At times there is a disconnected between how the two people move, if there were force travelling from one to the other you would see the chain. However what is happening is the "student" is making himself move, you can see the chain of movement from his feet into his hips and not from the teacher and into the student.
He is doing nothing on the outside. That's why it's internal. A video can't show it but he explains what he's doing.
That doesn't explain the observable action taken by the student, unless you want to argue that the teacher is sending waves up from the ground and into the students lower body. Sorry but it's clear as day in the video if you know what you are looking at.
Post one. I'd wager it will result in a completely different response from people, can you guess why?
Explain the force and movement going up from the student's feet and in to his hips? Keep in mind where the teacher is connected. Explain why his lower body is doing what it does.
Yes, because the teacher isn't forcing the patsy in any way, shape, or form - everything that happens, is of patsy's own doing. The teacher is then just taking credit for the acting skills of patsy. As Dean stated, if you know what you're looking for, you can see what's happening.
Yes, because boxing is simplistic like most external styles. There doesn't have to be much explanation. What they are doing is obvious. In the internal styles most of what is happening is on the inside so people who don't or can't do it don't want to or can't see it.
Post one. While you are at it explain why that student is doing what he is because I've explained what is happening yet you've consistently failed to account for my observations. That you think Boxing is simplistic speaks volumes for your knowledge and understanding. Oh yeah keep in mind that you mentioned the Freddie Roach video as a way to back up your excuses for your clip being a demo. So put your money where your mouth is and post one.
Here is Sam Tam, one of Wee Kee Jin's kung fu brothers. He shows and explains it. [ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MF8CDgQtRY8[/ame] My father boxed as a heavyweight in the NCAA's for UC Berkeley in 1959 and my maternal grandfather fought as a middleweight in Chicago gold gloves in the 1920's. I know boxing. If boxing is so complicated why does it have some of the dumbest athletes? They aren't all Jack Dempsey. Who am I talking to? Post a video of your practice. You don't even have to be in it. What do you focus on when training?
Really? Care to explain in exacting detail what physiologically is supposed to be happening on the inside besides muscular contraction and joint movement in order to generate force?
Grossly exaggerated responses by the students - the actual mechanics being expounded are pretty standard across MANY disciplines No, THEY know boxing...it isn't hereditary Poverty and education - sports are the traditional escape Also be very careful using a qualifier like "dumb" because it is all relative to who you are talking to.... I have a few scattered - search function will help Hurting people efficiently
I will let Glen Passion explain the han shi yi quan method. [ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a5H2p8TIfbI[/ame]
23rdwave - another moderator has kindly requested YOU post explanations along with the videos. I understand there are explanations in the videos but we would like to hear your take on it.
Hannibal, I have neither the time nor the inclination to convert you. The mechanics are the least important thing in ima's. If it was all mechanics we could just pick up a form or drill on youtube and practice that. It's the ima principles that are important. I learned boxing from my father and grandfather. They competed at a high level. As far as dumb goes... Who have you hurt? If there were no charges filed it must have been compliant.
Theres a difference between consenting and compliant sparring but not compliant in just falling over with a punch. when I've sparred with people they did not comply to the force, they actively resisted it but were consenting to the encounter of sparring
That implies you could This alone shows you have little awareness of what you are talking about. Do not presume you have the drop on me in this because you will be surprised at what I have experience in....and how much I have learned from said experiences They were both amateurs, so no they didn't. It also does not make them good teachers either, and as you achieved nothing of note in boxing - or you would have told us about it - this is like me claiming I am a county level cricketer because my dad was and he taught me I suck at cricket btw If the shoe fits...... Many - it is sadly an occupational hazard
