STRIKING POSTS IN THE NEIJIA?

 By Yang Shuangxing

All too often, I have come across neijia (internal Chinese martial arts; taijiquan, baguazhang, xingyiquan) stylists who pride themselves on not having to use any kind of striking post, which they consider rather barbaric. The truth, however, is a bit different.

Back in the early days, taijiquan enthusiasts practiced striking crude heavy bags as well as wooden posts (which were really just posts that had been stuck in the ground). The idea was to strengthen and toughen the bodily striking surfaces, and to increase the density of the bones. No callousing...just strengthening and toughening.

The same thing holds true for practitioners of xingyiquan and baguazhang. Bagua stylists would plant several poles in the ground and then practice routines that involved manneuvering around them while “sliding” their arms against them (many current devotee still do this). They would also strike the posts in a variety of ways.

Most Chinese striking posts are bare wood. I think this is a problem. Striking bare wood is, if the blow has any “guts” to it, rather painful. Your subconscious mind will not permit you to strike with much power. It's protecting you from doing something that it regards as harmful (and probably very foolish). Don't believe me? Walk up to a solid post of some kind and give it a good whack...not a homerun punch, but a strong one. Just 50 reps. Odds are you'll barely be tapping it when you get to 50...if you even make it that far. Even if you place a pad on the immovable post, it won't help much.

When you strike a solid post or anything else that doesn't “give”, YOU will absorb almost all of the power of your own blow! That's because your target is more stable than you are. I have seen photos of well-known gong-fu and karate teachers punching a pad that has been affixed to a tree. Such practice is harmful and foolish. Period. The same thing goes for beating the hands against large rocks and concrete or steel pillars.

In my opinion, for what it's worth, there is no better striking post than the old Okinawan version. It is padded and “gives” a bit when struck. And that's a critical issue. The object in using this device is NOT to build callouses on the hands, but to increase the density of the bones in the hands and, to a lesser extent, in the arms. It also teaches, albeit sometimes painfully, how to execute technique correctly.

Striking a proper striking post should not be especially painful. Initially the padding (which is traditionally made of a type of rope derived from rice stalks) is a bit stiff, but with regular practice it gets much softer...kind of like using a new baseball mitt. Striking it then isn't painful at all and your subconscious will allow you to deliver strong blows because there is no fear of pain.

If you want to develop genuine martial skill with your taijiquan, baguazhang, or xingyiquan, make it a part of your regular daily practice.

STREET READY?

 By Phillip Starr

As practitioners of percussive martial arts such as gong-fu, karate, and taekwondo, there's a serious issue that we should all consider; in our practice of 1-step fight routines as well as the applications of parts of various forms, we are usually not being realistic at all. And that can cost us (and our students) dearly...

The problem is that we have the uke (person acting as the aggressor) attack with nice, straight lunging or reverse punches, and so on...strikes and movements that would be used by persons practicing our form of martial art. What we'll encounter on the street is considerably different, however.

This has resulted in many traditional martial art students and instructors believing that the traditional forms/techniques don't work “on the street.” I would answer by saying that that's rather shallow thinking. The truth is that they do, in fact, work – but just HOW they work may be a little different from what one might think (or have been taught).

The various forms created by our martial arts ancestors are extremely effective against various forms of attack – but the forms of attack against which they're intended to be applied and HOW they're meant to be applied may be rather different than what you think. Let's be realistic; “street fighting” hasn't changed much over the eons...and nobody probably attacked someone with a crisp lunging punch. As is the case today, haymakers were common and often preceded by a grab or push. Years ago, the FBI listed the most common forms of simple physical assault///#1 was the grab, and #2 was a push. Both were followed by a punch. And our traditional forms were designed to enable us to deal with these kinds of common “street attacks” rather than preparing us to fight other martial-arts trained people.

Moreover, the techniques may often work considerably differently from what you expect. For instance, your inside forearm block probably won't work well against a haymaker, and that low-level side kick works better as a leg throw! In breaking down your forms, work to see how movements work against street attacks instead of other martial arts techniques. You'll likely find numerous joint-twisting techniques, take-downs, and strikes you didn't even know were there. But you're going to have to work at it.

Bear in mind that disciplines such as karate were never used on the battlefield. Soldiers back in the day were attired in full armor (to go into battle without it would be tantamount to suicide), and performing karate techniques and body shifting would have been very awkward, right? Our percussive martial forms were intended for CIVILIAN self-defense (the revered martial arts historian and author, Donn Draeger, noted this). And the types of attacks that civilians encounter are a bit different than those experienced on the battlefield; the aggressor was rarely armed with a sword or spear…and attacks occur at very close quarters. Consider these things when you analyze and practice applications of your forms…