The Resurgence of Traditional Martial Arts in Modern Mixed Martial Arts

[windwalker099]

View attachment 32671

My mistake, the question was meant to be
What is being measured?

The appropriate method depends on what is being measured.
The scientific method may not always be the best way to quantify certain types of internal processes.



For example:

Scientific measurement: "Your blood oxygen level is 95%." (Objective, numerical data)
Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) assessment: "Your lung qi is weak because you have a cough and shallow breathing." (Qualitative, holistic interpretation)

Each method has its own framework for evaluation, depending on the context.

In Taiji and internal martial arts, methods that emphasize internal processes (such as intent, relaxation, and energy flow) are often assessed based on how they affect movement, structure, and efficiency of force application, rather than solely on fighting ability.

A key distinction is that internal development is often judged by changes in one’s body mechanics, sensitivity, and ability to generate and absorb force—rather than direct combat effectiveness alone.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The measurement of effectiveness are you using is based on what ?

Do we have examples of Bruce Lee being water?

 

[drop bear]

My mistake, the question was meant to be
What is being measured?

The appropriate method depends on what is being measured.
The scientific method may not always be the best way to quantify certain types of internal processes.



For example:

Scientific measurement: "Your blood oxygen level is 95%." (Objective, numerical data)
Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) assessment: "Your lung qi is weak because you have a cough and shallow breathing." (Qualitative, holistic interpretation)

Each method has its own framework for evaluation, depending on the context.

In Taiji and internal martial arts, methods that emphasize internal processes (such as intent, relaxation, and energy flow) are often assessed based on how they affect movement, structure, and efficiency of force application, rather than solely on fighting ability.

A key distinction is that internal development is often judged by changes in one’s body mechanics, sensitivity, and ability to generate and absorb force—rather than direct combat effectiveness alone.

So there is no experiment that could test these things?

 

[windwalker099]

So there is no experiment that could test these things?

There have been ongoing studies in China and Taiwan attempting to understand the physiological and psychological effects of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) practices and methods.

Taiji, like other arts classified as 'internal,' is rooted in TCM principles.
While one does not have to adhere strictly to TCM,
its theoretical framework serves as the foundation for internal martial arts.

My own practice follows an empirical approach to Taiji theory and application,
reflecting the teachings of my teacher Master Zhang Yongliang
and other esteemed Taiji masters.

 

[drop bear]

There have been ongoing studies in China and Taiwan attempting to understand the physiological and psychological effects of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) practices and methods.

Taiji, like other arts classified as 'internal,' is rooted in TCM principles.
While one does not have to adhere strictly to TCM,
its theoretical framework serves as the foundation for internal martial arts.

My own practice follows an empirical approach to Taiji theory and application,
reflecting the teachings of my teacher Master Zhang Yongliang
and other esteemed Taiji masters.

So you suggest you can do a thing. You test it under controlled conditions.

 

[windwalker099]

So you suggest you can do a thing. You test it under controlled conditions.

"controlled conditions"

A long time ago. I worked with an Phd, level physicist who worked at one of the National Metrology Institutes
He happened to be practicing with me.

These labs are responsible for establishing, maintaining, and improving national measurement standards to ensure accuracy, consistency, and traceability.

A lot of technology is used to maintain the integrity of these standards. Using the instruments available, he attempted to measure what he felt from me—something he could sense and react to. However, it didn’t work out well,
he wasn't sure what he was trying to test. Neither was i at the time...now it might be different.


Nowadays, there are labs conducting studies on similar subjects with more qualified individuals who understand what they’re testing and how, leading to many theories.

One interesting theory comes from Jie Gu, Ph.D., who proposes that Qi in Taijiquan is an intention wave—a physiological wave guided by the mind. He differentiates the breath (gas) from Qi, describing it as a wave rather than air.

While interesting, this theory doesn’t fully help with my work.

I field-test my work with those qualified in the same field when possible.
For me, replicating aspects of others' work that interest me is sufficient.

you might find this interesting

In this episode, Bill Moyers travels to China
To learn about healing and the mind from another culture. “What I discovered in China was another way of thinking about mind and body, about health and illness and a phenomenon called chi,” Bill Moyers tells the audience in his introduction.

 

[JowGaWolf]

My own practice follows an empirical approach to Taiji theory and application,
reflecting the teachings of my teacher

Elaborate please. I'm not saying this to be confrontational. I could look it up myself, but that won't guarantee that what I see will be the same thing that you would explain. For example, "Taji application." Are we talking about health application, fighting application, offense application defense application, life application?

What is the empirical approach to Taiji as you understand it. If this isn't clear to other people in the conversation, including me, then we are only left with assumptions which loop us back to the beginning vs moving forward. I'm application heavy, but not so much where I don't see different types of applications. I often use Taiji principles in Jow Ga to help me recognize shifts in the force that is being applied to me. But that may not be the same application that you use, and it may not even be the same type of application that you are referring to.

For me, drop bear, and kung fu wang, we are heavy on fighting application. It's not a secret, everything conversation will eventually "lead to that ocean." Even when explaining types of principles, the question in the background will be "How do you apply that to fighting." If the principle isn't for fighting but for development, then that's something that's not foreign to us. I don't want to speak incorrectly for them, but for as long as I've been on this site, that's pretty much where we live.

So you suggest you can do a thing. You test it under controlled conditions.

The only thing that I don't like about this is that it doesn't take into consideration the size of water that is needed to make dowsing effective. In my opinion it's not a reliable test to figure out if something works. If I were doing that experiment, I would treat it like my martial arts training. I would want to know when it works and when it doesn't work.

My own understanding of water is that it would take more than a bottle of water to have an effect so I wouldn't start with a bottle of water. If it can't detect big sources of underground water, then it's not going to find smaller sources.
If I were going to experiment with it then I would do it this way and then verify with scientific equipment. To me it's like a metal detector. Some metal detectors are sensitive, some only detect certain types of metal. Dowsing would be the same. Was it really intended to find a bottle of water or does it require more water to actually work? I treat martial arts the same way. I have a technique that is said to work. When does it works and when it doesn't work is important.

The people in your video probably never thought it that way. Similarly, some people may mistake a technique to be a strike when it's really a grabbling technique. I'm guilty of that in my own training, but I'm also open minded about my training. Bruce Lee says "Be like water" I say "not every technique or principle is going to fit like water."

Sometimes things have to be applied where they fit.

 

[JowGaWolf]

A lot of technology is used to maintain the integrity of these standards. Using the instruments available, he attempted to measure what he felt from me—something he could sense and react to. However, it didn’t work out well,
he wasn't sure what he was trying to test. Neither was i at the time...now it might be different.


Nowadays, there are labs conducting studies on similar subjects with more qualified individuals who understand what they’re testing and how, leading to many theories.

One interesting theory comes from Jie Gu, Ph.D., who proposes that Qi in Taijiquan is an intention wave—a physiological wave guided by the mind. He differentiates the breath (gas) from Qi, describing it as a wave rather than air.

While interesting, this theory doesn’t fully help with my work.

I field-test my work with those qualified in the same field when possible.
For me, replicating aspects of others' work that interest me is sufficient.

This goes back to what I was saying about the dowsing rods. The Qi isn't the issue. What is being used to test the Qi is the issue. If i wanted to test Qi then I would connecting sensors that capture what my brain is doing and what my body is doing. In turn I would be capturing what my partner's body is doing when receiving Qi.

Nothing is invisible. If an actiion is triggering a reaction then it's going to be possible to pick it up. The most important thing is that the equipment being used to measure is measuring the correct thing.

The only thing that I don't like is that there are a lot of fakers out there. I'm not saying that the guy in the video above is a fake. I'm just saying that there are a lot of fakers in general. It's no different than how the medical community was with snake oil salesmen.

 

[windwalker099]

For example, "Taji application." Are we talking about health application, fighting application, offense application defense application, life application?

"What do you mean by 'fighting application'?

This might be the crux of the issue.

In my teacher's group, everything was tested in a martial context, according to the level of the practitioners, many of whom were long-time practitioners from other styles. Most of his students, including myself, stayed after meeting him because we found something quite different in his approach.

Our teacher encouraged those with questions to 'try it' and see what happens.

Nothing was left to theory. Empirical means direct observation, experience, or experimentation.

The challenge for some may be that what is observed may not be fully understood by those observing, especially if they don't have the direct experience needed to make sense of it.

It’s similar to the misunderstanding of "long arm" by those comparing it to other methods, like boxing.
They might assume it's the same or that they understand it based on their own methods, but they can't replicate it without having undergone the specific training necessary to make it effective.

 

[JowGaWolf]

"What do you mean by 'fighting application'?

This might be the crux of the issue.

In my teacher's group, everything was tested in a martial context, according to the level of the practitioners, many of whom were long-time practitioners from other styles. Most of his students, including myself, stayed after meeting him because we found something quite different in his approach.

Our teacher encouraged those with questions to 'try it' and see what happens.

Nothing was left to theory. Empirical means direct observation, experience, or experimentation.

The challenge for some may be that what is observed may not be fully understood by those observing, especially if they don't have the direct experience needed to make sense of it.

It’s similar to the misunderstanding of "long arm" by those comparing it to other methods, like boxing.
They might assume it's the same or that they understand it based on their own methods, but they can't replicate it without having undergone the specific training necessary to make it effective.

This is a much better response than the one that I responded to. It gives more information about what was done and in what context. None of this information can be known without you telling us. It may not seem like a lot but it is and it helps with the discussion. I agree what is said here because I've said as much in past posts and when it comes to researching martial arts, I think it's important to experience it. It's not enough to just be on the side-line observing.

This is one reason I was interested in experiencing an ankle lock. Even though it wasn't fully applied, what I did experience was more than enough for me to feel where things were going. I was told that people don't feel the ankle lock until it's too late. I think the reason why is because they are not focused on the right thing. The thing that I noticed right away was the feeling of leverage. I didn't feel it in my ankle, but I was very aware of that leverage feeling. All that was told to me about my ankle didn't include that feeling. I only learned of it through experience.

I could sit here and describe how to use iron rings and what to look for but experiencing it makes things easier to understand and grasp. But like I was saying. This response that you gave is much better, so I appreciated it. I won't understand everything but I won't be totally clueless. I just need some more pieces of the puzzle to understand what I'm trying to understand. Without that extra information, there's only assumptions.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

There's no need to know how others train. There are key things that need to be done in order to achieve specific results. We can pick any activity and easily pick out those key things and apply them across a various activities. It will all be the same or at a minimum very similar.

No disrespect, I disagree. There are many roads to Rome. Various methods can be seen to offer similar results in many pursuits. That’s why we have competition between styles. One guy punches bags, another punches makiwara, both learn to punch effectively. I am confident you have good balance and structure from your training, but I can certainly show you a way to train stance and stability that you haven’t seen that will certainly improve your ability. I have never seen it anywhere outside my teachers system. That doesn’t mean others can’t achieve better balance without it, other methods exist. Furthermore, I am not so full of hubris to imagine that I know best or that I have seen it all, how could I? Does that somehow invalidate a training method that worked for hundreds of martial artists? This one size fits all mentality is very narrow minded. Innovation doesn’t grow in a box, maybe in an octagon though. All other things being equal, trainers and methods vary, humans are varied, that’s what makes a competitive sport. That’s why they watch each others fight videos, that’s why they prevent plants at their training camps, there are differences in training that become strategies geared towards a certain individual and their fighting proclivities. If you don’t have something innovative or above the average basics to offer, chances are good you will be outclassed. That’s why fighters travel and pay big money to certain trainers, because they have methods that others don’t. So, my point, as before is that no one knows it all, no one knows what everyone else is doing to train. To say different is just obviously short sighted and untrue. Pride comes before a….

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Or there will be evidence of success showing that someone's unique method is effective.

Sure, how would you know about all the evidence out there. I could give you a unique training method, you could try it, get back to me on your evidence findings. Would that be evidence? Could I introduce you to someone that can do things you can’t do and that you would not figure out on your own? Would that be evidence? I’m almost done with this ridiculous argument. You haven’t seen it all my friend, neither has anyone else. Are you so unwilling to believe that with all these decades, even centuries of MA experience amongst the people here that no one knows something useful that you don’t know? That’s just laughable.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

There's no need to know how others train. There are key things that need to be done in order to achieve specific results. We can pick any activity and easily pick out those key things and apply them across a various activities. It will all be the same or at a minimum very similar.

The thing people are claiming TMA does this or that, I’m saying how could they know that? The are thousands of different TMA schools in the wide world. Yes a kick is a kick, a punch is a punch, but teachers and their methods of transmission are not the same, maybe not even within one style.

 

[JowGaWolf]

There are many roads to Rome.

Correct and if you are traveling on the road, I can tell you that no matter what road you take you will only have these options.

1. Travel by vehicle
2. Travel by animal
3. Travel by foot

No matter what you train or how special the training is. Those 3 things will always exist for everyone who chooses to travel the road. Those are the realities of travelling on the road. If you are using something outside of that, then you are not on the road. This is how martial arts is. If you want to be good at what you train, then you must use what you train. There are no exceptions to this. I don't know why Traditional Martial Arts believe that they are outside of these types of realities.

It's the one thing that frustrates me the most about TMA which I cherish. "The rules apply to everyone else except TMA." This is the worst type of poison for TMA.

One guy punches bags, another punches makiwara, both learn to punch effectively.

Again. If the road you are using is punching then there are certain realities that will apply for all who travel the road of punching.
1. Punch Structure - There will always be a punch structure that one will need to maintain
2. Surface Conditioning - conditioning of the hand or fist, or both
3. Impact Conditioning - Joints and ligaments will become conditioned to the impact
4. Powering the Punch - How the punch is powered

The Road isn't what I'm punching. The Road is the act of punching. What I'm punching is just a description of what the road is made of. Is it dirt, pavement, stone, grass. It is the context in which I apply punching. Punching is not road. The road is not Punching. No matter what type punch that I do. The 4 things that I listed above will always be a component of punching.

I am confident you have good balance and structure from your training, but I can certainly show you a way to train stance and stability that you haven’t seen that will certainly improve your ability

I don't doubt this. I can also guarantee that I can already the name the components you will train me on because those components exist regardless of the training method. For example, whatever you train me in is going to contain the following.
1. Standing
2. Structure
3. Balance

Whatever you teach me will not fall outside of those realities. How you stand and how I stand may be different, but we must still travel the same paths.

Oh by the way. I'm not letting you off the hook. You said you can do something to help improve my stance, I've already made it known that I keep an opened mind.. lol. So if this is something that I can start learning long distance then I'm willing to try. Unfortunately I can't more than that. Life recently dumped an extra load of challenges which makes any traveling difficult.

All other things being equal, trainers and methods vary, humans are varied, that’s what makes a competitive sport.

Humans are varied but the options will still be the same. It will involve the following.
1. Mind
2. Body
3. Limbs.

Sort of like running which has the same things. Even those without legs are bound to.
1. Mind
2. Body
3. Limbs.

If "The Road" is the track, then people will be required to be developed along the same paths.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Sure, how would you know about all the evidence out there. I could give you a unique training method, you could try it, get back to me on your evidence findings. Would that be evidence? Could I introduce you to someone that can do things you can’t do and that you would not figure out on your own? Would that be evidence?

From what I know of drop bear this is what he's saying. If it's possible then there is evidence of someone doing it. It doesn't mean that he knows where the evidence is, he just means that someone does.

For example, When you tell me that you know someone that can do something. I don't on a mindset that I believe you are don't believe you. It's more like, you haven't done or said anything that I know of that would make me doubt that you saw and experienced what you claim. In terms of this conversation I don't think drop bear has said told anyone that what they claim is false. I could have missed it, but I haven't seen that.

I know how I am. If I see BS then I'll do one of two things. Suddenly disappear from a conversation or call it out. I will only call things out that I can prove otherwise without having to research it. But that's just mean.

From my own experiences with drop bear, I probably clashed with him more at the beginning than I do now. The only reasoning for the change is either we both changed, or we have a better understanding of how we communicate via typing. I personally think that once I got a better understanding of who is and how he trains and think, I could more easily say things like "nah if he trains a certain way then there's no way he can believe what he just said."

On terms of the Scientific Method. He's dead serious on that. If there's one thing that can be said about Drop bear is that he's consistent with his core perceptions.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The thing people are claiming TMA does this or that, I’m saying how could they know that? The are thousands of different TMA schools in the wide world. Yes a kick is a kick, a punch is a punch, but teachers and their methods of transmission are not the same, maybe not even within one style.

I agree with this, which is why you don't see me making zen claims. I know that there are many elements to TMA development which is why I tend to classify people TMA practitionres into two groups. Scholars and those who Apply. Both categories are fine, but their understandings will be different. Those who train to apply will still have similar or same paths to travel.

People who train and apply techniques can quickly recognize someone out side of their system who train and apply techniques because of these same paths that we sometimes have to travel.
There's no method of kicking that is completely unique.

No matter how you power a kick there will be some universal truths for all kicks. I'm not saying there won't be differences that ultimately makes them different, I'm saying that they won't be completely unique.

My last Jow Ga teacher told me to focus on what makes TMA different. I don't agree with that. I think that's a bad approach. It's the approach that I often see the most and it's the thing that I often see as being most controversial, such as in never ending purity war of What is Wing Chun and what it isn't.

I think it's better to focus on similarities first and then branch out to differences and why the differences exist is a more productive approach.

One of the first things I do with any TMA discussion is to quickly highlight similarities. Start from what people understand and then allow them to grow branches from there. Not everyone trains CMA, not everyone trains TaiJi or even done Qi Gong.

I do a lot of gardening and the worst place for me to teach anyone about gardening is starting with the fruit. Martial arts is the same way. The good news is that even though people don't train Qi Gong, they may be already experincing some lesser version of it.. Start from there.