Dan

Hi Dan,

Good to hear from you! thanks for responding. I obviously agree with you, but again let me play the devil's advocate.

Yiquan folks would also say something similar: no forms, no habitual patterns ... even some aikido folks would say the same thing. Note i use the word "say" ... again ... we recognize the substantial difference ... but how do we frame that to the average martial art consumer ...

Lipyeow

Hey there Lip Yeow!

I hope you're doing well in beautiful Hawaii.

I'm having the same issues describing ILC to my buddies in Malaysia. Some have some general martial arts background, others less.

Over here in Malaysia, Wing Chun is the kung fu style du jour, thanks to all the Yip Man/Ip Man movies. If I talk about the sensitivities that are developed through spinning hands, they say "oh yeah, that's just like Wing Chun". Then they bring up chi-sau, and want to chi-sau with me. And when it's obvious that I have no problems handling any of them, they're still oblivious to the differences. Aaaargh!!!

Adrian

I think that the precision developed through ILC sets it apart from most other martial arts that I am familiar with. While similar things are sometimes trained (“no forms, no habitual patterns...” sensitivity, awareness...) the degree of precision through the transitions between yin and yang (while keeping both yin and yang with the ‘neutral point’) may differentiate ILC from others. Not that other styles do not follow this principle, I think that they probably do, but for me personally, my understanding of what was being trained in Taijiquan changed through studying ILC. I’ve heard of yin and yang (and simultaneous yin-yang) in other styles, but ILC is the first that has explained the ‘neutral’ to me.

ILC trains awareness of what the actual conditions are during the transformations occurring during interactions, and it train precision in the responses to those changes. I am not certain how someone could convey this to an average consumer though.

One other thing that seems somewhat unique in my experiences is the ILC methods of engagement (circle-to-center, center-to-center, and center-with-cross). While other styles may use these, they do not seem to emphasize always having all of them (especially the center-with-cross concept).

If someone is aware enough, and precise enough, with these two aspects of ILC, then attack and defense seem like they should be almost ‘automatic’ (if it’s not improper to state it that way; i.e. no ‘techniques’, forms, habitual patterns...)

I think that the above would be sufficient to introduce the “Zen & Taiji” aspects of ILC, hopefully giving an indication of the depth and precision of these concepts as practiced in ILC.

Dan

i think Daniel has pretty much hit it.  it's the concepts that make ILC different.  

the concepts that bridge the philosophy and principles.  

yes many other arts share Zen philosohpy, and many many arts talk about Tai Chi principles, but it's the ILC training concepts that really set us apart.  that and how well organized they all are, with a clearly defined, principle based curriculum that allows the usually nebulous "internal feel" to be clearly transmitted and understood.

Although I pointed out some things that may differentiate ILC to some degree from other martial arts, it is true that sometimes the philosophy is similar. What’s truly valuable about ILC are the training methods that allow someone to actually put the concepts-philosophy-principles into practice.

I actually think that the similarities between ILC and other styles may help to attract people to ILC (they did for me and you [and Ben...] coming from a Taijiquan background). If there are similarities, but you can demonstrate a higher level of understanding of them, then they may want to at least experience ILC. Sifu has the ability to ask someone who states that they have the same things in their arts, to touch with him to demonstrate. He frequently finds that the ‘same things’ does not translate into the ability to perform them to the level that is developed in ILC.

Best wishes for attracting students to your group in Hawaii. I suppose that we are unlikely to see you again in NC since the distance has increased greatly from when you were in NY. If my band happens to get a gig on the islands (unlikely, though we are possibly playing in Washington state next year – depending on their ability to raise funding to bring us), I’ll let you know. [If your University is looking to bring in a band for some event, pass on our information; our web site is http://www.bigjohnshearer.com/]

Here's how i describe ILC to prospective students.

ILC rests on Taiji and Zen philosophy and provides a clear curriculum that provides reliable results. Students who sincerely follow the training progression receive the martial, meditative and health benefits promised by the Taiji Classics. This is done in 5 to 7 years. For me this is an important differentiator.

Any and all movement or meditative practice will be enriched by training ILC.

I've come to see the error of my ways --- Ashe is right ... ILC is not for everyone. I am perhaps too intent on "selling ILC" to everyone. I've somehow come to peace with this recently ... so Adrian, let go and you won't get so frustrated ...

Dan made many good points. Kelley's point that ILC is effective in imparting a certain level of skill in 3-5 years is also a very powerful testimony -- that is especially convincing for me when i first encountered ILC in NY area where most ILC students had a very decent level of skill...

Lipyeow

Lip:
I feel that the 'not for everyone' is simply not true and smacks of elitism. I use the phrase, 'not a good fit'. This is more accurate anyway.

The internal system in general and ILC in particular provides a framework for dramatic personal change in mind and body. Make it a priority to be open to anyone and especially to make a safe and supportive environment for students to build on their strengths and address their weaknesses.

No advancing and no backing off also means no comparisons, no judging. In my mind there are many approaches to developing awareness and in my experience, ILC provides the clearest methodology and curriculum.

To develop a clear understanding of 'neutral' is unique to ILC in my 35 years of exploration. Neutral opens many doors of understanding.

Best regards,

Hi Kelley,

I agree with what you said. I think i wasn't expressing myself clearly. Let me try to explain what i meant by "not for everyone".  I'm not saying that in an elistist sense. What i am saying is that while i make every effort to explain ILC to everyone who comes to my class even for just one session, not everyone will be convinced and say that "yes, ILC is a great art and system" -- there will always be some who remain unconvinced.

And i'm just being too uptight about people being unconvinced. People may be unconvinced for many reasons. It could be that i didn't communicate well. It could be my skill level not being impressive enough. It could be that the person came with a closed mind or the person is just not ready to see how cool ILC is ... 

So yes, from my perspective as an instructor and an "ILC evangelist" of sort, I try to bring ILC to everyone, but not everyone will respond positively ...

the fact that "not everyone will respond positively to ILC" is what i meant by "ILC is not for everyone".

Now that i think of it, i'm not sure if Ashe used the phrase with the same meaning ... I might have hijacked it and gave it my meaning ...

Lipyeow

lip:

thank you for the clarification.

people come to ILC for many reasons and from many different backgrounds. one of the main things i immediately liked was the openness and fairness of master chin. he was and is always very careful to manifest taiji and zen principles at all times.

i endeavor to accomplish the same.

to be critical of something that a prospective student may have invested decades of their life is no small thing. it is also no small thing for a student to move away from that practice to pursue ILC. whenever this happens i am again grateful to master chin for setting up the system.

so, we're back to 'how to market ILC. in my experience, i try to make a safe place for students to support each other as all move through the difficult process of change and transformation.

i hope this makes sense.

best regards,

Lip,

i wouldn't feel too bad about having difficulty marketing ILC in HI. HI has many different skilled martial artists. We also have all these gracie jiujitsu schools, as well as all these MMA guys. finding people who are interested in the internal side in this crowd is a difficult task. marketing it to those who are interested is a whole different story.

regarding people talking about the same stuff:

i think that they're talking about all the same stuff because it is all the same stuff. i've worked out with many skilled taiji guys, ILC guys, wing chun guys, etc etc, and across the board they all generally speak about the same stuff. the common denominator here, imo, is the energy. developing, refining, continually practicing this energy/chi etc is as Sam described as obeying the laws of movement (or something like this). everything follows the dao (imo). the next question is, can they demonstrate it when you go to touch hands with them? 0:)

-mr jong

Hey and welcome to the forum Mr. Jong!

Here's my two cents on the marketing issue:

The first thing to consider is if you want to attract martial artists to switch to ILC or if you want to attract complete newbies.

For complete newbies I would think that it kills their interest if you go to much into detail. In most cases I try to explain it like this:

"ILC is much like Tai Chi but it's not form-based but partner exercise-based. The forms in ILC are mere additions and more like application summaries. The main concept of ILC is to maintain your balance under all circumstances and to off-balance your opponent/partner."

For experienced martial artists my explanation goes more like:

"ILC is an internal martial art much like Taichi or Xingyiquan but it's more partner exercise-based. A big difference in my opinions is that ILC uses a much more western terminology derived from Physics rather than Qigong. We here in Munich talk much about force-vectors, angles, spatial planes etc. and if the word 'energy' is used, in most cases the teacher does not mean 'Qi' but 'direction of physical force'".

As I know many scientists from university this always sounds interesting to them because 'Physics' means 'logic' to them and 'Daoism/buddhism/Qigong' sounds like 'colorful esoteric pictures'. This may not be right but thats the way many people see it.