Power generation in VT

[guy b.]

Guy, have you trained SPM, Pak Mei or other Hakka arts?

Yes I have. Not any more though

They are not widely taught here in the States, so I only know what I read or see on Youtube (i.e. nothing).

I think probably more in US than in some places. Robert Chu will probably know where to find it if you have any contact with him. UK has quite a lot due to HK Chinese population.

Anyway some people have opined that WC may be influenced if not partially derived from those arts due to many shared traits such as the short stance and emphasis on infighting, arms held in front with the elbows down, the rounded back some WC branches also have, ample use of the "phoenix-eye fist", as well as geographical proximity in Southern China.

I would say they work in completely different ways. They look superficially similar in some ways, but for me they are not. Compared to these systems, wing chun is like a step change, an evolution. Wing chun is fast and mobile. Hakka arts are not so much due to more involved body mechanics. I guess they would claim striking power over wing chun but they lack the momentum based power of wing chun. Wing chun is economical, attacking. Hakka systems are more complex, counter punching styles.

Also, you again referenced "float, sink, swallow, spit" which I've also heard in Okinawan Karate circles. In your experience, do these principles have a place in WSL VT? Or do you feel they contradict your WC structure, principles for power generation, forward intent, etc.?

I would say that they are contradictory. Wing chun power connected is like a spear point with the shaft stuck for a second against the ground. It is momentary and explosive. It doesn't need prolonged contact. Hakka systems are more trapping/semi grappling systems that draw the opponent into a place where they can be destroyed. They rely on contact and not too much moving around.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

"Running down a hill or forcing speed in other ways is again a standard approach. People doing this kind of thing will also be lifting heavy and doing heavier to lighter plyos periodised in a logical way and building towards event."

No, trainers like Nick Curson has pretty much completely eliminated heavy weight lifting from his regime and he has trained many famous UFC fighters. He doesn't even like kettlebell workouts anymore. Lifting heavy will make you look big, but not necessarily help with explosive force.

"Nothing is more effective in training full body muscle recruitment than olympic lifting."
For building muscle? Perhaps you are right. Does that equate to power in structure or punching power? Not necessarily.

"Getting stronger does not necessarily entail getting bigger. Muscle fibre composition, muscle recruitment, neural pathways all play a huge role."

- Yeah I agree getting stronger doesn't mean getting bigger. But KPM's ascertion was about a skinny guy getting bigger. That means putting on muscle. I assume he wasnt talking about getting fatter.

There are many things that play a more important role than building strength when it comes to power and explosiveness. Stance, relaxation, speed, alignment, body mechanics, understanding of force vectors. These things can all be trained and refined to incredible levels and is a life time of study in itself. If I am relying on stronger shoulder muscles to get bet better power or overpower a partner, I am looking in the wrong places. If there is a problem with power it is going to be one of those things above that is off - NOT how strong my muscles are.










​

 

[geezer]

...There are many things that play a more important role than building strength when it comes to power and explosiveness. Stance, relaxation, speed, alignment, body mechanics, understanding of force vectors. These things can all be trained and refined to incredible levels and is a life time of study in itself. If I am relying on stronger shoulder muscles to get bet better power or overpower a partner, I am looking in the wrong places. If there is a problem with power it is going to be one of those things above that is off - NOT how strong my muscles are.

I agree with what you say here, but I also think careful and selective cultivation of muscular power can contribute a lot to power. That's been proven over and over with top athletes in a wide variety of competitive sports. By contrast, my old Chinese sifu was opposed to weight training because he achieved a high level of explosive power without it. He preferred the traditional WC methods of training in the areas you mentioned to build his power. But he also had a very strong core and legs as well as a high level of mastery. For people not so naturally endowed, IMO some form of supplemental resistance training would be useful.

 

[geezer]

....They (Hakka and WC systems) look superficially similar in some ways, but for me they are not. Compared to these systems, wing chun is like a step change, an evolution. Wing chun is fast and mobile. Hakka arts are not so much due to more involved body mechanics. I guess they would claim striking power over wing chun but they lack the momentum based power of wing chun. Wing chun is economical, attacking. Hakka systems are more complex, counter punching styles.

So do you think WC evolved out of some form of village boxing like these Hakka systems? ...Perhaps reconceived and forever changed by a particular master such as Leung Jan? Or did it have another, separate source or sources? If so did Yonchun Baihe contribute something? Or was there something else? Do you think it's combination with the long pole (an actual historical connection reminiscent of the folktale of Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tai) was what inspired these changes and started WC heading in a different direction?

Finally, if you still hold to the theory of the pole as pivotal factor, why didn't these other Southern Chinese systems --which I'm told also train similar long pole systems ...why didn't they take the same road as WC?

If you are right about the pole thing... (and I'm still skeptical) then there must have been another factor involved, like the pole and a powerful personality ...a master (Leung Jan?) who forever changed the nature of the system.


I'd like to point out that, unlike our previous discussion (argument?), here I'm open to the concept that the pole might have exerted a major influence on the direction WC took. I just have to point out that both the empty handed system and the pole clearly have long roots. The roots of the pole and "proto-WC", if you will, must go back a long way, whatever the system was called. Sure the pole comes from spear and has ancient military roots. And villagers in Southern China have been duking it out since the dawn of time. It's kinda what people do.

 

[KPM]

- Yeah I agree getting stronger doesn't mean getting bigger. But KPM's ascertion was about a skinny guy getting bigger. That means putting on muscle. I assume he wasnt talking about getting fatter.

---A muscle's ability to generate contractile force is directly related to its cross-sectional area. That is simply a fact of human physiology. Now I'm not talking about the guy that takes weight lifting to an extreme and looks like a muscle bound hulk. You do reach a point of diminishing returns where more mass just slows you down and restricts your range of motion. I'm talking about the normal guy that uses weight-lifting to build strength and explosiveness to improve his athletic abilities. Take two new students to Wing Chun. One that does no strength training at all and has relatively skinny arms. Another that does some weight lifting 2 or 3 times per week and has some decent muscle mass. Train them exactly the same....all things being equal other than muscles mass and strength.....the guy that does some strength training is going to hit harder and with more power than the other guy. Again, that's simply human physiology.

 

[guy b.]

"Running down a hill or forcing speed in other ways is again a standard approach. People doing this kind of thing will also be lifting heavy and doing heavier to lighter plyos periodised in a logical way and building towards event."

No, trainers like Nick Curson has pretty much completely eliminated heavy weight lifting from his regime and he has trained many famous UFC fighters. He doesn't even like kettlebell workouts anymore. Lifting heavy will make you look big, but not necessarily help with explosive force.​

Moving heavy things explosively will help with explosive force. You can mention one gimmicky trainer and I will mention almost everyone in competitive sport.

"Nothing is more effective in training full body muscle recruitment than olympic lifting."
For building muscle? Perhaps you are right. Does that equate to power in structure or punching power? Not necessarily.

Onlympic lifting is not body building. It is the fastest and best way to build whole body neural connections, to increase muscle recruitment, and coordination of muscle firing

"Getting stronger does not necessarily entail getting bigger. Muscle fibre composition, muscle recruitment, neural pathways all play a huge role."

- Yeah I agree getting stronger doesn't mean getting bigger. But KPM's ascertion was about a skinny guy getting bigger. That means putting on muscle. I assume he wasnt talking about getting fatter.

You can't get stronger if you don't lift more weight. You can't get more powerful if you don't lift heavier things just as fast as you were previously lifting lighter things, or lift the same things but do it faster. That is what power is. Weight training, especially explosive lifts like the snatch and clean and jerk are about the best way of doing this recruiting almost the whole body musculature in the process.

There are many things that play a more important role than building strength when it comes to power and explosiveness. Stance, relaxation, speed, alignment, body mechanics, understanding of force vectors.

None of these things increase power. You are talking about improving mechanics (which everyone should be doing) and reducing inefficiency. These things do not increase gross power.

These things can all be trained and refined to incredible levels and is a life time of study in itself. If I am relying on stronger shoulder muscles to get bet better power or overpower a partner, I am looking in the wrong places. If there is a problem with power it is going to be one of those things above that is off - NOT how strong my muscles are

Shoulder muscles??​

 

[guy b.]

So do you think WC evolved out of some form of village boxing like these Hakka systems? ...Perhaps reconceived and forever changed by a particular master such as Leung Jan?

Sounds likely

Or did it have another, separate source or sources? If so did Yonchun Baihe contribute something?

Sounds unlikely

Do you think it's combination with the long pole (an actual historical connection reminiscent of the folktale of Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tai) was what inspired these changes and started WC heading in a different direction?

Many Southern Chinese systems incorporate the same pole method. It was obviously widely taught at some point in history (e.g. mid 19th century when most Southern Chinese systems appear, a time of much unrest in China). However only one Southern Chinese empty hand system is directly analogous to that pole method in terms of concepts and techniques. Did wing chun empty hands map directly to pole completely by chance? On balance I would guess not.

Finally, if you still hold to the theory of the pole as pivotal factor, why didn't these other Southern Chinese systems --which I'm told also train similar long pole systems ...why didn't they take the same road as WC?

Because nobody within those other systems decided to throw all the other crap out and remodel the whole thing based on well known and very effective military pole/spear methods?

If you are right about the pole thing... (and I'm still skeptical) then there must have been another factor involved, like the pole and a powerful personality ...a master (Leung Jan?) who forever changed the nature of the system.

Who knows? Leung Jan from Foshan is the earliest person we even know of who practised this system. I doubt that it goes back much before him, but then I am speculating

I'd like to point out that, unlike our previous discussion (argument?), here I'm open to the concept that the pole might have exerted a major influence on the direction WC took. I just have to point out that both the empty handed system and the pole clearly have long roots. The roots of the pole and "proto-WC", if you will, must go back a long way, whatever the system was called. Sure the pole comes from spear and has ancient military roots. And villagers in Southern China have been duking it out since the dawn of time. It's kinda what people do.

Pole comes from spear, sure. Given its ubiquity it is probably something that was widely taught to militias in 19th C Southern China. People have been fighting forever I agree

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Coming under fire in all directions here!

"Moving heavy things explosively will help with explosive force. You can mention one gimmicky trainer and I will mention almost everyone in competitive sport"

Well, I wouldn't say that he is gimmicky. The Marinovich brothers train this way (admittedly Curson derives his ideas from these guys). But the notion that heavy weights are not optimal for explosive power is nothing new. It's good for lifting heavy weights in that exact way though. Injuries, overloading of joints, spinal compression .... these are just a few of the negatives you can get from heavy lifting.

"Olympic lifting is not body building. It is the fastest and best way to build whole body neural connections, to in rease muscle recruitment, and coordination of muscle firing"

Whole body motions themselves are good for that. Do you need to add heavy weights to get those benefits? No. Plyometrics will do a better job for explosive power.

"You can't get stronger if you don't lift more weight. You can't get more powerful if you don't lift heavier things just as fast as you were previously lifting lighter things, or lift the same things but do it faster. That is what power is. Weight training, especially explosive lifts like the snatch and clean and jerk are about the best way of doing this recruiting almost the whole body musculature in the process."

It depends on what your definition of what power is. If by power you mean lifting heavy things, then yes you are absolutely right. We are on a wing chun forum though. Does power mean being able to crash through someone's arm structures and break their structure and alignment? Or does it mean explosive punching or kicking power? If the latter, then no, heavey lifting is not optimal for that. Wing Chun training is though.

"None of these things increase power. You are talking about improving mechanics (which everyone should be doing) and reducing inefficiency. These things do not increase gross power."

Well we are on a wing chun forum. If a wing chun guy can make me drop or fly across a room (in chi sao or otherwise) then I deem him/her powerful. I will think they have lots of power. Are they using great body mechanics? Yes. Why are you separating the two? It's not like they are opposites.

I used shoulder muscles as an example. The fact remains to me that if my punching power or structure breaking power is off, I am not going to fix it by making my muscles stronger.

 

[guy b.]

Whole body motions themselves are good for that. Do you need to add heavy weights to get those benefits? No. Plyometrics will do a better job for explosive power.

You need both plyometrics (neural) and weight (muscular) traning. Olympic weightlifting is somewhere in the middle, i.e. speed strength.

They are combined and periodised in such a way as to be appropriate to whatever event the athlete is competing in. It is what all athletes do. It is pure gimmick to focus on plyos only as some kind of radical new thing.

It depends on what your definition of what power is. If by power you mean lifting heavy things, then yes you are absolutely right. We are on a wing chun forum though. Does power mean being able to crash through someone's arm structures and break their structure and alignment? Or does it mean explosive punching or kicking power? If the latter, then no, heavey lifting is not optimal for that. Wing Chun training is though.

There is no competing definition of power. Power is work done fast. Amount of energy per unit time. Moving more to the force production side increases gross muscle recruitment, strength and yes size. Moving more to the speed side of it increases specific neural connection, firing rate, specific muscle recruitment. They work hand in hand. It is called complex training and has been used by athletes for decades.

Well we are on a wing chun forum. If a wing chun guy can make me drop or fly across a room (in chi sao or otherwise) then I deem him/her powerful. I will think they have lots of power. Are they using great body mechanics? Yes. Why are you separating the two? It's not like they are opposites.

Training body mechanics is not the same as training power. Of course they can be linked, e.g. in poon sau, pole, chi sau

I used shoulder muscles as an example. The fact remains to me that if my punching power or structure breaking power is off, I am not going to fix it by making my muscles stronger.

Depends on the reason. If your punching power is off because you are weak then making yourself stronger will help a great deal.

 

[Zeny]

I agree with what wc auckland has said, namely that resistance training is useless (or even detrimental) to achieve power.

Many wrongly assume that bigger muscles = stronger, and again i blame hollywood movies.

Real martial arts don't work like that, in fact a lot of martial arts theories don't make sense to an untrained person, which is why there is more bs in martial arts than any other sport.

I'm going to tell you, and i'm not charging anything for this advice, real explosive power comes from the reverse of resistance training (imagine running downhill). You want to remove tension and muscular force from your arm (defined as 'li' in chinese martial arts), and achieve springy explosive power (defined as 'jin' in chinese martial arts). That is why you would not want to go near anything resembling weight lifting, at all, as a wc practitioner. It doesn't make sense that a soft arm that does not appear to have any muscle at all can break your arm easily and effortlessly, but that's how it is. If you haven't touched or felt this kind of arm, you've been living under a rock. The sooner you accept it the better.

You can choose to continue your weight lifting training, that's your body and your perogative, but don't pass on this bs to your students, please. It will be a real sad day if after many years of training you finally realise all you are getting is 'li' and not real 'jin'. But by then it would be too late to recover all the lost years, at which point you will probably stubbornly insist that resistance training is correct because the truth is going to hurt, a lot.

And for this same exact reason, i disagree with wc auckland's method of practising the form against resistance. Forms should be practised until it is more comfortable and relaxing to do, over time, and not the reverse.

 

[LFJ]

Weights are completely unnecessary (and probably even detrimental) for developing power.

Unnecessary? Maybe, but you won't reach anywhere near your potential.

Detrimental? Explain. If it's that "bulky muscle slows you down" nonsense, that's a myth/excuse.

What makes you strong and powerful against a partner is using body structure, relaxation, alignment and correct limb movement which is learned in the forms.

That's like learning the olympic lifts but never loading the bar and thinking you're going to get stronger and more powerful.

All you've done is learned the mechanics which of course is an essential stage, but again, if you don't load the bar you won't reach anywhere near your potential.

Boxers etc are not going to be doing heavy bench presses etc. Power in punching does not come from lifting heavy. With fighters I see a lot of plyometric stuff.

You think Mike Tyson was just born with that muscle mass or got it from plyometric stuff? He was in the gym moving heavy weights. Was he not a power puncher?

His bigger muscled frame is going to slow him down

There it is! That's absolute nonsense and is the excuse skinny/weak people make for their inadequacy.

To quote Mark Rippetoe; "Does a bigger motor slow the car down?"

Ever notice the physique of a sprinter, some of the fastest people in the world? If the sprinter traded physiques with the marathon runner would that make him faster, you reckon?

"Nothing is more effective in training full body muscle recruitment than olympic lifting."
For building muscle? Perhaps you are right. Does that equate to power in structure or punching power? Not necessarily.

You still don't seem to understand the difference between weightlifting and bodybuilding. Muscular hypertrophy is a byproduct of weightlifting. The goal is general power. The power trained by olympic lifts can carry over to any sport you apply it to. If it can improve a tennis player's game, how could it not improve a martial artist's if applied to punching mechanics?


Have a look at this video here. The first guy is pretty skinny. Yeah? But he's throwing well above his own bodyweight over his head. Same with the women. He's already developed great power without a lot of mass. Though, if he increased his muscle mass, no doubt his power output (strength displayed explosively) would also increase.

Also notice his mobility, and in fact that of any olympic weightlifter. There is absolutely nothing about weightlifting to the detriment of a martial artist's goals. It would only optimize one's training.

 

[LFJ]

You can choose to continue your weight lifting training, that's your body and your perogative, but don't pass on this bs to your students, please.

If mediocracy is your aim and that of your students', then by all means, but you sound like a teenager so I doubt you have any students.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

"You need both plyometrics (neural) and weight (muscular) traning. Olympic weightlifting is somewhere in the middle, i.e. speed strength. They are combined and periodised in such a way as to be appropriate to whatever event the athlete is competing in. It is what all athletes do. It is pure gimmick to focus on plyos only as some kind of radical new thing. "

It's what all athletes do? Really? Your assertertion is that lifting heavy is an indispensable component of explosiveness and power development. I think that is a more radical stance than what I am saying. PLENTY of fighters stay away from heavy lifting or weights. And that is nothing new or gimicky. Muhamid Ali didn't lift weights. GSP has been on record saying he only does weights to make himself look good and marketable. Do Thai boxers lift weights? Do they lack power?

"There is no competing definition of power. Power is work done fast. Amount of energy per unit time. Moving more to the force production side increases gross muscle recruitment, strength and yes size. Moving more to the speed side of it increases specific neural connection, firing rate, specific muscle recruitment. They work hand in hand. It is called complex training and has been used by athletes for decades."

We might be on different pages here. What is your definition of power as it applies to wing chun or fighting? How does it play a part? How does one use their 'superior power' from lifting weights to good effect in wing chun or fighting?

"Training body mechanics is not the same as training power. Of course they can be linked, e.g. in poon sau, pole, chi sau"

Again, I need to know what you think power is when applied in wing chun and fighting. Because for me, body mechanics is exactly where the power comes from.

"Depends on the reason. If your punching power is off because you are weak then making yourself stronger will help a great deal."

Again, that is the last place I would make someone look if they lack power in their punches.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

LFJ,

"Unnecessary? Maybe, but you won't reach anywhere near your potential.
Detrimental? Explain. If it's that "bulky muscle slows you down" nonsense, that's a myth/excuse."

My potential to lift weights will undoubtable suffer from not lifting weights. Applying that skill or abiliy to wing chun or fighting is what I am struggling with. In our school power and force is everything. When I see what my potential could be, I have only to look at teachers or seniors and follow the path set in front of me. They are not bigger or stronger than me yet their force output is superior to mine. Over the years mine has gotten better and better. A 60 year old man at the club can take my leg out with one kick from years and years of training. Yet strangely he has never done weight training..... I train another art that focusses on body mechanics. Same thing here. But now you have a Japanese guy able to shock poeple with his power. Again, he didn't get this from weight training. There are a 100 things that you should be doing being turning to weights to make you stronger.


"You think Mike Tyson was just born with that muscle mass or got it from plyometric stuff? He was in the gym moving heavy weights. Was he not a power puncher?"

Do you think that Mike Tyson didn't already have knock out power? Mike Tyson has gone on record saying that his punching power comes from nothing more than heavy bag work. Isn't it pretty widely accepted that boxers turn to weights when they want to go up a weight class more than actually sports performance?

"There it is! That's absolute nonsense and is the excuse skinny/weak people make for their inadequacy."
- Why do you think skinny people are inadequate?

"Ever notice the physique of a sprinter, some of the fastest people in the world? If the sprinter traded physiques with the marathon runner would that make him faster, you reckon?"

How do you think sprinters got their physique? How did they get that muscle? Was it from lifting heavy?

"You still don't seem to understand the difference between weightlifting and bodybuilding. Muscular hypertrophy is a byproduct of weightlifting. The goal is general power. The power trained by olympic lifts can carry over to any sport you apply it to. If it can improve a tennis player's game, how could it not improve a martial artist's if applied to punching mechanics?"

- Yep, I do understand. When I said "for building muscle", I really meant "for building strength". Sure anything can help. But is it optimal? Is it essential? Are there ways it can be damaging? Again, did Muhamid Ali need weights? Do Thai Boxers? GSP? How are/ were these people not at their full potential (or at least close)?

"Have a look at this video here. The first guy is pretty skinny. Yeah? But he's throwing well above his own bodyweight over his head. Same with the women. He's already developed great power without a lot of mass. Though, if he increased his muscle mass, no doubt his power output (strength displayed explosively) would also increase."

Yeah he is really good and powerful at lifting a weight above his head. Explain how that relates to fighting or wing chun again?

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Zenny,

Doing parts of the form against resistance doesn't require tensing the arm up at all. It is the opposite. You have to be extremely relaxed and in fact it should feel effortless. It is about getting your alignment set up and letting the joints freely rotate.

 

[LFJ]

Yeah he is really good and powerful at lifting a weight above his head. Explain how that relates to fighting or wing chun again?

Gaining an understanding how general power development can be applied to any sport specific goal to enhance your performance, and why olympic weightlifting is the best method to reach your power potential will dispel all the misconceptions you have displayed on this topic.

It's a matter of optimizing energy transfer by developing kinetic chain efficiency. Again, your focus on alignment and body mechanics in your training is only teaching you how to generate more power through movement, but not developing it above your current capacity.

Your advancement in this is a result of improving your mechanics, but that is limited. By training with progressive overload you will actually be developing your strength and power to reach your genetic potential. With greater raw power you will be imparting more force into your target through the body mechanics you've been training. You will be a more powerful puncher.

I suggest re-watching this guy's explanation of how weightlifting is useful for tennis players, as I'm sure you're equally unaware/skeptical of how lifting a weight over your head would related to the patterns of tennis swings. It's really the same principle that applies to striking in Wing Chun.

 

[dudewingchun]

Gaining an understanding how general power development can be applied to any sport specific goal to enhance your performance, and why olympic weightlifting is the best method to reach your power potential will dispel all the misconceptions you have displayed on this topic.

It's a matter of optimizing energy transfer by developing kinetic chain efficiency. Again, your focus on alignment and body mechanics in your training is only teaching you how to generate more power through movement, but not developing it above your current capacity.

Your advancement in this is a result of improving your mechanics, but that is limited. By training with progressive overload you will actually be developing your strength and power to reach your genetic potential. With greater raw power you will be imparting more force into your target through the body mechanics you've been training. You will be a more powerful puncher.

I suggest re-watching this guy's explanation of how weightlifting is useful for tennis players, as I'm sure you're equally unaware/skeptical of how lifting a weight over your head would related to the patterns of tennis swings. It's really the same principle that applies to striking in Wing Chun.

Wasnt this about Wing chun power generation ? Not general S & C... thats got nothing to do with actual wing chun methods of generating power. I dont think Ip man taught anyone how to Deadlift or clean and press. Iv got nothing against weights as I personally do compound exercises.

 

[LFJ]

Wasnt this about Wing chun power generation ? Not general S & C... thats got nothing to do with actual wing chun methods of generating power. I dont think Ip man taught anyone how to Deadlift or clean and press. Iv got nothing against weights as I personally do compound exercises.

Yes, I originally just intended to make the suggestion to incorporate it into one's training because it is better than anything in the system for the purpose of general power development. Didn't expect much opposition or myth believers.

I just think it's good training for those who want to get closer to their genetic potential. It would only maximize your power for Wing Chun. Of course you can be effective without it, but why aim low?

Stone lock training has been used in TCMAs for centuries for developing power. It's not bodybuilding but power training. Olympic weightlifting is just a modern but far better and more efficient method to progressively train for raw power. The more powerful you are in general, the more powerful you will be when you apply it in sport-specific patterns.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

LFJ,

Yeah I can kind of see the message you are trying to put across in regards to body mechanics being the pathway if you will and strength being the engine. I still believe there is too much to refine and learn from in body mechanics, alignment and structure before you need to go making yourself stronger.

Sure I could be underestimating the benefits of heavy lifting. Or you could be underestimating the power or alignment, body mechanics etc.

I have seen many other versions of wing chun and martial arts in general. The first thing I find with them is they have poor mechanics. They cant deal with pressure. They have to divert, go around or speed up to compensate. Then THEY think I am using muscle. I am just using body mechanics. I am totally relaxed. You can refine to such high degrees. I can break/collapse the structures of people much bigger and stronger than me. In a drill I like to do when we stand straight and try to push into eacother's arms back, I can pretty much effortlessly push them back because I know how to source from my stance. I am not an expert by any means. But my limited knowledge and experience so far is showing me that there is much more important things to focus on than how strong I am. I am humbled myself all the time by one of my teachers who is a female who can do all this stuff on me and make me look weak. I know I am never going to overcome her by building strength. I need to refine my structure, alignment etc. Only then can I hope to have a chance. I look at the older teachers in my lineage who never cease to amaze me with the force they put out. Again it is their dedication to the training that got them this powerful. Not weightlifting.

 

[Zeny]

Wc auckland, my primary art is taichi, and even in taichi there are people in my area that practise the taichi form while holding with both hands a basketball injected with sand as a form of strength and resistance training. Those people believe they are wholly correct, but if they enjoy the process who am i to stop them from doing it.

I know exactly what you mean when you say you practise the form against resistance but in a relaxed and effortless manner. Here are my thoughts. When you move in a relaxed manner against resistance, there is a very small amount of tension in order to maintain structure. You may feel like you are strengthening your structure, but in fact the reverse is true. If you practise your form without resistance, and for a long time, your familiarity with the movements and the frequent movements will further enhance your relaxation, and this relaxation actually (believe it or not) improves your structure and force generation. Sounds counter intuitive, but again, that's how it is.