The routine of body conditioning and the performance of Sanchin is complementary such that the practice of both enhances the performance of each. The term Sanchin has been translated as "three conflicts" or "three battles," popularly interpreted as “mind, body and spirit.”  Kanbun Uechi, the patriarch of Uechi-ryu, stressed that "All is in Sanchin".  This comment implies that Sanchin offers the karate-ka all of the tools necessary to become proficient in classical Okinawan karate. Sanchin’s seeming simplicity belies its complexity: experienced practitioners believe that Sanchin unites the mind, body, and spirit.

 Few martial arts systems incorporate the use of body conditioning and Sanchin. Sanchin is the most important kata (form) of a number of southern Chinese and Okinawan civil combative traditions. If there is one unifying thread that characterizes Fukien boxing styles it is reliance upon a form of the kata Sanchin to teach the salient precepts of the system. Sensei Patrick McCarthy recognizes Sanchin  (alternately Saam Chien) as common to five Fuzhou Crane Boxing styles: Dragon boxing, Tiger Boxing, Dog Boxing, Arhat (Lohan or Monk Fist) Boxing, and Lion Boxing. Additionally, the recently popularized Ngo Gyo Kun style relies on a version called Sam Chien as the backbone of the system. The Hakka style of Southern Praying Mantis (which possesses more than a casual resemblance to Uechi-Ryu and Goju-ryu) also relies upon an initial form that has been compared to Sanchin, Som Bo Gin (Three Steps Forward.)

 There are two main classifications of body conditioning: Kote-Kitei (arm conditioning) and Ashi-Kitei (leg conditioning) - each of equal importance. The term, Sanchin-Kitei refers to conditioning or striking in Sanchin thus including the entire body. The majority of exercises found within these pages are typically performed with a partner. As partners are not always available, we have also included a section on solo conditioning.

Although used in the dojo for conditioning purposes, the drills presented are very well suited for delivering highly explosive street valid techniques.  As each partner gains experience in the conditioning drills, increased combative realism will aid practitioners in transitioning to effective attacks and defenses.

The Difficulty in Data Collection

The physiologic mechanisms for body conditioning remain unknown; nor are they likely to become known. This ignorance persists not merely due to a lack of interest. Limited research funds and the impression that conditioning represents a specialized aspect of an extreme activity play a part. Nevertheless, the requirements of proper investigations prohibit them. Few, if any, practitioners pursue conditioning to the exclusion of any other activity, and many methods of conditioning exist. A conclusive study must control for all of these and other variables. Even if investigators could standardize the methods, as well as control for multiple variables such as age, sex, and initial body habitus and health, they then face prohibitive ethical constraints. Physiologic studies require comparisons of the tissues between those who do and do not condition.  Such comparison would require serial biopsies of skin, fascia, muscle and bone.  An ideal study would compare conditioned and unconditioned extremities on the same practitioner with sufficient subjects studied over months and years to reach statistically significant conclusions.

Animal studies prove equally unfeasible. While one of the authors confesses a “gallows humor” in considering the image of inflicting kote-kitei on the family cat, the dark comedy underscores the problem. As with human investigations, animal studies prove expensive. One may imagine sufficient informed human volunteers interested in discovering the basis of conditioning; this does not apply to animal experimentation.  Proper conditioning requires informed consent and communication between participants, which proves impossible with animals. Not surprisingly then, Medline searches reveal no conclusive or significant research on the physiology of conditioning.

 Possible Mechanisms

The absence of hard evidence encourages speculation, which ranges from the reasonable to the hilarious. While it is reasonable to speculate based on what we know about physiology, one must avoid the temptation to heap “reasonable” speculation upon "reasonable" speculation to construct conclusions as solid as a veritable house of cards. This caution may appear excessive; however, one can speculate their way into useless, counter productive, injurious, and even dangerous practices.

Bones do remodel and require physiologic loads. It is reasonable to suggest that conditioning results in some degree of increased bone strength. The degree and quality of this increase remains speculative.  Increased bone strength cannot explain abdominal muscle conditioning, and the authors doubt that it explains all of the effects on limbs. 

Increased muscle mass and tone also appears a reasonable mechanism. One could then argue that conventional exercises exist to increase muscle mass and tone which renders body conditioning exercises unnecessary. Practitioners do report conditioning has an effect beyond other exercises. Indeed, all of the authors practice muscle building from moderate to serious degrees and contend that muscle-building exercises prove insufficient.

Two other possible mechanisms may play a part. Chapman speculates that conditioning strengthens the fascial planes secondary to repetitive stress (Chapman, 1995). Again, no hard evidence exists for this. He also suggests an increase in pain tolerance. The authors and their many fellow practitioners agree with this, however, pain physiology remains poorly understood, and what is understood is frightfully complicated.  Many competing and complimentary peripheral and central influences exist, and the pain experienced ultimately proves subjective. While perhaps a reasonable suggestion concluding that body conditioning directly increases pain tolerance remains unproven.

Reasons for Caution

As “obvious” and “reasonable” as testimonials seem, no proven physiologic mechanism exists to justify them. Practitioners must understand and accept this unfortunate fact, for one can cite "reasonable" and "obvious" testimonials to support disproved and even dangerous practices and therapies. Belief in non-physiological mechanisms can justify some potentially dangerous activities. The authors had thought the groin obvious to avoid. Apparently, some male practitioners have followed the directions contained in Qi Gong texts to suspend weights from their genitals.  The practice results in damaged testicles. Evolution simply did not design the structures contained in the scrotum to withstand such physical abuse.  Given that adherents exist who advocate this idiocy, the authors feel compelled to list other “obvious” areas to avoid.  These include the face and eyes, head, trachea (windpipe), elbow and knee joints, and the spine.

Adherents of Western philosophy should not chortle and think themselves immune to similar delusions. The authors have heard many unfortunate claims based on how practitioners “think” the human body responds to injury. Some extend the possibility of raising the pain threshold to attempt damaging the sensation itself. As difficult as this is, practitioners need to remember that pain protects the body from damage. A review of the literature concerning the complications suffered by patients who lack sensation from injuries should dissuade readers from this practice.

Damaged tissues generally do not “regenerate” in the sense that they reform the complicated structure necessary for function. Some cells, such as nerve and muscle, do not divide to replace lost ones. Instead, tissues tend to heal by scar formation.  The authors have heard that the function of conditioning is “tearing” or otherwise damaging the tissues so they may "grow back stronger.” This belief can lead to serious injuries, especially to joints.   This includes extreme practices such as striking hard surfaces repeatedly with full force.  Trauma to joints leads to a weakened and painful structure at best and a painfully deformed and non-functional structure at worse. While very little evidence exists to support the belief that injury promotes rheumatoid arthritis, degenerative arthritis can develop.

Women and Conditioning

If bizarre mythology exists in the martial arts, it is particularly great with respect to women. Whether or not women should engage in body conditioning stirs up legitimate concerns and outright silliness.  While the men may secretly share smirks and chuckles at the expense of the "fairer sex,” the authors all know and have practiced with women who can inflict painful exception to these jests and prejudices. Women can and do achieve impressive levels of conditioning. Separating practitioners by sex leads to erroneous assumptions. Men have the potential edge in size and strength in the extremes; however, just as not every man achieves the same level of success, many women achieve better results than men. Practitioners need to remember the relative goals of conditioning and tailor the level of practice accordingly. Those who seek invincibility against the real and imagined threats of the world need to accept that no method can render their bodies “bullet-proof”.

While it should prove obvious that the female breast is not a target for conditioning, women practitioners acknowledge that they do receive strikes in the region frequently. While damage to the breast tissue can result in fat necrosis, no evidence exists that this promotes or increases the risk of breast cancer. One should avoid strikes to the female groin. Again, one would think this obvious; however, the authors are aware that a myth exists that women do not suffer consequences from groin strikes. They do.

Women do practice under the myth that conditioning the abdomen will damage their reproductive organs. Blunt trauma serious enough to damage internal organs does not tend to damage the reproductive organs. The liver, intestines, spleen, pancreas, kidney, and bladder of both men and women suffer a far greater risk. Pregnancy changes everything, of course.

Beyond the mythology concerning women in the martial arts lies the vast emptiness of information concerning children.  As pediatricians remind their colleagues who treat adults, children are not miniature adults.  Indeed, childhood represents many different physical, intellectual, and emotional milestones.  Compound this with the absence of credible data, individual variability, and the desire to include children in a traditional art that promises them many benefits, and one may understand why teachers may just give up on conditioning.

The two significant questions concern whether or not conditioning poses a danger to children and at what age may they begin conditioning.  With respect to the first question, specific dangers do exist; however, they are not unique to conditioning.  Until their bones mature, children risk damage to their growth plates.  Such maturity does not occur until after the growth periods in the early teen years. An immature body simply cannot withstand the stress expected by an adult body. Yet, one would not expect adults to inflict adult-level prearranged or free sparring on a child.  Thus, in a way, common sense answers both questions. Clearly, a nine year-old cannot and should not engage in adult level conditioning.  A teacher should not condone any significant contact on a child who has not reached the early teens.  The authors hope no teacher requires enlightenment to this or the need to grade his training to the level of the practitioner, including a child. Martial arts always involve degrees of training.  Adults are not built the same.  Many adults will require a measured and progressive approach to conditioning as well as other aspect of training.  This applies to children.  Finally, no practitioner who lacks the maturity of mind to work respectfully with a partner should engage in partner conditioning drills.

While this paper addresses adult–level conditioning and how practitioners may approach basic exercises in a manner that promotes conditioning, one can reverse the conception.   Children can and do benefit from soft conditioning which focuses on proper posture and position.    The described procedure of Sanchin shime (testing) can be altered to soft touching that guides a child into proper position.  Indeed, adults benefit from a “soft Sanchin test” as well.  Since martial arts requires a spectrum of physical skills, abilities and techniques, readers should not conclude that the authors present the “only” way to practice, or that practice must “always” involve conditioning.

Conditioning involves a gradual and progressive process. Injuries should not happen if practitioners practice responsibly and listen to and respect one another.