years before you start to learn the practical applications of Tai Chi techniques"

Looking at it now I think I was kinda stupid to say that. Im going to drop out of this discussion as my experience and knowledge of Tai Chi is very limited.

Happy New Year everyone!!

Anana

Thanks everyone for all the information. It's been a real help. I appreciate it.:)

Colm_OReilly

Colm,
I can understand the usually negative opinion towards Tai chi Chuan’s martial benefits as most “players” who claim to teach it couldn’t deal with an attack even if you told them the limb you would use and when you would strike. These guys are basically playing boxercise. Now don’t you think it would be a little unfair to announce that western boxing was rubbish just because you’re understanding of it came through watching some middle aged women trying to shed a few pounds?

Yes, yes it would be unfair, but that's not the point of discussion here.

As for building up strength and power, I have regularly beaten opponents at international level competition in both wrestling and kickboxing who have out weighed me by over two stone. My ego might certainly like to believe that it comes down simply to superior skills, but clearly a degree of strength and power might be needed what do you think?

Yes, in any combative or athletic endeavour, attributes do contirbute to the success of a practitioner. However, again that wasn't the point of discussion.

What complete Tai Chi Chuan system have you mastered that you can make such a sweeping statement?
Personally over the past 7 years I have competed internationally I have met both good and bad fighters from too many different styles to remember and I’m a little too long in the tooth to believe that everyone who practices BJJ is on par with the Gracies, although for many that seems to be the selling point. What was it Mao said?, oh, yea “no evidence, no right to speak!”

To address the selling point issue, an athletic club can advertise to children that they could be just like Seb Coe, so I can't see your beff with the point of some BJJ clubs alluding to the Gracies in their advertising.

I don't have to master Tai Chi to be able to examine it, I'm educated and experienced enough in sport and exercise to understand the benefits of an activity by observation.

Firstly let me say that any sort of activity will have knock on effects to all the areas of fitness. In order to build strength, you have to apply a certain amount of resistance to the muscles to have the appropriate response. Cardio work, be it low level or high intensity, does not directly produce these results, they work on the locomuscular and cardiovascular endurance and output abilities.

An activity such as martial arts can have a knock on effects on strength, but the primary fitness effect they'll have will be on locomuscular endurance.

Peace Out,
Colm

Niall Keane

Colm,

Original question:
“Is Tai Chi a good exercise? good for building up strength?”

Your response:
“No, Tai Chi will not build up strength.”

Mine:
“I can understand the usually negative opinion towards Tai chi Chuan’s martial benefits as most “players” who claim to teach it couldn’t deal with an attack even if you told them the limb you would use and when you would strike. These guys are basically playing boxercise. Now don’t you think it would be a little unfair to announce that western boxing was rubbish just because you understand of it came through watching some middle aged women trying to shed a few pounds?”

Yours:
“Yes, yes it would be unfair, but that's not the point of discussion here.”

Really, show me a competent martial artist without strength? Are you seriously suggesting that Tai chi neglects this requirement?

Quote:
“Yes, in any combative or athletic endeavour, attributes do contribute to the success of a practitioner. However, again that wasn't the point of discussion.”

My point exactly, which is that although skill is a factor, it is an acquired attribute born of experience, in order to compete a basic training would necessitate strength, fitness and power training.

“I don't have to master Tai Chi to be able to examine it, I'm educated and experienced enough in sport and exercise to understand the benefits of an activity by observation.”

So you’ve checked out and/ or trained with serious tai chi fighters? Funny that I haven’t trained with you or seen you observe a class, nor has Paul Mitchell, nor have any of our students, as I’ve already mentioned I’ve been in international competition in San Shou, San Da, Tui Shou and Shuai Jaoi for the past 7 years, Paul since 1992, I know every Irish competitor and you haven’t trained with us so where is the educated observation coming from? Or have you just seen public/ health tai chi in a park and decided as I have afore mentioned that Boxercise created Muhammad Ali?

Quote:
”Firstly let me say that any sort of activity will have knocked on effects to all the areas of fitness. In order to build strength, you have to apply a certain amount of resistance to the muscles to have the appropriate response. Cardio work, be it low level or high intensity, does not directly produce these results, they work on the locomuscular and cardiovascular endurance and output abilities.”

Wow man, you really believe that you know everything about Tai Chi Chuan and its syllabus. I have no argument about the science, and believe me Tai Ch Chuan incorporates it, my point stems from the fact that you believe that a complete tai chi chuan syllabus lacks certain fitness/ power elements. Your opinion has arrived from hearsay, I guess Tai Chi Chuan is generally a soft target, and due to the new age rubbish I can understand your misunderstanding, but although Practical Tai Chi Chuan Ireland have produced European and World champions which other posters on this forum have made you aware of, although I myself am ranked in the top 5 in the world in IMAF and PWKA pro San Da, you are seriously announcing here that basically Tai Chi doesn’t work without ever having trained in it, that’s kinda weird? You’d never catch me commenting on the BJJ syllabus, why because I acknowledge that I don’t know the first thing about it.
My point about the Gracies and BJJ is simply that I believe that fighters and not styles make fights. For example take Muay Thai: I have fought a Grevicious who trained with Vipers/ Fitness First, a Nash who trained with Peacock and Vos, a Shwardner (not sure on the spelling) who fought out of a gym in Milan and 2 other hard hittin bast—ds from Zurich can’t remember their names (that’s how hard they hit ‘_’), some of them I destroyed, one without conceding a point, another managed to (I found out afterwards) break my cheek bone. In my opinion as their opponent so I guess I should know, they were entirely different fighters, sure they all fought with round houses, push kicks and punching combos, and all lacked a sharp grappling attitude, some however had obviously practiced countering throws whereas other hadn’t. Some were prepared for and were hungry to win San Da competitions, others weren’t. That’s my point! Anyone who’s fought at international level knows this, style is irrelevant, we all practice for the same competition, and it is the attitude, intent and training of the fighter that is paramount!
Practical Tai Chi Chuan has consistently proved its reputation; our fight record speaks for itself, not hearsay? Yet people continually preach to us individually about the folly of practicing Tai Chi Chuan, of course these are people who’ve never seen us compete or been our opponents. I have to say thanks because it only makes us hungrier.

All the best,
Niall

patjunfa

I'd be interested to hear more of Tai Chi in relation to Sanshou. I've done some Tai Chi, and know friends who are well into it. I know it can be used effectively in combat application, but I didn't know it could be used much in competition like Sanshou. I can Imagine abilitys learned from Tai Chi would help, being able to ground , generally flow and redirect force.
However to compete in Sanshou you will need skills more associated with kickboxing and judo. How to take hits on a closed gaurd, some body conditioning, breakfalls and throws, general kicking and boxing ability, bobing and weaving etc
While I know Tai Chi can be practical, I've not heard of this being part of TaiChi Syllabus. Is TaiChi your only or main training for such events? Do you incorperate some padwork and elements not traditionally considered part of TaiChi? Essentially how much of "other" training do you have to include to compete in these events.
Well done to:)

Colm_OReilly

Niall,

a few questions:

What do you define as strength?

When did I argue regarding the practicality of Tai Chi in a fighting environment? I believe you'll find my posts addressed the strength related components of practicing Tai Chi or any martial art.

As for the rest of your post, I never mentioned Tai Chi in a combatitive environment nor did I ask for a list of your achievements/credentials. Without sounding patronising you appeared to take a very personal view over what I said.

Colm

Dave Joyce

Without sounding patronising you appeared to take a very personal view over what I said

If I can butt in here for a second, I'd hardly blame Niall for taking it personally
when Colm you were making a lot of carte blanche comments that were totally dismissive of Taiji. Dan Doherty and his guys have been to the forefront (in many ways lol!) in tackling the many untruths relating to Taiji over the years and more power to them!

"the strength related components of practicing Tai Chi or any martial art".

Well for one thing theres pushing hands practise/competition and then theres the internal strenght training/benefits. However, I suppose its "uncool" or unreal to think that there can be an internal benefit to this type of training. Feck it, who needs balence or an improved immune system in their life anyway!!


IMHO there are 3 types of Taiji, the new age crap where most "instructors":p (and I use that term loosely) know sweet FA and can barely pass on the form and only concentrate on the "yin" side of training, the guys who know the long form (barely) and don't have an instructor/the ability to teach any of the other aspects of the art, such as grounding, pushing hands, applications etc and then you have the guys (like Niall and the guys in PTCC who some of my students have fought many years ago AND they CAN walk the walk:eek: ) who do the WHOLE art including competing. To me Taiji is probley the most mis-understood/mis-quoted martial art out there. Personally I would still love to be training in Taiji, but when I was teaching Gong Fu very few of my (much younger) students wanted to do internal training and prefered the external styles of Longfist/White Crane. Now I'm so snowed under I don't have the time to train in it:mad:

kenpo_dave

"students wanted to do internal training and prefered the external styles of Longfist/White Crane"

Dave if youre talking about Shaolin White Crane, it is internal.

pma-ire

Dave Joyce wrote:

Now I'm so snowed under I don't have the time to train in it:mad:

Something to do when you get old and useless

Must be nice to have something to look forward to

Niall,

Really interesting posts on TaiChi!

Colm_OReilly

Dave,

I was talking purely on the strength, as a function of the ability of the body's "external" muscles to do work. I don't know about the internal benefits of a style but I'll say this: there really is no bad exercise, there are exercises that are performed badly that can injure the body, and there are exercises which will better help people achieve the objective at hand.

columok

Firstly I can really understand Niall getting annoyed at people typecasting TaiChi people as hippy crystal hugging beardies and having seen Niall train in UCD and seen San Da and San shou before I have a lot of respect for these combat athletes.

I think Colm's POV is referring to the pursuit of strength development through martial arts and I think that Colm was saying (or trying to say) that most forms of Tai Chi like most martial arts arent great specifically for fitness. Also I believe that Colm was referring to the most common style of Tai Chi learning rather than, certainly in my eyes, the less common sparring involved styles. Again loose language probably didnt help.

So...getting back to the OPs question...

Fall in with some athletes and competitors like Niall and you'll find Tai Chi great for fitness/strength building. However be warned that this is not the case for many Tai Chi classes. Therefore if you really wanna get strong and fit then train with Niall and compete.

Tim_Murphy

I don't know much about tai chi.

Do you guys spend much time doing the forms when you are training for san shou competitions?

Dave Joyce

Granted Colm and I agree with most of your last post but I remember Master Yang Jwing Ming saying that a lot of people who train exclusively external CAN be very weak internally, so although they look the part, they can be suffering with lots of different ailments eg from my own and some of my fighters experiences your immune system can be crap when you're extremely fit, although you look AND feel great. Whereas it is possible to do internal strenght training (which Niall touched upon) and some people (and NO I don't mean the cliched overweight and under training types) may not look very impressive to the western eye (not cut or ripped, carrying a bit of weight) but CAN have far better overall health because their training emphasises internal training. I can't vouch for Niall but I know practising Taiji/Qigong while training for Thai fights worked really well for me, keeping me focused and very relaxed particularly in the lead up to events.

Anana

I know I am interrupting the tai chi debate, but I just remembered myself that my original question had been about tai chi and kung fu.

Are there places on the Northside that teach Kung Fu?

kenpo_dave

Theres a Kung Fu club in DCU but I dont know if they accpet non students

http://www.redbrick.dcu.ie/~kungfu/

paul moran

Dave if youre talking about Shaolin White Crane, it is internal.

Sorry Kenpo Dave,

I beg to differ, some of the aspects of Whitecrane "Qigong" can be internal but Shaolin Whitecrane is considered an External Martial Art!!!

Regards,
Paul

Michael O Leary

Anana wrote:

I know I am interrupting the tai chi debate, but I just remembered myself that my original question had been about tai chi and kung fu.

Are there places on the Northside that teach Kung Fu?

Hi Anana,

If Blanchardstown is not to far for you to travel you could have a look at the thread "clubs in Castleknock/Clonsilla". I teach a type of Kung-Fu called Wing Tsun there and you will get a lot of information on the above mentioned thread.

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

patjunfa

"Kung Fu


I know I am interrupting the tai chi debate, but I just remembered myself that my original question had been about tai chi and kung fu.

Are there places on the Northside that teach Kung Fu?"


If Raheny's close to you, I teach a Kung Fu system called "Ching Wu" on Mon and Wed nights

For details call me on 0861675034

kenpo_dave

Actually, after reading Dr Yangs "The Essence of Shaolin White Crane" I was 100% positive that Shaolin White Crane was Internal. After all, Qi Gong and Jin are Internal, are they not?

But Paul, you are one of the last people I want to argue with.

Colm_OReilly

Paul, you are one of the last people I want to argue with.

Dave,

Given Paul's postings on this forum I'm sure he'll have no problem answering any questions you have about his areas of expertise.

Colm

kenpo_dave

Oh, dont get me wrong. If Paul tells me that White Crane is considered an external martial art then Im going to accept it. Its just Im a little confused as to why its considered external, because theres alot of internal training in it.

Niall Keane

Ah, you’ve brought up perhaps the most controversial aspect of CMA theory. My understanding (stressing ‘my’) is that external refers to Buddhist related arts brought to China from India and Tibet, for example Shaolin arts from India and White Crane, originally called Lion’s roar or Budda’s Roar from a monk in Tibet. Internal refers to Daoist Indigenous Chinese Arts such as Tai Chi Chuan, Hsing I and Ba Gua Zhang.

Now the essence of the confusion arises, (Soft) and (Hard) arts.

Basically this comes down to the focus or main thing stressed in an art. In the soft arts (the above 3 famous internal ones all are but not all external ones are hard) we stress giving up of the self to follow the opponent. In all the drills there is incorporated the learning of skills and strategies used to follow and control the opponent without allowing him to “hear” what you’re doing; “we borrow but leave nothing to borrow”.
In the ‘Hard’ styles the guiding expression is: “first bravery, second strength, third Gung Fu (technique/ skill)” (yi dan, er li, san gung fu). Here the building up of strength is paramount, with the feeling that eventually skill will follow.

Now we have the makings of a tedious row!

Hard stylists will argue that at least strength can be built up quickly and a strong person devoid of skill stands a better chance than a weak person with a little skill. Cannot argue with this premise. From this comes the expression “Tai Chi cannot go out for 10 years”. This expression was used at the time the Yangs were champions in Beijing. Kind of (they might be better but it takes ages.)
The false logic of course is that strength is not built up in the soft arts. This is where the expression ‘jin’ aforementioned on a previous post arises. The Chinese character for Jin contains the characters for Li (strength) and silk. Books at the time were written on silk, so Jin literally means educated strength, of strength in the correct direction, i.e. power. Nei Jin or internal power, developed through nei gung arises when breath, structural focus, intent and timing/aptness of technique all arrive together. It is about efficient power, strength not wasted, think of all the water metaphors alluded to throughout Daoist writings. The classics state: ‘Many error forsaking what is near, to pursue what is far.”
Strength is built upon, but it is not isolated, e.g. one typical everyday Tai Chi Chuan exercise is handstands for 2 mins on the fists. It does not simply mean being able to ‘pump’ your weight but conditions the fist and develops correct arm alignment that helps one to be able to deliver a powerful strike without breaking your hand. This is a really simple exercise so I’ve picked it, I’m not going to go into all the exercises and explain all of their benefits here, suffice to say they all provide strength increases, strengthen the will or intent, bring about with practice correct movement and teach us new skills, so to do many hard style drills the difference being what is emphasized as the purpose of the drill and the efficiency how many fighting attributes are trained at the same time.
So do you go down to the weights area 3 times a week and practice fighting 3 times a week or do you be efficient and practice fighting 6 times a week whilst building up strength?
Thinking is not as good as study, and it is difficult to convey a moving physical art with a few pen strokes. There are always exceptions and unorthodoxies and that’s what makes life interesting. Anyone seriously interested in this stuff feel welcome to contact me anytime up in UCD or Churchtown. Perhaps some kind of Kung Fu, meet/demo/open mat/event might be worth exploring?

All the best lads,
Niall

Michael O Leary

Your explanation is really interesting Niall and sounds very similar to the theory of force in Wing Tsun. According to Newton's law of motion, Power or force is Mass multiplied by acceleration. In Wing Tsun we already have the body mass and therefore all we have to add is speed or acceleration. We achieve the body mass by the correct alignment of the bones. We are taught that pure force travels in straight lines so by aligning the bones in a straight line they can channel the force effectively. Apparently the more dense that an object is the effectively it can channel energy or force. This is why bones act as a more effective conduit than muscles. The only reason why we use the muscles is to align the bones properly so that it can compress or release force effectively.

Here is a simple excercise to illustrate the point for people. Stand up straight with your head over your shoulders, over your hips, over your knees, ankles, etc. At the moment gravity is pushing your body into the ground but you cannot feel it as the gravity is being compressed into your bones. Your muscles are quite relaxed and are only being used, not for force but merely to position your bones correctly.

Now lean back or to the side at about a 45 degree angle and you will suddently feel gravity kick in. You will also feel it where the straight line alignment of your body is broken. As the bones cannot compress the force instead your muscles now need to be utilised for force and you will not be able to hold the position for very long.

This is a very basic concept of how we utilise force in Wing Tsun and I suspect other likeminded arts.

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

Michael O Leary

Sorry guys, its me again. I am just home from class about an hour and I am always wired after. I guess its the same for everyone.

After my last post about 20 mins ago I had a look at some of the previous messages some of which were very interesting specifically the issue of strength. I think the point that Colm was making was defining STRENGTH. If I am not mistaken Colm, like myself is a qualified fitness instructor and trained with the NCEF. What we were taught is that according to sports science true increases in strength can only come about when the muscle "fails" or cannot do one more rep or movement. This is nothing to do with willpower, the muscle just cannot do anymore. Only with "failure" will you get an increase in strength.

However in the first few weeks of say for example someone going to the Gym they notice an increase in strength without their muscles failing, this is not a real increase in strength. The reason for this is that in the muscles are motor units of which we only use a percentage. When we do a new activity we activite the dormant motor units and end up using a greater percentage of them and this gives a false impression of increased strength.

So at the moment I would agree with Colm in that unless in Tai-chi you train so that your muscles fail by increasing the resistance continously then you will not see an increase in strength. However you will see an increase in power/force which is something totally different. I sparred with some of Niall's boys in 1996 and I can vouch for that :-)

So I agree with Colm, I just think there was a little misunderstanding.

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

paul moran

Hey Kenpo Dave,

You should always argue what you believe or at least what you're interpretation of something is! I can only guess you have trained with me in the past but I am no expert on Whitecrane and Dr Yangs book "The Essence of Shaolin Whitecrane" is the culmination of 30 years work so is open to alot of interpretations because the art becomes your own the more you practice it.

The definitons of Hard and Soft and External and Internal have been alot more eloquently put by Niall than I could have have detailed, but the point of training Whitecrane Kung Fu is to fight. Jing is Martial Power, and how you manifest that power can be done in 2 distinct ways. 1 Emphasis on Muscles to generate power or 2 Emphasis on Qi to generate power.

As it is a rarity to find anybody who can use the Yin side of the Martial Arts (Qi) effectively in a fight I define Whitecrane as external. This is because no matter how advanced you become in the style you will still be confined to the basic body movements required to generate the whipping power used in Whitecrane. (I refer to Ancestral or Shaking Crane as there are alot more forms of Whitecrane other than what I train, eg, Shouting and Flying crane!).

Whitecrane by direct definition is a Hard/Soft style as in order for a whip to work it must be loose and flexible, other wise it would not generate the snap at the end of the strike to penetrate into the target. The "bows" of the body must be used to produce this sort of whipping power, these are the 2 legs, 2 arms, spine and the chest, this requires a strong muscular body otherwise you would injure yourself when striking with jing. This is where people start to refer to Whitecrane as internal because the strikes are designed to penetrate deeper than perhaps those of a Longfist strike.

If I strike the abdomen of an opponent with a Longfist punch, the force going forward would cause them to fall away from me. If I strike the same target with a Whitecrane strike they will fold over. This is because the whipping power going forward with velocity and conversely the whipping power coming back (also taking into account the different hand forms) will cause the power to go into the body as opposed to the impact spreading across the body.

Like all fighters and styles the more you train the less you should be focused on using your physical attributes and more on the technique and strategy of fighting. If you get to Master the Whitecrane style then it should be an internal art as you will learn to direct your Qi to hurt your opponent but until then the style has to be considered an external style as the majority of people will not reach this stage and the few that do should not set rule!?!?!

Of course this is only my interpretation of the style at this stage of my training, I simply like how it helps me to fight.

If you want to know more come and train with Dr Yang on the first weekend of March!

BTW Dave Joyce is highly skilled in the Whitecrane style, he was the director of YMAA Galway afterall and some of the best Whitecrane guys in YMAA are from his old school!!!!

Goodluck,
Paul

Mikel

Michael O Leary wrote:

We are taught that pure force travels in straight lines

what the hell is "pure force?"

Michael O Leary wrote:

the gravity is being compressed into your bones.

WTF?? the gravity is being compressed??

Michael O Leary wrote:

As the bones cannot compress the force instead your muscles now need to be utilised for force and you will not be able to hold the position for very long.

how does a bone "compress the force"? How does anything "compress" a force? What does it mean to compress a force? Why is it when a martial artist tries to rationalise what they do with science is comes out like pseudo scientific gibberish?

Mikel

Michael O Leary wrote:

What we were taught is that according to sports science true increases in strength can only come about when the muscle "fails" or cannot do one more rep or movement.

Not true. Go to Hercs and ask the Olympic and power lifters and they will tell you otherwise. They don't train to failure.

Michael O Leary

Hi lads, :-)

If anyone wants to raise any of the questions posted by Mickl feel free to do so and I will explain as best I can. I won't bother replying to him directly as I feel it would be as useful as eating soup with a fork. He seems to be an angry young man.

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

kenpo_dave

Mikel, i think what Michael means by 'failure' is the point at which the muscles being used simply cannot go any further and so to continue doing the exercise on a regular basis they must get stronger.

Michael O Leary

Hi Dave,

Nice to write to you. I have enjoyed reading some of your posts over the past few months.

This question of strength is an interesting one. Please note that when I talk about muscular strength I am not talking about the considerable force that most martial artists can generate through the co-ordination of their whole body. I am talking about the ability of a single muscle or group of muscles to contract in a powerful manner. A popular indicator or general strength is someones grip and many fitness centres have machines which give a reading on how powerful your grip is. So for example a bicep curl works the ???, oh yes, the biceps :-) So how do you make your biceps stronger and your ability to do a bicep curl using more weight and more times?

A very experienced personnel trainer called Mark Honeyman did a seminar for the Irish Martial Arts Commission about 10 years ago. He received his qualification with the American Council of Excercise (ACE) which is very well recognised and respected. He explained that for a muscle to get stronger it needs to "fail". I then went to him privately for some time. After that I qualified as a fitness instructor with the National College of Exercise and Fitness (NCEF) where they told me the same thing, namely that for a muscle to get stronger it needs to fail. I worked as a fitness instructor in "Total Fitness" and this was the strength training philosophy also. Now I am not saying that anyone else is wrong or that I am 100% right but what I have been taught is that for a muscle to get stronger it needs to "fail".

On page 63 of the book, "Serious Strength Training" (1998) by Tudor O.Bompa, Phd and Lorenzo J. Cornacchia, "in order to achieve optimum training benefits, it is crucial to perform the greatest number of repetitions possible during each set, therefore always reach the state of local muscular exhaustion that prevents him or her from performing one more repedition, even when applying maximum force".

One of the reasons why some people do not train to failure is that the connective tissue which attaches the muscles to the bones develop at a slower rate that muscles. Some while the muscles can do a powerful contraction the tendons are at risk of injury. That is why you should work on at a lower rate first.

Now I am not a scientist or a bodybuilder. I am not saying that I am absolutly right rather I am just relating one of the main current theories regarding muscular strength. If anyone has anything to add I would welcome their contribution. Also if anyone wants to raise any my other points regarding force, bones and muscles I will try to answer all questions.

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

Colm_OReilly

As someone who has studied this and spends a considerable amount of time talking to coaches and fitness experts in various sports let me add this.

Training to failure is too vague a term.

Example, if I wanted to build up strenght in my "push up muscles" and decided training to failure was the way to go I may fail at 60 or 70 pushups, higher for some, lower for others. This would not increase strength, but rather endurance. Also a nasty side effect of this would be I wouldn't be able to train for a few days (however, there are some athletes and coaches who use this methodology)

In Explosive Lifting for Sports the basic outline of training, wrt reps per set is:

4-6 Power
6-10 Strength
8-12 Hypertrophy (Growth)
12-20 Endurance

As regards failure, if you are struggling/failing between 8-12 with a weight then you are building strenght, provided of course you give your body adequate recovery and refuel it properly.

BTW Human Kinetics are probably the best publishers when it comes to sports training, and I'd recommend them over pretty much any other brand.

Colm

Michael O Leary

Hi Colm,

I was actually going to make the point about "failing" at around ten reps for strength but I didn't want to ramble on too much. You are absolutely right. So we agree on the main point that for the muscle to get stronger it needs to "fail" at about ten reps.

By the way the book that I quoted was published by Human Kinetics.

All the best,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

Mikel

Angry young man eh? Of course i am, by pointing out you're posting gibberish I must be. Try opening a physics book once in a while.

columok

Michael,

Maybe you could clarify some of Mikels questions. I'll put them to you instead. As a civil engineering grad I've spent years studying statics, mechanics etc so maybe we can clear up any bits and pieces.

Michael O Leary wrote:

We are taught that pure force travels in straight lines

I trust you just mean force. As in force travels in straight lines? Pure force doesnt really mean anything. Force is a product of mass and acceleration.

Michael O Leary wrote:

the gravity is being compressed into your bones.

Tbh, I dont follow. Are you saying that the bones have a compressive force exerted upon them and the compression of the bones by this axial force absorbs some of this force before your muscles have to take over?

Michael O Leary wrote:

As the bones cannot compress the force instead your muscles now need to be utilised for force and you will not be able to hold the position for very long.

I'm not sure if I understand this bit.

If youre saying that the compression force when axial can be taken straight down your leg with little muscle strain yet when the angle is changed and bending/flexure is introduced the muscles are required to resist the bending of the bone member.

Cheers,

Colum

Michael O Leary

Hi Columok,

Thanks for the good mannered reply. As you are an engineering student I would welcome any input you may have on the subject and you may help me clarify some of my opinions. This is what I (maybe naively) believe this forum should be about. We all talk about our area of expertise and maybe learn a little something from each other. Please note that Colm O Reilly got a terrible amount of abuse regarding whether tai chi would be good for strength. Now unless anybody has anything to add on the matter between the two of us we seems to have the last word by providing the best explanation of how a muscle gets stronger.

Do you mind if I answer your question one part at a time? When I talked about "pure force" I was talking about something different to centrifugal force. Centrifugal force, as far as I am aware is the force used when an object is being swung in a circle. The reason that it can travel in a circle is that the force is being restrained. For example the force generated by a hammer thrower in athletics. When s/he wants to swing it in a circle they need to hold onto it and this is centrifugal force. However when they let go of the force and there is nothing holding it back then the hammer does not continue to travel in a circle but instead goes in a straight line. It travels in a straight line as there is no restraining force.

So as far as I am aware force can only travel in a circle if it is being restrained but if there is nothing restraining it then it will go in a straight line. Can you tell me if I am incorrect in this before we go onto the other points?

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

columok

Hey Michael,

I've finished engineering actually so I'll try and dredge it all up in the memory banks.

Please people shame me and correct me if i'm wrong here. Centrifugal force is exerted, as in your analogy, as the force acting from the centre of rotation of the body (as in the hammer thrower) to the body itself. The force acts from the persons centre line to the centre of the hammer ball. The force acts along the line of the wire. Therefore the force is just a straight line and isnt travelling in a curved path at all.

All forces are really the same. Centrifugal force is really just a name for a phenomenon and is really like all forces. No different really.

Hope that helps and feel free to keep asking,

Colum.

Michael O Leary

Hi Colm,

Thanks for the quick reply. Phew, you are making me work. Fair balls to you;)

I understand what you are saying that "all" force travels in straight lines. I suppose what I am talking about is the force of the impact between the hammerball and another object anywhere along the 360 degree circle rather than the force between the body and the hammerball. The only way the hammerball can do this along a 360 degree angle is because you make adjustments (rotating) by holding onto the hammerball. If the hammer-ball is no longer attached to/held back by the body then the hammer-ball will travel in a straight line.

Would you agree with this?

Regards,

Michael
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

columok

The ball is travelling in a circular path but any force it exerts should be in a straight line. As you say when it's released it travels in a straight line (well more likely an arc) but is has the centripedal force sending it far away and then the gravity force returning it to the ground around the 60m mark.

Early morning mechanics. May not be accurate

Colum