# Block and strike?



## TietKiu3 (Aug 27, 2016)

Hi guys and gals! I practice Yee family Hung Ga Kung Fu, and a lot of the time, we talk about blocking and striking at the same time. But from my sifu, I heard that a guy that does violence seminars around the world (cant remember his name, but you might know, apparently he's known) doesn't think it's possible. My question is, what is your opinion?


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 27, 2016)

Without knowing to whom you are referencing, and what he actually said, it's not really possible to give any meaningful comments.  Your vague reference to someone famous who does violence seminars, and says you can't block and strike at the same time just doesn't give me much to work with.  I suspect there may be more content and context in what he is actually saying, and that is probably being lost in your brief summary.

Instead of asking us, maybe you can share your own thoughts.  So, what are your thoughts on it?


----------



## TietKiu3 (Aug 27, 2016)

Ok. He means it is not possible if someone randomly comes up to you and tries to knock your teeth in. I apologise for the poor description of the guy. It doesn't matter about the guy, I was just asking for your opinion. Anyway, I think it is quite possible to train a reflex of blocking and striking at the same time.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Aug 27, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> I think it is quite possible to train a reflex of blocking and striking at the same time.


please define block and strike at the same time.
doing one action with one hand and one with the other? or ... an action that accomplishes both tasks at once?


TietKiu3 said:


> He means it is not possible if someone randomly comes up to you and tries to knock your teeth in.


if this is your context,  then you have more issues than just a block and strike,  so yeah your chances of doing something ,anything is slim.


----------



## Paul_D (Aug 27, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> Ok. He means it is not possible if someone randomly comes up to you and tries to knock your teeth in.


Well, techniclaly yes.  However, that isn’t how civilian violence takes places.  People do not, generally, just walk around randomly knocking people’s teeth out for no reason and with no warning.  There are events, known as the rituals of violence, which precede a violent encounter e.g. an argument, road rage, spilling someone’s drink in pub.

Even if people where in the habit of randomly attacking peoples without warning,  in terms of the odds of you being on the receiving end of such an unlikely event, I think there are far more likely scenario’s that you need to worry about and train for.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 27, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> blocking and striking at the same time.


Many MA style has this move that your blocking arm lift up the curtain, you than walk through under it.






You can also use the same arm to do both blocking and striking. If you striking path is also in your opponent's striking path, your striking will integrate both of your offense and defense into one. Examples are:

1. rhino guard - you hold your hands into a big fist, straight your elbows, hide your head behind it, run your big fist toward your opponent's face when he punches at you.
2. hay-maker - use a 45 degree downward hay-maker to swing in front of you when your opponent punches at you. If will not only knock down any of your opponent's straight punch, if your opponent moves in, your hay-maker can hit on the back of his head, and knock him out.
3. ...


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Aug 27, 2016)

Paul_D said:


> Well, techniclaly yes.  However, that isn’t how civilian violence takes places.  People do not, generally, just walk around randomly knocking people’s teeth out for no reason and with no warning.  There are events, known as the rituals of violence, which precede a violent encounter e.g. an argument, road rage, spilling someone’s drink in pub.
> 
> Even if people where in the habit of randomly attacking peoples without warning,  in terms of the odds of you being on the receiving end of such an unlikely event, I think there are far more likely scenario’s that you need to worry about and train for.


You've never heard of knockout have you? No idea if it's still going, but was pretty popular in new york a few years back. 




A couple months ago, people were also randomly stabbing people on the subways around brooklyn. I can't remember what the reason was, but people were getting stabbed for no reason whatsoever.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Aug 27, 2016)

As for the OP:

If you mean a block that is a strike, that happens all the time so it definitely is possible.
If you mean blocking with one hand while striking with the other, that also happens all the time so definitely is possible.
If you mean blocking and going from the block to a strike, that also happens all the time so definitely is possible.


----------



## TietKiu3 (Aug 27, 2016)

hoshin  -  block and strike = one hand blocks and the other strikes simultaneously. And you are right, the chances of doing anything are slim, but...........

Paul is right. Society is not such a violent place.

Kempodisciple, option b.


----------



## TietKiu3 (Aug 27, 2016)

And the knockout game was disgusting


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Aug 27, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> And the knockout game was disgusting


Absolutely. But it was something that was common enough to be an issue, and afaik is something that still happens in the NY boroughs.


----------



## TietKiu3 (Aug 27, 2016)

I guess I'm happy to live in Scotland then.....


----------



## drop bear (Aug 27, 2016)

It is quicker to just block.  So if someone launches a flurry of quick shots then you are probably better just blocking. (sort of. You have to hit them back eventually)

But if you can pick out that the shot is coming then you block and strike at the same time.

Me i block.  Block and strike and head move and strike depending on where i am at the time.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 27, 2016)

drop bear said:


> It is quicker to just block.


When someone punches at you, you can always

- kick his belly (or groin), or
- sweep his leg.

Your leg is always longer than his arm.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 27, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When someone punches at you, you can always
> 
> - kick his belly (or groin), or
> - sweep his leg.
> Your leg is always longer than his arm.



I would suggest that if you are blocking fast and reactively then you will want both feet on the ground. 

Otherwise there are block knee options that can be pretty devastating.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 27, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When someone punches at you, you can always
> 
> - kick his belly (or groin), or
> - sweep his leg.
> ...


Why were they punching that far away?


----------



## drop bear (Aug 27, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> Why were they punching that far away?



Because you have created the circumstance by maintaining distance. Connor mcgregor style.

You can use use teeps from range to block.  But they are not the sort of reactive quick block i was suggesting in my other post.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 27, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> Why were they punching that far away?


When a stranger moves into your kicking range (to obtain his punching range), it's always a good idea to "step back", and keep him away from his effective punching range. IMO, if your opponent steps in, you should

- steps back 45 degree,
- start to circle around him in the kicking range, and
- try to find out what his intention is.

Many MA styles such as Taiji, WC, Judo, ... all start their "partner training" from the punching range. IMO, this kind of training will miss the "footwork" training completely.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 27, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When a stranger moves into your kicking range (to obtain his punching range), it's always a good idea to "step back", and keep him away from his effective punching range. IMO, if your opponent steps in, you should
> 
> - steps back 45 degree,
> - start to circle around him in the kicking range, and
> ...


Not my style. I am moving in too.


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 27, 2016)

Way more than I felt like responding to on my telephone...

I suspect you're thinking of Rory MIller -- but you're not really understanding his point.  A block-then-strike approach is going to be behind the curve, and getting further and further behind, UNLESS you do something to change catch up and pass your attacker.  What do I mean by that?  If I wait for you to punch me, then I try to block your punch with a classic up block found in many martial arts, for example, then try to punch you after I block you -- the odds are that I might get the block in, but you probably won't be standing there for me to hit you afterwards.  Instead, you're throwing your own second shot, moving, etc.  And I'm already behind the curve to start with, because I'm waiting for you to act...  

Yet the principle of defensive fighting is found in many martial arts which have stood the test of time...

H'mm...  Maybe there's something not being shown?  Maybe we're missing something...

Different styles have different answers, but here are some parts of my own answer...  First, I don't wait for a strike to defend myself.  As soon as I perceive that you're moving to attack, I'm doing something about it.  I'm taking a defensive step to point that will give me an advantage.  I'm preparing a "block" that does more than merely stop the strike; it inflicts harm on the incoming limb, it disrupts my opponent's balance, impairing their ability to throw another attack, and it's stopping the strike, too.  Then I'm moving into some "doing unto" while my opponent is recovering...  

Of course, this sounds easy.  Hell of a lot harder to do than describe...

A perfect move, as Rory and several others describe it, improves your position, worsens your opponent's position, prevents them from harming you, and delivers damage.  (I've reordered them reflecting my own emphasis... I have a lot of options if my position is better than my opponents...)


----------



## TietKiu3 (Aug 28, 2016)

Yes! Thank you, it was Rory Miller I was talking about.
I get what you're saying, and I see why blocking and then attacking might be seen as better, it does take less thinking, but it isn't quite as quick as Block and strike simultaneously. As for not just putting the arm in the way and improving your position, I can't disagree. In Hung ga, if we're on the inside, we like to move in and grab the throat. We also have a movement we call 'Water' (sing pao choi), where we block the hook punch, and the other hand comes up under the elbow and breaks it.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 28, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> Yes! Thank you, it was Rory Miller I was talking about.
> I get what you're saying, and I see why blocking and then attacking might be seen as better, it does take less thinking, but it isn't quite as quick as Block and strike simultaneously. As for not just putting the arm in the way and improving your position, I can't disagree. In Hung ga, if we're on the inside, we like to move in and grab the throat. We also have a movement we call 'Water' (sing pao choi), where we block the hook punch, and the other hand comes up under the elbow and breaks it.



I am going to suggest blocking and striking at the same time is slower.

We could test this by trying twenty blocks in succession and then twenty block/strikes.


----------



## TietKiu3 (Aug 28, 2016)

drop bear said:


> I am going to suggest blocking and striking at the same time is slower.
> 
> We could test this by trying twenty blocks in succession and then twenty block/strikes.


 

Well, first of all, I agreed with you when you talked about the flurry of punches coming at you. But block, and THEN strike definitely takes more time. 

Also, realistically, when do you block twenty times?


----------



## drop bear (Aug 28, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> Well, first of all, I agreed with you when you talked about the flurry of punches coming at you. But block, and THEN strike definitely takes more time.
> 
> Also, realistically, when do you block twenty times?



When they throw twenty strikes.

Sorry.  Just blocking is quicker. Than block and strike. So if you are short on time and space for example like that flurry or a sucker punch or if you get countered during your own flurry you will want to quickly put something out there to stop an attack. Then when you have some space you can counter.

If you see the strike and have a little bit more time to act you can block/strike and take advantage of their open positions and forward momentum.

Blocking also gives you a fraction more of a second in which to act. So i see a punch and have to organise myself into a block and a strike before that punch lands.  Or i see the strike block it.  Now i can try to organise a punch in the time it takes to retract that hand and for the second punch to land.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Aug 29, 2016)

drop bear said:


> When they throw twenty strikes.


Why would you let them throw twenty strikes?


----------



## MI_martialist (Aug 29, 2016)

There is no such thing as a block...is not a block a strike that is striking what is striking, so a block is really a strike, which makes a simultaneous block/strike a normal action.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 29, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> There is no such thing as a block...is not a block a strike that is striking what is striking, so a block is really a strike, which makes a simultaneous block/strike a normal action.


A hard block can be a strike. A soft block is just a "deflect".


----------



## MI_martialist (Aug 29, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> A hard block can be a strike. A soft block is just a "deflect".



Does a soft block, that deflects make impact?  if so, it strikes.

the definition of strike


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 29, 2016)

The deflect can be just a parry.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 29, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Why would you let them throw twenty strikes?



It is a concept. The same thing could be done with five strikes but it is less pronounced.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 29, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> There is no such thing as a block...is not a block a strike that is striking what is striking, so a block is really a strike, which makes a simultaneous block/strike a normal action.



Like those double punches people do all the time?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Aug 30, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Like those double punches people do all the time?


That is what we call a 'U-shaped punch' and in guy in the picture is doing it wrong.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Aug 30, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> There is no such thing as a block


Then why are they called 'blocks'?


----------



## MI_martialist (Aug 30, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Then why are they called 'blocks'?



Because mis-understanding of actual application has changed the vocabulary.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 30, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> Ok. He means it is not possible if someone randomly comes up to you and tries to knock your teeth in. I apologise for the poor description of the guy. It doesn't matter about the guy, I was just asking for your opinion. Anyway, I think it is quite possible to train a reflex of blocking and striking at the same time.


If you are surprised by an attack, you probably will block and evade as a first action, with little chance of an immediate strike. When you see it coming, however, I see no reason a block and strike can't happen at the same time. So, if someone tries to ambush you, and you see it only at the last moment, your first response may be block/evade only (a strike is still possible, but problematic under that scenario). After that first block, however, I'm assuming the assailant doesn't stop attacking. So, as you move to counter-attack, you're probably still blocking/evading at the same time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 30, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When someone punches at you, you can always
> 
> - kick his belly (or groin), or
> - sweep his leg.
> ...


The length of your leg is only helpful if using it keeps him outside the range of his arm. If he's already punching, then he's already closing that distance.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 30, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Because mis-understanding of actual application has changed the vocabulary.


What is your understanding of the actual application?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 30, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> That is what we call a 'U-shaped punch' and in guy in the picture is doing it wrong.


If it takes the shape of a, "U", you are doing it wrong.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 30, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Because mis-understanding of actual application has changed the vocabulary.


I don't think so. I block is when you strike the strike, which is different from a punch in the nose.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 30, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> If you are surprised by an attack, you probably will block and evade as a first action, with little chance of an immediate strike. When you see it coming, however, I see no reason a block and strike can't happen at the same time. So, if someone tries to ambush you, and you see it only at the last moment, your first response may be block/evade only (a strike is still possible, but problematic under that scenario). After that first block, however, I'm assuming the assailant doesn't stop attacking. So, as you move to counter-attack, you're probably still blocking/evading at the same time.


If you are fighting real close, you almost can't help but do both at the same time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 30, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> There is no such thing as a block...is not a block a strike that is striking what is striking, so a block is really a strike, which makes a simultaneous block/strike a normal action.


Not all blocks are strikes. I teach what I call a "plow block" (using the flinch reaction to get arms between the attacker's shoulders and your upper targets), and have seen instructors teach a block that uses the arm at the side of the head to shield against a blow from the side. Neither are strikes.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 30, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Does a soft block, that deflects make impact?  if so, it strikes.
> 
> the definition of strike


Unless it only pushes. Pushing is not striking.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 30, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Not all blocks are strikes. I teach what I call a "plow block" (using the flinch reaction to get arms between the attacker's shoulders and your upper targets), and have seen instructors teach a block that uses the arm at the side of the head to shield against a blow from the side. Neither are strikes.


Exactly, blocks are, in fact, covers, and not strikes.


----------



## Paul_D (Aug 30, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> You've never heard of knockout have you? No idea if it's still going, but was pretty popular in new york a few years back.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hence my qualifier "generally" rather than "never"


----------



## marques (Aug 30, 2016)

TietKiu3 said:


> I guess I'm happy to live in Scotland then.....



Are you from Aberdeen? 'Your' headquarters are 5 min from where I live (until tomorrow...).
www.yeeshungga.co.uk


----------



## MI_martialist (Aug 31, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> What is your understanding of the actual application?



Striking the strike.


----------



## MI_martialist (Aug 31, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> I don't think so. I block is when you strike the strike, which is different from a punch in the nose.



Sorry, I am not getting what you are saying.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 31, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Striking the strike.


That's not every block. Some blocks are strikes at the striking limb. Some blocks are static in respect to the strike (either because the block isn't moving or because the blocker is moving in the opposite direction from the block). Some blocks are soft, and push the strike off-path, rather than striking it. Some are soft and absorb the strike.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 31, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Sorry, I am not getting what you are saying.


I believe he's saying there's a difference between a hard block (which is a block that strikes the striking limb) and a true strike, like a punch. And I agree. The dynamics are different.


----------



## MI_martialist (Aug 31, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I believe he's saying there's a difference between a hard block (which is a block that strikes the striking limb) and a true strike, like a punch. And I agree. The dynamics are different.



Of course the dynamics will be different depending on the strike being employed and the purpose of the strike, but a strike is a strike.  If I were to take your example, is not a punch "block" to the attacking limb a "punch" so a "strike" but it is a "block"?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 31, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Of course the dynamics will be different depending on the strike being employed and the purpose of the strike, but a strike is a strike.  If I were to take your example, is not a punch "block" to the attacking limb a "punch" so a "strike" but it is a "block"?


I agree. I often refer to hard blocks as a strike. I was interpreting his comment. There is a difference, though I refer to both punches and hard blocks as strikes. It is, however, a block. It blocks the incoming attack from its target. You have said a block is a strike to an attacking limb, so any strike to a blocking limb (by that definition), is in fact a block.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 31, 2016)

MI_martialist said:


> Sorry, I am not getting what you are saying.


Intent.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Sep 7, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> You've never heard of knockout have you? No idea if it's still going, but was pretty popular in new york a few years back.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



you know a joke?

America.


----------

