OP
- Thread Starter
- #81
If you take the view that AM and every technique is a mini form then naturally multiple applications of the same mechanics are to be explored, but that is not mere opportunistic and / or random changes without regard for and working out the mechanics and their effects. It should be specific recognition of the effects of the mechanics that the mini form has rather than changing the mini form based on what if's. as much as kempo fighting is not about techniques the methoodology of teching is that there are different mini forms prepared to discuss the what if's. Otherwise it becomes to easy to miss the dept of application of the catalogued information in the mini forms, including AM. i am assming because that is how our techniques are used and discussed in SK
My humble 2 cents...I am prepared for the blasting
Respectfully,
Marlon
I think this kinda goes back to having a technique for every possible attack. A defense if the guy punches you and steps forward, another one if he throws a cross, another one if he throws a cross but you're standing with your left leg forward, and so forth and so forth.
IMO, what you're suggesting (if I'm understanding correctly) works fine if the person knows whats happening. But when the spontaneous, unknown attack comes....
Again, I teach all the little goodies that are contained in the IP tech. But I like to take it a step further and teach my students to be able to use the same tech for a multitude of options. AM is taught for a step thru punch. but what happens when the guy throws a cross? You step back, attempting to block the punch, you'll no longer be in range for anything else. That being said, I should still be able to use the concepts of AM and adjust accordingly.
I want my students to be able to respond to whats happening at the moment and each moment after that, by not being bound by an IP tech, but instead, use the ideas and concepts that those techs teach, and just react, defending themselves.