# High Kicks to the Head



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 6, 2007)

I was checking out the thread in the TKD forum about Forms/Pooms and it morphed into a debate about the effectiveness of high kicks to the head.  What are your thoughts about high kicks on the street?

Let me copy one of my posts from the TKD Forms thread as I think it conveys alot of my thoughts about it.

_Don Flatt



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> *CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ALLOW FOR KICKING HIGH TO THE HEAD*
> 
> It's really quite obvious that if you offset a man's balance, cause him to double over, or drop him to the ground makes it easy to deliver a powerful finishing kick to the head. But then again it's not really a high kick then is it?? And we all know if it's not a high kick to the head it just doesn't look as cool so I will outline some circumstances that will allow you to deliver that ultimate kick to the head finish!!
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 6, 2007)

This one works for me



> *3. You are Chuck Norris.* The mere sight of your beard will cause them to hang back at the right range and you won't have to worry about those pesky throws, takedowns, or hand techniques.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 6, 2007)

Personnely, I don't kick much in the first place. I'm too top heavy really. I have the flexiblity and balance, but not enough balance to try it too much. I have however seen a video of a Tae Kwon Do guy (WTF I think) doing a jump spinning hook kick to his opponents head. The guy went down, and stayed there. Out cold after ONE kick (who says Tae Kwon Do/Karate isn't real?). If only I could post attachments.


----------



## bluemtn (Jul 6, 2007)

I'm not real fond of head- high kicks, but they can be good with proper timing, in my opinion.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 6, 2007)

Like any other technique, high kicks work better for some people than others; if they work for you (and I know plenty of people they work for - me included, for some kicks) - GREAT!  If they don't work for you, but they are part of your MA, learn them, improve them as best they can, and gain strength and flexibility from the practice... and maybe, someday, they will work.  Maybe they won't - but they won't if you don't try.

Also like any other technique, if you tell yourself high kicks don't work, and therefore don't practice them - or don't practice them as if they work - then they won't.  Everyone has techniques they prefer - techniques that work for them for whatever reason - and they tend to practice those techniques the most, and therefore those techniques continue to get better, and work better, than the techniques they don't like and therefore don't practice as often or as hard.


----------



## foot2face (Jul 6, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Like any other technique, high kicks work better for some people than others; if they work for you (and I know plenty of people they work for - me included, for some kicks) - GREAT! If they don't work for you, but they are part of your MA, learn them, improve them as best they can, and gain strength and flexibility from the practice... and maybe, someday, they will work. Maybe they won't - but they won't if you don't try.
> 
> Also like any other technique, if you tell yourself high kicks don't work, and therefore don't practice them - or don't practice them as if they work - then they won't. Everyone has techniques they prefer - techniques that work for them for whatever reason - and they tend to practice those techniques the most, and therefore those techniques continue to get better, and work better, than the techniques they don't like and therefore don't practice as often or as hard.


 
*Thank You!  *

Your reasonable insight has been refreshing.  Indicative of an experienced MAist I would expect to find on MartialTalk. 

Again, thank you for your common sense.

Respectfully, Foot2Face


----------



## seasoned (Jul 6, 2007)

I have studied and teach GoJu karate and high kicks have a place in training and in sparring they can surprise someone. But in my opinion they have no place in self defense at all. A high kick takes a special talent that not everyone has flexibility. A low kick takes technique and someone can learn it fairly fast. In self defense we should keep our kicks from their midrange down and our hand techniques from their midrange up. Self defense is for everyone but high kicks are not, point said.


----------



## MJS (Jul 6, 2007)

My personal preference is to keep them stomach level and below.  I've never really been a high kicker.  During some sparring sessions I've pulled off some good roundhouse kicks to the head, but that was while wearing a gi and being nice and stretched. 

Now, this isn't to say that others can't pull them off.  Again, this is my preference.  If the person I was kicking, was already bent over from another kick, then sure, the head might be a target for me.

Mike


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 6, 2007)

Relevant post on TKD Forms/Poomse thread.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> No acrimony is intended. I'm not even sure of the definition of acrimony but judging from the context of your response, I was making a point with humor. I'm sorry you did not find it funny. We must not only use a different approach to fighting but also humor. My last post was for those of you that will enjoy the wit.
> 
> Stating my opinion without the wit. Successful use of a high kick not only requires the appropriate training to do so ie. flexibility, balance, power, speed, & timing but also requires an appropriate set up to work. The range of the move is very particular and the movement is easily jammed in chamber.
> 
> ...


----------



## foot2face (Jul 6, 2007)

MJS said:


> My personal preference is to keep them stomach level and below. I've never really been a high kicker. During some sparring sessions I've pulled off some good roundhouse kicks to the head, but that was while wearing a gi and being nice and stretched.
> 
> Now, this isn't to say that others can't pull them off. Again, this is my preference. If the person I was kicking, was already bent over from another kick, then sure, the head might be a target for me.
> 
> Mike


 
Not to sound as if I am singling you out MJS, I have read several of your post and find your conduct respectable.  I mean no insult, I'm merely trying to make a point.  Is it your preference not to kick to the head or is it that you lack the years of extensive and specific training required in order to consistently and effectively land a powerful kick to the head?  Far too often people who feel compelled to criticize a particular method don't have the experience with that method needed to offer a meaningful critique.  They base their opinion on what they do, and if they don't do it, it must be wrong, period.  This is not the humility I would expect from a competent MAist.  It reminds me of the arrogant statements heard before BJJ became mainstream, " A karateka will always defeat a Judo player," or "grappling is for a game, karate is for a fight."  I think we all can appreciate the folly of such declarative statements.  Sadly it seems the like will never end.

Thanks, Foot2Face


----------



## foot2face (Jul 6, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Relevant post on TKD Forms/Poomse thread.


 
Forgive me, based on the other post directed at me I perceived insult. Since non was intended, I truly apologize.

Once again with apologies- Foot2Face(or in this case FOOT_in_MOUTH)


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 6, 2007)

> Originally Posted by *Kosho Gakkusei*
> 
> 
> *CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ALLOW FOR KICKING HIGH TO THE HEAD*
> ...


Not to sound like I'm trying to one-up anyone, and I'm wondering if KG's whole post was tongue in cheek, but either way: If I can kick him in the legs '_a few times_', he's done.  Fight's over, let's go home. I mean, is it just me, or does that scenario work for others, too? I know every kung fu san soo stylist has to agree with this.


----------



## exile (Jul 6, 2007)

The fact that, so far as I am aware, _every_ single MAist with significant professional streetfighting expertise who has written on the topic of high kicks has dismissed them as dangerous and impractical under realistic combat scenarios seems to me to be rather indicative of the singular weakness of thee as CQ tactics for self defense. I've given some of the key references in the `limited poomsae' thread, but I think it worth reciting at least the six or seven pages Tristan Sutrisno and Marc MacYoung, in their book _Becoming a Complete Martial Artists: Error Detection in Self-Defense and the Martial Arts_, devote to the inherent combat weakness of high kicks, with no compensating advantages whatever. 

But if the experience of those who actually _have_ the experience is of no interest, there are still such obvious inherent weaknesses to appealing to high kicks (I've itemized just a few of them here) that the burden of proof definitely shifts to anyone who advocates such kicks. And from what I've seen on the other thread discussion, that burden of proof hasn't even begun to be met, even a little bit.

Still, people have to decide for themselves. If someone, against all the factual objections to such marginal techniques, wants to pursue them in a nasty confrontation in a bar, in preference to the many techs that the TMAs make available with far greater margins of safety and likelihood of effective force delivery to vulnerable points on the assailant's body, that's _fine._


----------



## still learning (Jul 6, 2007)

Hello,  Every kick/ punch has it place and time.  Those that are able to kick to the HEAD  and able to do it effectively....that is a great weapon to have and use.

Sometimes punching head is not the best tarket...so is kicking low..when (if you can)...you can kick there heads.

Knife is hand has it place...hammer blows...ridge hand all has it place and time...so is kick to head.

When one limits his tools...he limits his skills.  NOT everyone has the ablility to kick effective/quickly/hard ...to head.

Running has it place too......Best to leave your HEAD on....do not kick it!

Aloha........


----------



## bluemtn (Jul 6, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Like any other technique, high kicks work better for some people than others; if they work for you (and I know plenty of people they work for - me included, for some kicks) - GREAT! If they don't work for you, but they are part of your MA, learn them, improve them as best they can, and gain strength and flexibility from the practice... and maybe, someday, they will work. Maybe they won't - but they won't if you don't try.
> 
> Also like any other technique, if you tell yourself high kicks don't work, and therefore don't practice them - or don't practice them as if they work - then they won't. Everyone has techniques they prefer - techniques that work for them for whatever reason - and they tend to practice those techniques the most, and therefore those techniques continue to get better, and work better, than the techniques they don't like and therefore don't practice as often or as hard.


 
Well said Kacey!!  High roundhouse kicks are really easy for me, that and front kicks.  The only 2 that I can actually get a good height on, so I reserve those as a "surprise"-  like when an opponent has their guard down...  However, that's just my personal prefference, and what comes naturally.


----------



## exile (Jul 6, 2007)

tkdgirl said:


> Well said Kacey!!  High roundhouse kicks are really easy for me, that and front kicks.  The only 2 that I can actually get a good height on, so I reserve those as a "surprise"-  like when an opponent has their guard down...  However, that's just my personal prefference, and what comes naturally.



But the question is not whether high kicks are practical in a general sparring situation, TKD_G. The question is whether they are useful in a close-quarters self-defense situation against an unsought attack by a dangerous, but likely street-savvy assailant who's probably not much more than a foot away from you, and when every other avenue of escape from the situation has failed. I can snap off a roundhouse kick to something like my own head height, and I'm 6' tall. But not when the target's 14" or less away from me hand has just grabbed my shirt  or thown a haymaker at me from that distance.


----------



## Miles (Jul 6, 2007)

exile said:


> But the question is not whether high kicks are practical in a general sparring situation, TKD_G. The question is whether they are useful in a close-quarters self-defense situation against an unsought attack by a dangerous, but likely street-savvy assailant who's probably not much more than a foot away from you, and when every other avenue of escape from the situation has failed. I can snap off a roundhouse kick to something like my own head height, and I'm 6' tall. But not when the target's 14" or less away from me hand has just grabbed my shirt  or thown a haymaker at me from that distance.



Was that the question Exile?  I don't recall parameters being set in the original post. FWIW, I agree with Kacey.

Miles


----------



## Kacey (Jul 6, 2007)

exile said:


> But the question is not whether high kicks are practical in a general sparring situation, TKD_G. The question is whether they are useful in a close-quarters self-defense situation against an unsought attack by a dangerous, but likely street-savvy assailant who's probably not much more than a foot away from you, and when every other avenue of escape from the situation has failed. I can snap off a roundhouse kick to something like my own head height, and I'm 6' tall. But not when the target's 14" or less away from me hand has just grabbed my shirt  or thown a haymaker at me from that distance.


Then you don't know - or don't train - the right kicks, and that's your choice.  But I know plenty of people who do.  Here's an example:

Terry, a BB I knew when I started TKD as a white belt was walking back to his car from class.  He had his gym bag in one hand, and his briefcase in the other.  He was approached by 2 men, one of whom said "D'you have any change?"  The other man had started to fade to Terry's rear as the first man attempted to panhandle.

Terry said no, and the first man said "D'you have any bills I can have?"

Terry said no again, and the first man (who was now within grabbing distance) said "The you'll have to give me everything you have!" and reached out to grab Terry by the front of his shirt.

Terry placed 1 high kick (like a front kick, but the target is parallel to the ground - and it's a short range kick, really only effective within 18" or so) under the first guy's chin; the first guy was unconscious before he hit the sidewalk.  Terry whirled around to hit the second guy, but he was already gone.

His story was corroborated by a woman who was just leaving a nearby office building, who saw the whole thing and ducked back in to call the police.

As I recall, Terry was 5'9" or 5'10" - from the description he gave, the guy he knocked out was about 6'.

As I said - if you don't believe it, you won't train it, and if you don't train it, then it won't work.  This isn't saying it will work for everyone - I never said that - but just because you've got all these references who say it can't work, doesn't mean it can't - it means it can't work for them.  It also means that you are placing false limitations on yourself - and that's  your choice; high kicks aren't for everyone.  But they can work in a self defense situation - and that's not a book reference, that's my knowledge of an actual event in which a high kick was the only technique thrown - at short range.  Make of it what you will - just remember that no reference, however good, can cover every person's experiences.


----------



## foot2face (Jul 6, 2007)

Kacey, perhaps you can ask Exile to lend you one of his many books that detail what you've just describe, as not possible.

Thanks again- Foot2Face


----------



## exile (Jul 6, 2007)

foot2face said:


> Kacey, perhaps you can ask Exile to lend you one of his many books that detail what you've just describe, as not possible.
> 
> Thanks again- Foot2Face



Ah, but you see, f2f, Kacey wasn't describing, so far as I can see, a kick to the head when you're a foot away from an assailant who's grabbed or thrown a punch at you! That's the difference. We aren't discussing the feasibility of a kick to the head per se. We're discussing the feasibility of doing a standing split, in an upright position, on a bad surface surrounded by tables/trashcans/jostling bodies/etc. in the fraction of second you need to terminate the fight. I don't recall anyone actually describing how to do _that._ And that's one of the reasons why my many books, written by people who have expertise in this _particular_ area&#8212;practical, realistic self-defense&#8212;say that it's a bad, bad thing to try to do. You see, they're not talking about whether a _description_ is possible&#8212;you can describe anything. What they're talking about is _execution._



Miles said:


> Was that the question Exile?  I don't recall parameters being set in the original post. FWIW, I agree with Kacey.



That was the context of the discussion in which all this came up on the other thread, Miles. Whether high kicks are practical for most MA practitioners in a SD situation. Kosho was carrying that context over, I assume, when he started this post, since he too thinks that high kicks are not a practical resource for most people in a streetfight.


----------



## bluemtn (Jul 6, 2007)

exile said:


> But the question is not whether high kicks are practical in a general sparring situation, TKD_G. The question is whether they are useful in a close-quarters self-defense situation against an unsought attack by a dangerous, but likely street-savvy assailant who's probably not much more than a foot away from you, and when every other avenue of escape from the situation has failed. I can snap off a roundhouse kick to something like my own head height, and I'm 6' tall. But not when the target's 14" or less away from me hand has just grabbed my shirt or thown a haymaker at me from that distance.


 

When things are close in, lower kicks and knees are probably your best bet.  Then again, that's my training-  don't throw out all high kicks.  However, if it works for you, then it works for you.  I'm not saying it's just flat out wrong, it's just my personal prefference, it just isn't what I'd do when it's all up close and personal.

However, like Kacey said, if you don't train it, then it's a good chance it wouldn't.  To each his own...


----------



## Kacey (Jul 6, 2007)

exile said:


> Ah, but you see, f2f, Kacey wasn't describing, so far as I can see, a kick to the head when you're a foot away from an assailant who's grabbed or thrown a punch at you! That's the difference. We aren't discussing the feasibility of a kick to the head per se. We're discussing the feasibility of doing a standing split, in an upright position, on a bad surface surrounded by tables/trashcans/jostling bodies/etc. in the fraction of second you need to terminate the fight. I don't recall anyone actually describing how to do _that._ And that's one of the reasons why my many books, written by people who have expertise in this _particular_ area&#8212;practical, realistic self-defense&#8212;say that it's a bad, bad thing to try to do. You see, they're not talking about whether a _description_ is possible&#8212;you can describe anything. What they're talking about is _execution._



Actually, I *was* describing a short range (within 12-16 inches) kick to the head - assuming, of course, that you consider the underside of the chin to be part of the head - and I do.  Terry's attacker was within arm's length - with his arm bent - when Terry kicked him.  To do a high kick, you have to kick *straight up*, so while it may not be 170 degrees, it is at least 160 - especially at the distance Terry was dealing with.  It worked for him... and he was hardly a stranger to conflict; Terry was a bail bondsman when I knew him, as well as a Marine serving in the Reserves; I lost contact with him when he was activated and sent to serve in Desert Storm.  

Please don't take this wrong - I have a great deal of respect for your opinion and experience - but please don't speak for me.


----------



## searcher (Jul 6, 2007)

ONe aspect that is often overlooked when looking at head kicking is them being a little to effective.   I have the flexibility, speed, power, technique, and control to hit somebody in the head in a non-threatening environment.  I am not so sure that I could keep it from over-doing the job.   I am scared to death of having a non life threatening encounter that leads to an altercation and having such an adrenaline dump that the control of the technique goes out the window.   I don't think anything could be worse then killing or seriously hurting someone when the situation did not call for it.

Does this make sense?   Or am I just rambling?


----------



## exile (Jul 6, 2007)

tkdgirl said:


> However, like Kacey said, if you don't train it, then it's a good chance it wouldn't.  To each his own...



Well, as I say, I do train high kicks, probably more than any other tech, for accuracy, balance and force delivery&#8212;as a drill, in short. And if someone actually does understand the inherent dangers of high kicking to the head and decides to use it anyway, I would be the last to try to dissuage them! I've no doubt that some people can make it work. But take a look at Kosho's last post here on the `limited poomse' thread. And those where cases where the kicks actually connected! There are plenty of recorded cases where a gunshot to chest failed to kill the injured victim. Does this in general mean that you want to receive a gunshot to the chest?



Kacey said:


> Actually, I *was* describing a short range (within 12-16 inches) kick to the head - assuming, of course, that you consider the underside of the chin to be part of the head - and I do.  Terry's attacker was within arm's length - with his arm bent - when Terry kicked him.  To do a high kick, you have to kick *straight up*, so while it may not be 170 degrees, it is at least 160 - especially at the distance Terry was dealing with.  It worked for him... and he was hardly a stranger to conflict; Terry was a bail bondsman when I knew him, as well as a Marine serving in the Reserves; I lost contact with him when he was activated and sent to serve in Desert Storm.
> 
> Please don't take this wrong - I have a great deal of respect for your opinion and experience - but please don't speak for me.



Sorry, Kacey, I misread the distance involved in the post. The fact that your friend Terry was obliged to kick somewhere within close range of a split is just what I was saying: anyone who wants to do what you reported him as doing will have to do the same thing. One of the points that the people who I cited in my previous posts keep coming back to is that you have very little margin for error in this kind of technique. They are concerned with robust self-defense applications, those with enough of a margin of error that you don't have to be perfect, or capable of extraordinary athletic achievements, to execute the technique. Their point, if I'm reading them correctly, is that it is extremely unlikely that most people who find themselves in that kind of danger, even those who've trained MAs serioiusly for a long time, are going to be capable of that kind of performance. Again&#8212;this is getting to be thrice-chewed gum&#8212;exactly the same kind of thing can be said about a 720º flying back kick: there must be _someone_ on the face of planet Earth who could do that in a streetfight. But very few MAists, I suspect could, and the same  kind of inherent problems with that tech hold for the nearly vertical kick that your friend Terry had to do. 

I've seen wushu performers literally turn themselves into knots; I know that there are people capable, by a combination of genetic good fortune and intense training, of almost almost any action you can visualize for the human body. But the original context of this discussion was the practicality of high kicks to the head as a general method of self-defense. If no one minds, let me quote the original post that started all this:



			
				foot2face said:
			
		

> It was not different in my school. You described precisely the type of techniques I was speaking of in my earlier replies. Techniques that are contained in the forms and not hidden. However, non of these techniques are fight enders. You may poke a man in the eye or rip at his groin but as long as he maintains consciousness he maintains the ability to cause you harm. The only way to decisively end the altercation is to strike him in the head with a powerful blow, hence the high kicks in TKD.



The claim here is that `the high kicks to the head', which were introduced as a result of tournament competition starting in the 1960s and became more and more a marked feature of the art, were actually designed for self-defense application, and that the high kicks therefore have to be regarded as techniques of choice for self-defense. Given what I suspect is the minute percentage of MAists who could duplicate your friend Terry's performance, the assertion here is that a marginal technique accessible to only a small number of practitioners should instead by regarded as a standby, in preference to the control/striking combinations that the TKD forms (where all kicks were originally _low_) encode. This is exactly what experts in self-defense application identify&#8212;I think correctly&#8212;as, in Abernethy's phrasing, as `suicidal'.


----------



## Marginal (Jul 6, 2007)

I can't rule out high kicks in a SD situation no matter how many times I read that old Kenpo chestnut "I'll kick 'em in the head... Once they're on the ground!" 

Kind of depends on the context though. One nice thing about high kicks is they're usually not expected in a close situation. If they're not telegraphed, they can come up right in an attacker's blind spot, with the end result of the kick hitting flush on the jaw or temple unopposed. (Then the major downside is breaking their fall before they dash their brains out on the pavement.) 

If they're outside close range, it gets loads easier to react to and the odds of landing the kick safely decrease. 

OTOH, if a knee is available etc, the path of least resistance and risk is usually the better idea, and more likely more probable.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 6, 2007)

Exile, you can believe what you want - but that high kick is a standard kick from the ITF curriculum, and it is taught as a head high only kick - at 7th gup - and in 15 years of instructing, I haven't had anyone yet who couldn't do it, including plenty of people who *cannot* do the splits, because the kick is dependent on speed and momentum, involving driving the knee up and then allowing the foot to follow the knee upward.  It is this momentum - not flexibility, that allows people to kick that high - and Terry was not particularly flexible.

As I said, you can believe what you want - what your references say, since that seems to carry more weight for you than what practitioners say - but I could add quite a few other examples.  Since I don't particularly want to start an argument in which I compare my experiences to your reference books, I'm going to stop here and go to bed.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 6, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Terry placed 1 high kick (like a front kick, but the target is parallel to the ground - and it's a short range kick, really only effective within 18" or so) under the first guy's chin; the first guy was unconscious before he hit the sidewalk. Terry whirled around to hit the second guy, but he was already gone.
> 
> His story was corroborated by a woman who was just leaving a nearby office building, who saw the whole thing and ducked back in to call the police.
> 
> As I recall, Terry was 5'9" or 5'10" - from the description he gave, the guy he knocked out was about 6'.


 
We have an apparrent scenario where the high kick worked.  My posts have not been to say that a high kick won't work but that for the reasons I've mentioned on this thread & the TKD forms thread, I don't think it is the strategy of choice. I practice kicking high to develop balance, flexibility, and power and will use the high kick if the opening is present.  What your friend had was the element of surprise.  His attackers did not expect him to defend himself this is more critical than the choice of weapon he made.

Now I'm trying to envision the plausability with the distances you mentioned.  18" is not very far away.  18" is about the length from a man's elbow to his finger tips.  When a man's face is 18" from mine I can connect solidly with an elbow by simply rotating my hips.  I'm about 5'9" to 5'10".  I can get the height you talk about with that kick but the distance is really about an arms length or 30".  The closest high kick I can do is my crescent kick which ends up roughly 22" - 24" from my face.  I can adjust my targeting by leaning my upper body but neither of these fits your description.  The kick your describing with the target your describing would have to be roughly a standing split.  An impressive physical feat in it's own right.  This is not to say this was beyond your friend's abilities.

The problem I'm having is coming up with a plausible trajectory for a front kick at that range.  Even taking to consideration the attacker moving inwards to the target range your friend's kick would have been jammed by the attackers torso and could not have made it to the head at that distance.  To make the kick a knee rotation would have had to take place which would actually change the kick to an inverted upward roundhouse (even more impressive) but that's not what was described.  Although, at the 30" range the arc that the foot needs to perform this kick would be plausible but that takes us out of close range fighting because the hit takes place just as the attacker comes within kicking range.

If I'm thinking wrong, show me a video of someone using this kicking technique.  I request the use of a ruler to place a focus mitt exactly 18" from the performers face held horizontally by a spotter standing directly behind the mitt.  Figuring about an 8" focus mitt this would place the spotter about 26" away from the performer.  If the performer can perform a front kick without his kick getting jammed by the location of the spotter than I stand corrected.

I believe your friend's story.  Not disputing your anecdote, just anylizing it.  I'm wondering if the distance was exagerated or underestimated.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Marginal (Jul 6, 2007)

The kick arcs. THe higher it goes, the shorter the effective distance becomes. If the attacker was closing in, and the kick was timed right it should work THe way the kick's chambered though, the knee rotation occurs when you've gotten your knee up near your chest. Any sooner and speed and power is lost.


----------



## exile (Jul 6, 2007)

Marginal said:


> The kick arcs. THe higher it goes, the shorter the effective distance becomes. If the attacker was closing in, and the kick was timed right it should work THe way the kick's chambered though, the knee rotation occurs when you've gotten your knee up near your chest. Any sooner and speed and power is lost.



I don't see it, M.

So, you've pulled your knee so it's flat against your chest, right? So your kick now snaps up from a position where your lower leg is parallel to your upper leg to one where it's reasonably close to 180º away. But when I try doing that myself, it's just a simple fact that before I can get up to the target height, my arcing lower leg has to move away well over a foot from the upper leg tight against my body. I have fairly thick thigh muscles, but even if your upper leg were only 4" through the beam, adding another 14" or so&#8212;the absolute minimum&#8212;is still going to get your foot colliding somewhere with your attacker's midsection, no? Because we're assuming typical CQ fighting distances of a foot or less between your body and his body. 

So I'm with Kosho_G here; I'm just not seeing the trajectory you're describing.



Kacey said:


> Exile, you can believe what you want - but that high kick is a standard kick from the ITF curriculum, and it is taught as a head high only kick - at 7th gup - and in 15 years of instructing, I haven't had anyone yet who couldn't do it, including plenty of people who *cannot* do the splits, because the kick is dependent on speed and momentum, involving driving the knee up and then allowing the foot to follow the knee upward.  It is this momentum - not flexibility, that allows people to kick that high - and Terry was not particularly flexible.
> 
> As I said, you can believe what you want - what your references say, since that seems to carry more weight for you than what practitioners say - but I could add quite a few other examples.  Since I don't particularly want to start an argument in which I compare my experiences to your reference books, I'm going to stop here and go to bed.



Kacey, you seem to think I am saying it is not possible to execute a high kick at relatively close quarters. For the reasons that Kosho and I have posted, I think it is very difficult to execute a high kick to the head against an opponent who is close enough to be gripping you, say&#8212;but I don't think it's impossible for the average practitioner to learn to kick high! Nor are my `references', as you refer to them, saying that&#8212;and these references are practitioners themselves, a number of them extremely high ranking karateka (Iain Abernethy, Geoff Thompson, Peter Consterdine, eg. ) who are moreover practitioners of a very hard-edged combat-oriented martial art, and in many cases put themselves in harm's way for a living. So the distinction you are drawing between my `references' on the one hand and `practitioners' on the other creates a misleading impression.

What is at issue is not the possibility of executing high kicks, even high kicks at relatively close range, but the practicality of training for these very risky, difficult moves whose execution at CQ ranges requires, however you slice it, a practitioner's kicking leg to reach a position very near a standing split, whether driven by momentum or anything else, _in the context of a streetfight_. The inherent risks and difficulty of executing such kicks in a `live' situation of great danger, which a street fight normally is, are the reasons my `references', who are trying to get MAists to utilize their arts for SD in the safest and most practical way, urge them not to pursue this kind of technique. I would give the same advice. If you think I'm mistaken in doing so... well, I guess we'll have to agree to differ.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 7, 2007)

searcher said:


> ONe aspect that is often overlooked when looking at head kicking is them being a little to effective.   I have the flexibility, speed, power, technique, and control to hit somebody in the head in a non-threatening environment.  I am not so sure that I could keep it from over-doing the job.   I am scared to death of having a non life threatening encounter that leads to an altercation and having such an adrenaline dump that the control of the technique goes out the window.   I don't think anything could be worse then killing or seriously hurting someone when the situation did not call for it.
> 
> Does this make sense?   Or am I just rambling?



Since I also seem to be tangential to this thread, *searcher*, and no one else has responded to you, I'll butt in and do so.  

I know exactly what you mean, and I think that adrenaline dump is a very scary thing. It's not an exact science, we don't know how our bodies/minds will react on any given occasion or what vital point we might inadvertently reach in a dark, slippery-surface environment. Nor do we know our own limits at times. Case in point: Using only my fists, at the age of 19 I came close to killing a man who did not deserve it--a beating, probably; death, no way--I'm not God, not my purview. It was only because one of his family members came out of the house, saw the horror show, and began screaming that 'woke' me from the adrenaline stupor/rage. If not for that, the course of many lives would have been different.

So, yeah, I think you have a very valid concern. If fists can do what I did, imagine much-stronger legs, encased in shoes or boots, spurred on by adrenaline, and all the accidental factors of timing, distance, poor vision, bad footing, that could cause just one kick to end tragically.

Doubt that anyone really involved in this thread has read this  but in the event they have, my apologies for going OT. *Searcher *and I now return the thread to your enlightening debate. :asian:


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jul 7, 2007)

Personally...I am not a big fan of High kicks....I like to kick to the legs..


----------



## exile (Jul 7, 2007)

Sensei Payne said:


> Personally...I am not a big fan of High kicks....I like to kick to the legs..



Much bigger targets, much easier to hit at very close range, much less chance of slipping or losing balance, much less vulnerability at full extension, lots of weak point targets... and if they can't stand, they can't fight. I'm with you!


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 7, 2007)

Marginal said:


> The kick arcs. THe higher it goes, the shorter the effective distance becomes. If the attacker was closing in, and the kick was timed right it should work THe way the kick's chambered though, the knee rotation occurs when you've gotten your knee up near your chest. Any sooner and speed and power is lost.


That's one heck of a timing you talk about.  I was under the impression that in the story Kacey related the attacker was walking not running towards Terry.

Let me give further points on the body mechanics associated that make me question not the validity of the incident but rather the distances that are being described.

This morning I'm playing with a tape measure.

Checking my height. 69.5" or 5' 9 1/2".
My proportions, shorter legs longer torso. 30" inseam.
If I raise my knee to about knee height. 16" projection from hip not accounting for any hip rotation.
If I raise my knee to chest level as close as physiology will allow due to the density of my thigh there is still a 12" projection of the knee, again not accounting for any hip ratation.
Extending the full leg at hip level the projection is 34 1/2"(flat footed), also not accounting for hip rotation.
For me kicking the height described under the chin of a 6' tall man - approx. nose height the distance to the ball of my foot is again 30" projection from my body.
Forcing myself into a standing split with my foot reaching that height the projection of my heel is 26" the distance from the ball of my foot is 22", again without hip rotation.
Now using these distances let's judge the feasability of the arc your describing.  The closest projection of the knee to chest level was 12".  The knee becomes the fulcrum to 21" lever (distance from bent knee to bottom of foot).  The furthest projection of my arc now becomes roughly 30" to 31".  Now for this kick to work the man must be moving in at such a speed as his body is more than 30" after I chamber yet his head is 22" away by the time I extend the kick.  Let's say my kick clocks in at a measley 40mph (Chuck Norris' clocks @ 70mph) that means that my 3' arc is accomplished in .05 seconds.  For the timing to be proper my opponent must move forward 4" to 6" in the same time frame - .05 seconds.  This is roughly 15mph, which is humanly possible but hardly walking speed.  Also, take into consideration that to accomplish this technique I will be balancing on 1 foot for at least .1 seconds (account for chamber to extension to retraction to replacement) while my opponent is closing in on me at 22 feet per second.  Again all these distances are factored without hip projection which is essential to generate power!!

Now using the natural projection of the front high kick is a little more feasable if I catch the opponent at the 30" to 36" range (figure an additional 6" for hip projection).  He can be moving at a normal walking pace of 4mph to 6mph and I'd catch him just as he comes into range.  But I'd hardly consider this a close range technique since the extension of my fist without hip projection is only 22".  Again the key element here would be surprise and in the story told the attackers were not expecting him to defend himself since his hands were full.

To me range is a key factor in the usage of any technique.

_Don Flatt


----------



## qi-tah (Jul 7, 2007)

exile said:


> I don't see it, M.
> 
> So, you've pulled your knee so it's flat against your chest, right? So your kick now snaps up from a position where your lower leg is parallel to your upper leg to one where it's reasonably close to 180º away. But when I try doing that myself, it's just a simple fact that before I can get up to the target height, my arcing lower leg has to move away well over a foot from the upper leg tight against my body. I have fairly thick thigh muscles, but even if your upper leg were only 4" through the beam, adding another 14" or sothe absolute minimumis still going to get your foot colliding somewhere with your attacker's midsection, no? Because we're assuming typical CQ fighting distances of a foot or less between your body and his body.
> 
> So I'm with Kosho_G here; I'm just not seeing the trajectory you're describing.


 
Just a hypothisis... if you weren't that flexible (or even if you were) you might have to arc your back somewhere between lifting your knee and unloading with your foot - perhaps this is the explaination of how Kacey's mate was able to successfully strike at that range? (The trajectory of the foot would then start at somewhere closer to horizontal than it would if he'd been standing upright) 

I've always arced my back when front kicking, though stomach/diaphram is the highest i'll get!


----------



## Kacey (Jul 7, 2007)

Just to clear up a few questions:  high kick *not *a front kick, it does not follow the same trajectory, and yes, it starts by bringing the knee as high as possible so the foot can then move up in a straight line - which is how I can kick above my head with it - with power and focus, despite all those who say it cannot happen.  No, I don't believe Terry exaggerated or mistook the distances.

Many of you have decided that high kicks are ineffective, and therefore practice them for balance and flexibility (if at all) rather than for effective use, and that's your choice.  That does not, however, necessarily mean that they are ineffective - only that they are ineffective for you.  I return to what I said previously in this thread, which most of you seem to have ignored in your desire to prove me wrong, because _in your own experience_ you *know *high kicks don't work - well, my experience is different, and isn't that what we're trying to do here, expand our knowledge by comparing our various experiences?



Kacey said:


> Like any other technique, high kicks work better for some people than others; if they work for you (and I know plenty of people they work for - me included, for some kicks) - GREAT! If they don't work for you, but they are part of your MA, learn them, improve them as best they can, and gain strength and flexibility from the practice... and maybe, someday, they will work. Maybe they won't - but they won't if you don't try.
> 
> Also like any other technique, if you tell yourself high kicks don't work, and therefore don't practice them - or don't practice them as if they work - then they won't. Everyone has techniques they prefer - techniques that work for them for whatever reason - and they tend to practice those techniques the most, and therefore those techniques continue to get better, and work better, than the techniques they don't like and therefore don't practice as often or as hard.


----------



## MJS (Jul 7, 2007)

foot2face said:


> Not to sound as if I am singling you out MJS, I have read several of your post and find your conduct respectable.


 
Thanks for the compliment. 



> I mean no insult, I'm merely trying to make a point. Is it your preference not to kick to the head or is it that you lack the years of extensive and specific training required in order to consistently and effectively land a powerful kick to the head?


 
Lack of years?  Not likely, as I've been training for 21yrs., which IMHO, has provided me with quite a bit of time to learn how to kick properly.   2 of the arts I train in, Kenpo and Arnis, are both known for their low line kicks.  As I said in my first post, during sparring sessions, I've pulled off many high kicks.  Keep in mind again, as I said, this was during sparring and while wearing a loose fitting gi.  If I get countered or make a mistake, I'm not in any danger, compared to defending myself on the street.  

Additionally, keep in mind, some people are naturally not flexable.  This is not due to not stretching, but just body genetics.  As I said, it has nothing to do with not being able to do it, its my choice not to.  If a high kick is not done carefully, it can and will be telegraphed.  A skilled fighter will take advantage of that.  




> Far too often people who feel compelled to criticize a particular method don't have the experience with that method needed to offer a meaningful critique. They base their opinion on what they do, and if they don't do it, it must be wrong, period. This is not the humility I would expect from a competent MAist. It reminds me of the arrogant statements heard before BJJ became mainstream, " A karateka will always defeat a Judo player," or "grappling is for a game, karate is for a fight." I think we all can appreciate the folly of such declarative statements. Sadly it seems the like will never end.
> 
> Thanks, Foot2Face


 
So you think I was criticizing high kickers or TKD which is known for high kicks?  Sir, I suggest you re-read my post, as I've said nothing negative about either high kickers or TKD.  You state that you've read many of my posts.  If thats the case, then you must've seen me say many times that all arts have something to offer.  Additionally, I've stated many times that if I can borrow something that I find useful and add it to my bag of tricks, that is what I do.  

All that being said, as I stated originally, its my choice to not do them.  If the opportunity presented itself, I'd take advantage of it, but to limit myself to just high kicks, when there are a number of good targets below the belt is not something I choose to do.

Mike


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Just to clear up a few questions: high kick *not *a front kick, it does not follow the same trajectory, and yes, it starts by bringing the knee as high as possible so the foot can then move up in a straight line - which is how I can kick above my head with it - with power and focus, despite all those who say it cannot happen. No, I don't believe Terry exaggerated or mistook the distances.
> 
> Many of you have decided that high kicks are ineffective, and therefore practice them for balance and flexibility (if at all) rather than for effective use, and that's your choice. That does not, however, necessarily mean that they are ineffective - only that they are ineffective for you. I return to what I said previously in this thread, which most of you seem to have ignored in your desire to prove me wrong, because _in your own experience_ you *know *high kicks don't work - well, my experience is different, and isn't that what we're trying to do here, expand our knowledge by comparing our various experiences?


 
Kacey,
What is being debated here is not if a high kick would be effective.  I think it could be effective given the right set of circumstances - that was the point of my original post.  I even reposted to this effect a less humorous but more technical analysis.  

I'll rephrase it another way.  To utilize a high kick effectively you need to set it up so it is not detected, you need the correct range, and appropriate timing.  Actually, all moves require these same things.  But when you're kicking high this entails moving a part of your body 6' (more when you consider the circular path it will take) so consideration for the above mentioned facets are significantly greater.  It's true that if a practitioner that trains to utilize high kicks has a better chance of correctly and effectively landing one in a real situation.  But that's all it is, a chance.  You have a better chance of looking for a one punch knockout.  Are those impossible?  No.  The same considerations apply but it's easier to set up and time.  In addition, the punch travels less so setting up for further attempts is easier. But the kick that lands has more power than the punch and therefore a better chance of knocking someone out because the kick can have more power.  Again it's a chance, read back a few posts for the story of the biker named Chopper who sent several high kickers to the hospital.  I just don't think it's the best primary strategy.  Now, I don't advocate a primary strategey of one punch knockouts either.  My opinion of the best approach to a situation that has turned ugly would be to utilize mobility and hand combinations with low kicks, possible throws, possible locks or restraints, swing for the fence if opening presents, and lastly throw a high kick to the head if an opening presents itself.  Just because it's not my technique of choice doen't mean I don't train it - it just will not be the 1st thing I look for.

In regards to the story you related.  The technique you described within the range you described is not possible, physically.  Please read my last post and answer those questions if you disagree.  Perception of distance of eyewitness accounts takes a backseat to anatomy and physiology.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I percieve that you are shorter than 5' 9".  Why don't you try getting a tape measure and marking a distance 18" from a wall or door and see if you can perform this fabled kick without making contact to the wall.  For me at 5' 9 1/2", my foot touches the wall inches from the chambered position at about the level of someone's navel.

I'm sorry but within 18" is not the appropriate range for a high kick much the same way standing 3' to 4' away is not the appropriate range for grappling.  Yet if we swap those ranges we're onto something.  With the possible exception of crescent kicks.  I could land a crescent kick behind someone's ear at that distance but I would connect with my ankle.  I'm not sure if I would want to use my ankle as a striking surface.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Kacey (Jul 7, 2007)

As I said, you can believe what you like; I know what I've done, and I know what I've seen others do... and I also take into account moving the body to change balance points and range, which you apparently are not.

I'm not going to argue with you, as I see no purpose in it; neither, however, am I going to retract a statement based on an incident I know to have taken place.


----------



## howard (Jul 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Just to clear up a few questions:  high kick *not *a front kick, it does not follow the same trajectory, and yes, it starts by bringing the knee as high as possible so the foot can then move up in a straight line - which is how I can kick above my head with it - with power and focus, despite all those who say it cannot happen...


Hi,

I underlined part of what I quoted, because I have a question about that particular point.

If I bring my knee to my chest, so that my thigh is basically parallel to my chest (and vertical to the ground if I'm standing straight), when I swing my lower leg up from the knee to kick with my foot, how is my foot going to move in a straight line?  Is it not going to move in an arc, the center of which is my knee, and the circumference of which is described by my foot?

Seems that the only way I could make my foot travel straight upward, in a vertical line, would be to move my knee back and then inward somehow.  Otherwise, I don't see how what you seem to have described is physically possible.  Perhaps I'm misunderstanding some aspect of this kick?

Just a thought on the situation you describe your friend having found himself in... if you can raise your knee to your chest comfortably, I think a more high-percentage technique in that situation is a simple knee drive to your attacker's sternum or solar plexus.  You can add power to the knee drive by grabbing him by his lapels, or around his neck with one hand, and pulling him into the strike.  If you're quite flexible, you can even put the knee in his face.

Not intended as a criticism of your friend's technique, just an alternative that a lot of people might find more practical.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jul 7, 2007)

Here's how I came to respect high kicks to the head. For years I wouldn't do them because I didn't see the point. Why kick the head when their knees and groin are so much closer? From a technical aspect, closer is quicker, and so I focused my training accordingly.


Then I busted my knee and had to relearn to do everything. just to get to the point where I could walk without intense pain, I had to do massive amounts of stretching and muscle conditioning. when I got back into training, I my sensei had me go with the maxim "train high, kick low".  He reasoned that If I could kick to the head or above with great speed and power, how much more effective would my low kicks then be? Made sense so I went with it. While training high kicks I discovered that sometimes an opponent presents no other target than his head at a greater range than I could quickly get in with a fist.

Now high kicking is fully integrated into my martial arts.


----------



## foot2face (Jul 7, 2007)

MJS said:


> Thanks for the compliment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Mike, please understand my comments were in no way directed towards you, I tried to convey this but obviously failed.  I was merely making use of your words.  The point I was trying to make is that there is a distinction between being a very good kicker, which I'm sure you are, and having extensive and specific training. Your master standing in front of you drilling you over and over for what seems like a million times, on the hundreds of ways to bring your foot to an other mans head.
By any standard, I'm good with my hands, but I'm confident that I have no where near the proficiency that you have as such an experienced practitioner of Kempo and Arnis.  It's simply a difference of philosophy and training.

Again please understand my previous remarks were not directed towards you, just the phrase "It is my preference."

Respectfully- Foot2Face


----------



## Marginal (Jul 7, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> That's one heck of a timing you talk about. I was under the impression that in the story Kacey related the attacker was walking not running towards Terry.


That would make it a little easier rather than harder IMO. (As long as the guy wasn't paying much attention to the legs while he was approaching. By the sound of it, he was more interested in pockets etc.) 



> Again all these distances are factored without hip projection which is essential to generate power!!


Mmmm... Hip projection's not really important in that particular kick. Most of the kick's focused straight up, the ball of hte foot's a small point of focus anyway, and the power's largely generated by the momentum of the knee traveling upward. You don't need much more than that to mess up someone's jaw in this case. 

So assuming that the distance was just a little within arm's reach (which I usually consider to be close range) instead of a specific distance like 18", I don't find the mechanics unbeleiveable.


----------



## bluemtn (Jul 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Just to clear up a few questions: high kick *not *a front kick, it does not follow the same trajectory, and yes, it starts by bringing the knee as high as possible so the foot can then move up in a straight line - which is how I can kick above my head with it - with power and focus, despite all those who say it cannot happen. No, I don't believe Terry exaggerated or mistook the distances.


 


Marginal said:


> That would make it a little easier rather than harder IMO. (As long as the guy wasn't paying much attention to the legs while he was approaching. By the sound of it, he was more interested in pockets etc.)
> 
> Mmmm... Hip projection's not really important in that particular kick. Most of the kick's focused straight up, the ball of hte foot's a small point of focus anyway, and the power's largely generated by the momentum of the knee traveling upward. You don't need much more than that to mess up someone's jaw in this case.


 
Sorry get a little off task here, but now I'm curious as to what kick it is.  Again, I'm not saying such kicks are useless, just my prefference, and at close range, is somewhat discouraged where I go.  Perhaps it's something I can work on for myself, and learn on my own and come to my personal conclusion. 

Is it like a crescent kick, but where it comes from is different, or am I off?  Feel free to p.m. me...


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 7, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Personnely, I don't kick much in the first place. I'm too top heavy really. I have the flexiblity and balance, but not enough balance to try it too much. I have however seen a video of a Tae Kwon Do guy (WTF I think) doing a jump spinning hook kick to his opponents head. The guy went down, and stayed there. Out cold after ONE kick (who says Tae Kwon Do/Karate isn't real?). If only I could post attachments.


 
But not getting that kick off successfully could spell disasterous mistake for the person who threw the kick.  Once your foot is off the ground, you're at risk.  The higher off the ground, the greater the risk.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Like any other technique, high kicks work better for some people than others; if they work for you (and I know plenty of people they work for - me included, for some kicks) - GREAT! If they don't work for you, but they are part of your MA, learn them, improve them as best they can, and gain strength and flexibility from the practice... and maybe, someday, they will work. Maybe they won't - but they won't if you don't try.
> 
> Also like any other technique, if you tell yourself high kicks don't work, and therefore don't practice them - or don't practice them as if they work - then they won't. Everyone has techniques they prefer - techniques that work for them for whatever reason - and they tend to practice those techniques the most, and therefore those techniques continue to get better, and work better, than the techniques they don't like and therefore don't practice as often or as hard.


 
Kosho's question was about high kicks in the street.  I would assume he's asking about it's practicality.  Is this what you're asking Kosho?


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 7, 2007)

Marginal said:


> So assuming that the distance was just a little within arm's reach (which I usually consider to be close range) instead of a specific distance like 18", I don't find the mechanics unbeleiveable.


 
Specifically, if said kick is delivered with my own arm and hand outstretched in front of me the foot would touch the bottom of the knuckles on the palm.  I measured this distance and this is 30" (it would be 36" with hip projection which you say is not necessary).  If you read the post you quoted more thoroughly you'd see I already said I could see that working with a walking attacker.  That's not close range fighting and certainly not the 12" -18" range Kacey is claiming.  That kick delivered at 18" requires a standing split and the attacker closing in at 15mph.  Or if we're to use leaning so we can extend our 21" lever (knee to foot) even with knee to chest one would have to lean back 12" to 16" to bring the foot up from chamber.  Read my last post and think about the numbers.

Let me lay out my view on striking ranges.
Long Range: 30" to 44" Kicking to waist level or higher only.
Mid Range: 20" to 32" Most Hand techniques, Kicking from knee to waist level, and wrist grabs.
Close Range: 1" to 19" Collapsed hand techniques, elbows, forearms, knees, kicks to the knees or lower, and grappling.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 7, 2007)

Nebuchadnezzar said:


> Kosho's question was about high kicks in the street. I woud assume he's asking about it's practicality. Is this what you're asking Kosho?


 


Kosho Gakkusei said:


> I was checking out the thread in the TKD forum about Forms/Pooms and it morphed into a debate about the effectiveness of high kicks to the head. *What are your thoughts about high kicks on the street?*


 
yes.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Then you don't know - or don't train - the right kicks, and that's your choice. But I know plenty of people who do. Here's an example:
> 
> Terry, a BB I knew when I started TKD as a white belt was walking back to his car from class. He had his gym bag in one hand, and his briefcase in the other. He was approached by 2 men, one of whom said "D'you have any change?" The other man had started to fade to Terry's rear as the first man attempted to panhandle.
> 
> ...


 
This would fall under the banner of "Total Surprise" don't you think?


----------



## seasoned (Jul 8, 2007)

I have seen people kicked in the head in the dojo and I have seen people kicked in the knee in the dojo also. Head kick, not always effective because of hand and arm defense, but knee kicks holy cow. When in the 
street we wear American clothing not gis or all the loose garb they wear in the karate movies. If I want to minimize someones movement then the leg it is. Of course I speck from a traditional perspective with GoJu 
kata as my base of reference. I guess it all depends on our style and comfort zone. If I taught a 8 week self defense course to people in street clothes, which would be practical in street clothes, then low kicks it has to be. I wouldn't dream of taking a little old ladies 40.00 for the self defense course and then teach her a head kick. Just some of my thoughts on the subject and ofcourse just my opinion.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 8, 2007)

I re-read Kaceys story and noticed something.


Kacey said:


> Terry, a BB I knew when I started TKD as a white belt was walking back to his car from class. He had his gym bag in one hand, and his briefcase in the other. He was approached by 2 men, one of whom said "D'you have any change?" The other man had started to fade to Terry's rear as the first man attempted to panhandle.
> 
> Terry said no, and the first man said "D'you have any bills I can have?"
> 
> Terry said no again, and the first man (who was now within grabbing distance) said "The you'll have to give me everything you have!" and *reached out to grab* Terry by the front of his shirt.


When someone is within grabbing distance (18" or less) one *does not need to reach out to grab.*  One only needs to simply grab.  Remember, I'm 5' 9 1/2" as tall as Terry in the story yet apparently shorter than his attaker, my elbow to fingertips measures 18".  If Terry, says his attacker reached for him then he was clearly further than 18" and at a minimum of 2' to 2 1/2' (30").  If you read this post http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=818269&postcount=33 you will see again it's consistent with these findings.  I can see the timing of this defenese working at that distance but it's not close range fighting.


Kacey said:


> Terry placed 1 high kick (like a front kick, but the target is parallel to the ground - and it's a short range kick, really only effective within 18" or so) under the first guy's chin; the first guy was unconscious before he hit the sidewalk. Terry whirled around to hit the second guy, but he was already gone.
> 
> His story was corroborated by a woman who was just leaving a nearby office building, who saw the whole thing and ducked back in to call the police.
> 
> As I recall, Terry was 5'9" or 5'10" - from the description he gave, the guy he knocked out was about 6'.


Terry's description of the distances involved at 18" is not consistent with the rest of the story.  An attacker reaching for a grab is not within 18".

Retell me the story and substitute 26" to 30" for the distance and I will no longer have a dispute.  Please stop trying to pass off a high kick to the head as a close range defense.

High kicks can work under the right circumstances but in close (18" or less) is not one of them.


_Don Flatt


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

foot2face said:


> Mike, please understand my comments were in no way directed towards you, I tried to convey this but obviously failed. I was merely making use of your words. The point I was trying to make is that there is a distinction between being a very good kicker, which I'm sure you are, and having extensive and specific training. Your master standing in front of you drilling you over and over for what seems like a million times, on the hundreds of ways to bring your foot to an other mans head.
> By any standard, I'm good with my hands, but I'm confident that I have no where near the proficiency that you have as such an experienced practitioner of Kempo and Arnis. It's simply a difference of philosophy and training.
> 
> Again please understand my previous remarks were not directed towards you, just the phrase "It is my preference."
> ...


 
No worries.   The high kicking was usually something done as I said, just during sparring, ie: low/high combo kicks, etc.  I can't think of any of the SD techniques in which a kick is more than chest height.  Like you said, if this was something that I trained on a more regular basis, I'd probably be better at it.  

Thanks for the good discussion. 

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

Nebuchadnezzar said:


> But not getting that kick off successfully could spell disasterous mistake for the person who threw the kick. Once your foot is off the ground, you're at risk. The higher off the ground, the greater the risk.


 
I've had this happen to me on more than one occassion, with an axe kick and roundhouse kick.  Like I said, timing and telegraphing are things to keep in mind, and I apparently didn't take that into consideration at the time, so the person I was sparring caught both kicks and easily could've dumped me but didn't. 

Good points though.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Specifically, if said kick is delivered with my own arm and hand outstretched in front of me the foot would touch the bottom of the knuckles on the palm. I measured this distance and this is 30" (it would be 36" with hip projection which you say is not necessary). If you read the post you quoted more thoroughly you'd see I already said I could see that working with a walking attacker. That's not close range fighting and certainly not the 12" -18" range Kacey is claiming. That kick delivered at 18" requires a standing split and the attacker closing in at 15mph. Or if we're to use leaning so we can extend our 21" lever (knee to foot) even with knee to chest one would have to lean back 12" to 16" to bring the foot up from chamber. Read my last post and think about the numbers.
> 
> Let me lay out my view on striking ranges.
> Long Range: 30" to 44" Kicking to waist level or higher only.
> ...


 
Interesting points about the distance and the speed in which the attacker is closing on us.  Even during sparring, I've landed side kicks and while they landed, due to the opponents force, you still get moved back some.  

As for close range...for myself, I consider that to be within arms reach.  If I can touch the person or clinch with them, I don't see how I would be able to bring my foot high enough to kick to the head.  

Mike


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 8, 2007)

MJS said:


> Interesting points about the distance and the speed in which the attacker is closing on us. Even during sparring, I've landed side kicks and while they landed, due to the opponents force, you still get moved back some.
> 
> As for close range...for myself, I consider that to be within arms reach. If *I can touch the person or clinch with them, I don't see how I would be able to bring my foot high enough to kick to the head. *
> 
> Mike


 
My feelings as well.  Any frontward kick would be jammed in chamber or shortly after.  Side kicks would be jammed in the same way. A rear leg roundhouse would at best catch on an arm.  The best bet would be an outside-in crescent but then you still have bear in mind how long your on one foot with an attacker so close and it's hard to imagine them standing still for that long in the event they blocked the kick or it didn't have enough force to knock them out.  The crescent is not the fastest or most poweful of kicks.

_Don Flatt


----------



## exile (Jul 8, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Specifically, if said kick is delivered with my own arm and hand outstretched in front of me the foot would touch the bottom of the knuckles on the palm.  I measured this distance and this is 30" (it would be 36" with hip projection which you say is not necessary).  If you read the post you quoted more thoroughly you'd see I already said I could see that working with a walking attacker.  That's not close range fighting and certainly not the 12" -18" range Kacey is claiming.  That kick delivered at 18" requires a standing split and the attacker closing in at 15mph.  Or if we're to use leaning so we can extend our 21" lever (knee to foot) even with knee to chest one would have to lean back 12" to 16" to bring the foot up from chamber.  Read my last post and think about the numbers.



This tallies exactly with various experiments I've been trying with these kicks. 

In dobok bottoms, I can get my knee, at maximum height (where my quads are up against my upper body) around 5"-6" inches from my chest. From what I've observed of my fellow TKDists, none of them, no matter how many years of training they've done, can get much closer than 4" or so at max height. My lower leg is a bit more than 22" long. That means that at some point, when my lower leg is perpendicular to the line of my body, my kicking leg will be extended 28". If the assailant is any closer than that, my foot will contact him&#8212;_at the highest!_&#8212;at the point on his body corresponding to the height at which my leg is extended. Assuming he's my height, I'm going to be contacting him at a height a little below the shoulder. This is under perfect, even artifical conditions. To kick any height so that I would not be contacting him `on the way up', I would have to lean back at an angle that would leave me unacceptably off balance.

But when people talk about practicality for street defense, they're talking about not two feet and a few inches; they're talking about toe-to-toe or maybe a little more separation. I can't say I've had a lot of such confrontations&#8212;that, btw, is why I appeal to the experience of people who _routinely_ have them, people whose professions require their involvement in serious violence, collectively, several times a week over, say, a 10-year career&#8212;but in none of the ones I _have_ been involved in would anything over 12" have been anything but preemptive striking range. In every case, the fight was initiated from very close up, by a would-be sucker punch, a shoving action, or a grab.




Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Let me lay out my view on striking ranges.
> Long Range: 30" to 44" Kicking to waist level or higher only.
> Mid Range: 20" to 32" Most Hand techniques, Kicking from knee to waist level, and wrist grabs.
> Close Range: 1" to 19" Collapsed hand techniques, elbows, forearms, knees, kicks to the knees or lower, and grappling.
> ...



I think Don's estimate of close range is definitely in the ballpark, possibly even a little bit generous; a foot or so is, from my own experience, much closer to the expected range, and people who, however unwillingly, actually engage in street combat with others for a living&#8212;_people who know something about streetfighting based on years of doing it on a regular basis for a living_&#8212;typically give around a foot as the `close range' at which physical attacks start. Unless we're talking about preemptive striking, any kick which extends the leg much beyond a foot/foot and a half is going to contact the attacker's body at that range. 

Now factor in relatively constricting street clothes, street shoes, uneven surfaces, undependable areal illumination and all the other factors people who actually do this stuff for a living caution us about, and the reasons they identify high kicks to the head as excessively risky might become apparent. They're not talking about your skill in throwing them into the air or in sparring situations in dojangs; they're talking about what they themselves have _repeatedly_ experienced as a result of their... career choices. When people talk about `training' these kicks, are they talking about training them, repeadedly in live combat practice which closely simulates an actual streetfight? In realistic scenarios not with opponents, but `designated attackers' whose moves you have no prior idea about and who can do virtually _anything_ to you, operate in any way, that a violent, untrained assailant will&#8212;i.e., stage 4 of Abernethy's `kata-based sparring', as kidswarrior summarized here? How many people actually train _anything_, any tech, this way on a regular basis? So when people say they `train high kicks for SD', how much realistic `SD' actually comes into that training&#8212;actually meets that standard of realism? Because, while it may seem obvious, it's probably as well to point out that that training standard is the _minimum_ standard of training which will actually allow you to ingrain your SD techs for actual use at the next stage of `training'... namely, the extremely nasty, dangerous real thing.

If a professional boxer tells me that punching with _both_ arms at once is a very bad idea, I'm not going to try to counter that advice by reporting the single occasion when I did that to an opponent and won with it. And if a half a dozen professional boxers tell me the same thing&#8212;and no seventh one in the conversation challenged their view&#8212;I think anyone who heard me reply that their problem was that they `didn't train for it' and so couldn't make it work(, but that if I, a complete non-boxer, train for it, I _can_ make it work) would just shake their head at me, and justifiably so. Because these guys box for a living, and I don't. And in the present discussion, the issue is not MA expertise, the issue is practical street combat expertise&#8212;whether you fight in real, typically chaotic situation frequently. There are plenty of highly competent MAists who do not engage in violence professionally. I would guess that most of MT's membership, or a good chunk of it, falls into that category. And there are other highly competent MAists who routinely use their MA skills in violent situations on a regular, sometimes daily basis; our LEO members, for example, or people who work as `gatekeepers' in rough surroundings. Some of these people have taken the trouble to lay out in detail exactly why, tactically, high kicks to the head are way more trouble than they're worth, no matter how hard you train them, when you're in what Geoff Thompson calls the pavement arena. These guys train beyond stage 4: they're at stage 5&#8212;actual regular, messy, brutal conflict with angry, drunk, drugged-up or just pathological attackers.  Opposing what non-professionals report, or believe about the applicability of their art to what people who do this stuff for a living report is, therefore, hardly opposing `experience' to `theory', or even opposing two sets of equally representative experience. It's opposing the experience of people whose `going to work' will involve, on any given day, dangerous attacks by violent individuals with those of us who train, and perhaps teach, MAs as our avocation and `go to work' in offices, classrooms, factories, and all the other places where one _doesn't_ enounter that kind of violence. If people whose jobs of are the former variety caution you against something involving street defense, it seems to me worth paying very close attention to, just as it is when your doctor, looking at some innocent-seeming mole on your face, tells you you need it biopsied right away. Even if it looks innocent to you, even if you've ignored odd-looking moles in the past that indeed _did_ turn out to be innocent, just how good an idea is it to ignore what your MD is telling you? 

Obviously, no one is saying you _must_ pay attention to that advice, or the advice of people who have a knowledge of real-time violence very few MAists, as good as they are, possess. If you don't want to believe what these people are saying, or even take the trouble to find out what it is, well, that's up to you.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 8, 2007)

Could I be off on the distance?  Certainly.  Does that change the fact that a high kick to the head was effective in a self-defense situation?  Not at all - and that _was_ the original question, sparked in the thread this came from - could kicks to the head really work in a self-defense situation.  All of the discussion about distance and angles and everything else saying why it couldn't have worked does not change the fact that it _did_ work... and therefore I see no reason to respond further to those who say it can't.

As far as distancing goes - well, first of all, I don't necessarily agree with the ranges given, and secondly, there's nothing that says a technique can't be at least somewhat effective even if it's not fully extended.  Have you ever been kicked by a knee instead of a foot?  Been kicked by a side kick that was "too close" (in that it couldn't be fully extended)?  Been kick with a shin or calf because the kicker was "too close" (in that the kicking foot was past the target)?  I have... and while they may not do as much damage as intended, or in exactly the place intended, they call still hurt, and still cause damage - and isn't that the point?

As far as those things that can't be explained through graphs, diagrams, geometry, whatever science you choose to apply - those are the things that make this an art.  Some things cannot be explained from a purely scientific viewpoint - lifting a car off an injured person is theoretically impossible _under normal circumstances_ - but under _abnormal _circumstances, people have managed to do it... or perhaps the art is in advance of the science that could someday explain it, just as science has now explained how people can lift cars when they really, really need to.


----------



## 14 Kempo (Jul 8, 2007)

I believe kicking to the head is valid in a fight situation ... of course, for me, that is after I've buckled them with a kick to the groin. However, even in this situation, being a Kempoist, I would most likely drop them with a hand strike from this position, or maybe a knee to the face.

In a practice situation, kicks to head level are conceivable, balance is comprimised while on one foot, especially with the other foot some 6 feet off the ground, but again, it is practice. There is no doubt that TKD, and other kicking arts, practitioners are much more effective kicking to higher levels, I truly believe that, kicking is thier art's way. As a Kempoist, my training has me trying to be in a body check situation with a kicker, constantly checking legs, pinning arms and striking to vital areas. _(I've never studied TKD or another art of that type, so I know I'm making assumptions, don't quote please)_

Don't get me wrong here, I'm in no way saying that a kicking art would not have a chance against a Kempoist, what I am saying is that I try to jam them, keep them off balance, take their favorite weapons away ... but then again, they are trying to do what they do best and it can go either way at any given time! It's a matter of space, they want to work from their space and range, I'm trying to work from mine. Whoever finds it, has a better chance of coming out on top in that particular confrontation. With most ranked kicking artists, it can very often only take one good shot.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 8, 2007)

Ok,
This has got to be one of the funniest threads I have ever read.
The people who say this won't work are the same people on this thread who keep saying... I don't understand, I don't understand. Yet expouse that they are experts and try to spout supposed facts, which are pure subjective assumptions about things they don't understand. (Because they read in a book somewhere, don't understand...)

Which just porved the posts on the first page that they don't train enough with high section kicks to understand how they work. To try and teach you on a web page would be the same as those who say, by my book it will show you which techniques are valid and work. HA Sales pitch

First off, there is a big difference between a high kick and a high section kick. As a high kick is an actual kick itself, and a high section kick is anything thrown with a target above the shoulders.

1) *Still_learning* - you have shown the most wisdom with you post which these pundant advocates against high kicks missed on the first page. 

2) *Searcher* - Yes your comment about the high kicks being dangerious are true. However, how is this different from your hands? Do you not train your techniques at a focus point. If I punch you in the temple, sternum, or knife hand you in the Vegas nerve, what would also be the reaction? Leg, hand, elbow, no difference.

3) *Nebuchadnezzar* - But not getting that kick off successfully could spell disasterous mistake for the person who threw the kick. Once your foot is off the ground, you're at risk. The higher off the ground, the greater the risk.

some responses:

one - DUH, same disasterous mistake if you punch someone in the pectoral vs the sternum. Or get your hand technique jammed...

two - what makes you think I kick that slow?

three -what makes you think I am going to just stand their like a stork with my leg up in the air - after you puch do you just leave your arm out? 

four - Or kick you two, three, ... times in other vital spots?

4) *Kosho *- you say you practice things you don't use. That seems a waste of time to me. 

Also your difinitions of distances are off. I can crescent kick you in the head when your face is 6" away from mine. I can lean back or forward when I do any kick but my leaning is not a stationary variable either. I can lean back when I pick up my leg and I can lean forward when my heel is on your temple. 

So for a short lesson: 
High Section Kicking is all a matter of radius from your waist. Therefore, by the laws of physics the most powerful kicks are parallel to the ground (or slightly lower - where we power break) as the most power you can impart is at a right angle to your target. This is why most older hard styles do not kick above the waist and is why TKD is a leader in this aspect.
However, I do not need to fold a heavy bag in half in order to drop you when I kick you in the head. I mearly use a basic principal called focus as the mass of my leg will do the trick! 

What you need to understand is that by the sheer physical definition that I gave you most all high section kicks ARE close range. Heck, I can even hook kick you in the back of the head while we are in a clinch.

And can I kick straight up, sure can, most people can, as there is a big difference in kicking straight up and holding my leg straight up (tense muscles vs. relaxed muscles) By yellow belt I can have a good 80% of my students kicking straight up.

So the fact that most here don't know the difference in the trajectory between a high kick and a front kick (and I don't mean a high section kick, I mean a high kick because there is no such thing as a high front kick - it is a physical impossibility) shows the lack of knowlege of high section kicking.

5) *Seasoned* - You talked about kicking to the knee - what is a non dangerious focal point on the knee vs a non dangerious focal pt on the head. So you say the knee was more affective? What if the knee is not an open target but the head is?? Are you now SOL? A target is mearly a target (Mushashi - Book of five rings)


To end, as far as *Exile*, You slay me the most as you have read books by bar bouncers that don't use high kicks. Therefore you state this as it must be fact, based on books, and people who are not experts in the subject of high section kicks, that this must be true.

Exile tends to state things as fact which are mearly supposition and then the "you must prove me wrong" statement.

Well, the one example by Kacey just proved you wrong... and then when proved wrong changes the subjec to minor, moot points such as balance and distenceing and I don't get it, and I don't understand. Then you are going to have a boxer tell me about Martial arts punching - Don't think so.  That would be like me telling a boxer he needs to kick - Nope, doesn't work that way either. Reguardless of the change of subject, your assumption was proven wrong. 

For every example you give, one can be given in counter. You can not change the goal line just because you don't like the results!

The problem is that when debating affectiveness/validity/realism it should never be based on:
- your opinion
- if someone likes something
- if someone doesn't understand something
- if someone outside of a field (claiming to be an expert) wrote a book about something and discredited something they don't understand(high section kicking)

Shoot, didn't we see this when there were people writing that the earth was flat?

Just ask anyone who has defended themselves with high kicks and you will get the same shaking of the head, in disbelief, over your assumpitons as you yourself stated.

And for those of you who discard high section techniques because of people touting assumptions based on non-experts, I would be affraid of what other generalizations they would make for you based on thier own opinion. That is why everyone loves the WTF no punching to the face instruction 

IMHO - if a technique has/is being used then it is just a matter of how much I practice with it to "if it is good". It is not the technique, it is me. Discarding something based on someones statements who does not have expertise in the field seems just as dangerious as underestimating your opponent.

As my instructor taught me, "Even a bad side kick will hurt you!"

When you use a hammer, every problem looks like a nail
LMAO


----------



## exile (Jul 8, 2007)

14 Kempo said:


> I believe kicking to the head is valid in a fight situation ... of course, for me, that is after I've buckled them with a kick to the groin. However, even in this situation, being a Kempoist, I would most likely drop them with a hand strike from this position, or maybe a knee to the face.



Ditto&#8212;from a TKDist.



14 Kempo said:


> In a practice situation, kicks to head level are conceivable, balance is comprimised while on one foot, especially with the other foot some 6 feet off the ground, but again, it is practice. There is no doubt that TKD, and other kicking arts, practitioners are much more effective kicking to higher levels, I truly believe that, kicking is thier art's way.



If you practice kicking a lot, you're going to be better at it. But there are _inherent_ problems with high kicking in the chaotic situation of a streetfight on broken or uneven ground or a cluttered environment that have nothing to do with anyone's skill in throwing kicks in a dojang training or tournament sparring situation, or other non-life-threatening situation. 



14 Kempo said:


> As a Kempoist, my training has me trying to be in a body check situation with a kicker, constantly checking legs, pinning arms and striking to vital areas. _(I've never studied TKD or another art of that type, so I know I'm making assumptions, don't quote please)_
> 
> Don't get me wrong here, I'm in no way saying that a kicking art would not have a chance against a Kempoist, what I am saying is that I try to jam them, keep them off balance, take their favorite weapons away ... but then again, they are trying to do what they do best and it can go either way at any given time! It's a matter of space, they want to work from their space and range, I'm trying to work from mine. Whoever finds it, has a better chance of coming out on top in that particular confrontation. With most ranked kicking artists, it can very often only take one good shot.



I understand what you're saying, K14, but the issue, if you look at the way this thread originated and has progressed, isn't MAist agains MAist. The issue is MAist against belligerant almost-but-not-quite drunk in a pub, who decides that you bother him, or against sadist who decides that he needs to feel good by beating up someone that evening and decides on you, or against road-rage bully who thinks you've cut him off and follows you to your destination&#8212;and who's done this sort of thing before... again, please look at my previous post. These are not `contest' situations. 

At this point, I'm pretty much inclined to agree with Kosho's request for some visual evidence for the kinds of kicks being talked about, so we have some idea what the distances and scale are. And I'd still like to talk about why we should discount the best advice of people&#8212;trained MAists all but also experienced (though unwilling) streetfighters on the basis of individual stories which we're not able to assess&#8212;who know what works and doesn't in very close range fighting, because they _do_ it. People who lift cars off their trapped children are not doing the same thing as constructing a Euclidean triangle whose angles sum to 150º. Paul Anderson, maybe the greatest powerlifter of all time, is credited with a back lift of several thousand pounds, easily enough to get a car off a pinned victim, and the accomplishments of the great weightlifters of the  past makes it clear that human beings are _capable_ of these feats. But the delivery of very-near-vertical kicks where the minimum distance between the attacker and the defender is less than the sum of the length of the defendent's lower leg plus the distance of the defenders knee to his or her chest... that's what is delicately described in the literatures on pseudoscience and on eyewitness reliability as an `extraordinary claim'. And as the official literature of e.g. the Center for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal puts it, extraordinary claims require extraordinary levels of empirical support. 

So far as I can see, then, there is on the one hand a set of anecdotal claims based on unreplicable events that some `miracle' occurred, and on the other hand the collective judgment of self-defense professionals, trained TMAists all with decades of active street violence behind them&#8212;a `training' regime which I very much doubt any of us posting on this thread have pursued&#8212;who consider high kicks, attempted in nasty, chaotic street conditions in street clothes, to be a very, very _bad_ idea. I know which approach I'd pursue if my life depended on it. But that's just me...


----------



## seasoned (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold

I guess the little old Lady scenario didnt make my point. How about as we get older we begin to lose flexibility. How about my style does not teach high kicks and yours does. How about we take two people with no martial arts experience and train them for 1 day, one with head kicks and the other with knee kicks and see how they do. How about the head is harder to hit and the knees are easier. We could debate this until the cows come home but in the end you will have your opinion and I will have mine. Yes the head is very vulnerable to impact and this I will agree on. I guess what we are talking about here is choice, knee or head. I dont want to get hit in either place. You sound like a very talented individual, good luck.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 8, 2007)

exile said:


> Dittofrom a TKDist.
> If you practice kicking a lot, you're going to be better at it. But there are _inherent_ problems with high kicking in the chaotic situation of a streetfight on broken or uneven ground or a cluttered environment that have nothing to do with anyone's skill in throwing kicks in a dojang training or tournament sparring situation, or other non-life-threatening situation.
> 
> I understand what you're saying, K14, but the issue, if you look at the way this thread originated and has progressed, isn't MAist agains MAist. The issue is MAist against belligerant almost-but-not-quite drunk in a pub, who decides that you bother him, or against sadist who decides that he needs to feel good by beating up someone that evening and decides on you, or against road-rage bully who thinks you've cut him off and follows you to your destinationand who's done this sort of thing before... again, please look at my previous post. These are not `contest' situations.
> ...


 
Wow,
I haven't seen it so it's not valid.

Now we move the goal posts even farther.
Do you know that with this logic you have just discredited all your own stories. We haven't seen the people in your books so they don't apply.
Your logic is getting worse unless you meant to call those who have seen and have defended themselves with high kicks liars.
Is that what you meant?
Did you mean to call me a liar, because I have defended myself with high section kicks?
Did you mean to call Kacey a liar because you did not see it?
Please clarify because your logic keeps changing?

So for those of you out there that defended yourself with high section kicks, we now know for a fact that it was a miracle.

I don't know if this is the approch, nor logic, that many would want to take. But as you said, that is just me.

So as far as your experts, you have stated experts who are not experts in the field that you are discussing (High section kicking). Kind of where your logic started to fall apart.

But as far as the situation, BAHH, that is just a matter of focus.
So I don't know why I would lose my ability to hit a target if I'm in a bar, or in street cloathes (well, in the 70's when skin tight jeans were in at the disco it was a problem), or outside. With the logic you have used so far this would extrapolate to you couldn't punch in a bar either. Not sure why the situation would impead my focus.
A target is a target (Book of 5 rings -ahh, you didn't see Musashi so therfore it's not true  )

You may now call me St. Doug
:angel:


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 8, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy **http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sho...d.php?p=427486**. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Super Moderator-
*


----------



## DArnold (Jul 8, 2007)

seasoned said:


> DArnold
> 
> I guess the little old Lady scenario didnt make my point. How about as we get older we begin to lose flexibility. How about my style does not teach high kicks and yours does. How about we take two people with no martial arts experience and train them for 1 day, one with head kicks and the other with knee kicks and see how they do. How about the head is harder to hit and the knees are easier. We could debate this until the cows come home but in the end you will have your opinion and I will have mine. Yes the head is very vulnerable to impact and this I will agree on. I guess what we are talking about here is choice, knee or head. I dont want to get hit in either place. You sound like a very talented individual, good luck.


 
Thanks,
I probably did get more carried away than I should but some do not realize that juniors read this. I tend to bristle when someone states something based on some bar-room, hand-fighter, and then wants to pass it off to the world, and juniors, as written in stone fact. Could you immagine if everyone did this.  Man, this site would look like the Bulshido site.

I agree with everything except that the knees are easier to hit than the head. I find most people protect their knees better than they do their head. (Ahh and those fun loving WTF fighters)
WHOA
Thanks again
DAA


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold said:


> But as far as the situation, BAHH, that is just a matter of focus.
> So I don't know why I would lose my ability to hit a target if I'm in a bar, or in street cloathes (well, in the 70's when skin tight jeans were in at the disco it was a problem), or outside. With the logic you have used so far this would extrapolate to you couldn't punch in a bar either. Not sure why the situation would impead my focus.
> A target is a target (Book of 5 rings -ahh, you didn't see Musashi so therfore it's not true  )
> 
> ...


 
A theory that I like to go by is...environment and target availability dictate what I do.  That being said, in a packed club, yes, it may very well be difficult to execute certain things.  As I've said in other posts, I'd rather take advantage of a lower target in a situation like than, than risk a high kick.  Just last night, I was at the casino watching a show.  When that show let out, it was literally a sea of people.  Everyone walking in every direction.  That being said, if I needed to defend myself, and if I opted to kick, there is a 99.99% chance that if the kick was anything more than a knee, stomp to the foot, or very low line kick, that it would be not effective or even possible to execute.


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold said:


> I agree with everything except that the knees are easier to hit than the head. I find most people protect their knees better than they do their head. (Ahh and those fun loving WTF fighters)
> WHOA
> Thanks again
> DAA


 
IMHO, I think its easier and not as easily telegraphed to target the knee compared to the head.  Maybe I'm just not following what you're saying here.  Would you clarify please?

Mike


----------



## exile (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Wow,
> I haven't seen it so it's not valid.



On the contrary, DA. I haven't seen it, and it strains credulity (see what I was talking about in my last post), so I'd like some replicable evidence! 




DArnold said:


> Now we move the goal posts even farther.
> Do you know that with this logic you have just discredited all your own stories. We haven't seen the people in your books so they don't apply.



I feel a bit embarrassed by having to put it in these terms, DA; I'm afraid it's going to appear patronizing, and I don't intend that at all. But you seem to be having a very difficult time absorbing the previous discussion, so it may be convenient to break it down in the following way:

1. I am citing the eperience of people whose streetfighting careers are a matter of public record, recognized by MAists in the UK and the other venues where they've made their careers over many years. Their activities have been documented in newspaper stories and gone over with a fine-tooth-comb by member of their local `reality-based SD' communities. And btw, relevant to something you mentioned in an earlier post, they are bouncers, doormen, LEOs both in civilian life and the military, and security consultants and operatives; but they are also high dan ranks in Shotokan, Gojo-ryu and other TMAs, including judo and FMAs. Their work has been read and favorably reviewed by well-informed and well-respected MAists who have experience in this rather unpleasant aspect of MA application, and so far as I know, no one has yet called their street competence or authority into question. That authority rests on decades in the business. So their credentials in this area are bona fide.

2. The issue of plausibility does not arise in connection with the authorities whose views I've alluded to, but rather with the possibility of a head high kick against an attacker in the 1' range. There was, as you may have noticed, some discussion of angles and numbers in the previous posts, and several of us expressed considerable skepticism about the actions described. Kacey posted the following:



			
				Kacey said:
			
		

> As far as those things that can't be explained through graphs, diagrams, geometry, whatever science you choose to apply - those are the things that make this an art. *Some things cannot be explained from a purely scientific viewpoint - lifting a car off an injured person is theoretically impossible under normal circumstances - but under abnormal circumstances, people have managed to do it... *or perhaps the art is in advance of the science that could someday explain it, just as science has now explained how people can lift cars when they really, really need to.



(emphasis added). So the issue, DA, is whether the events under discussion actually _could_ happen the way they were described, given the issues that arose, which seem to require a geometrically impossible arrangement of body parts&#8212;_assuming_ that the kick in question was delivered less than 12" from the attacker's head. If it in fact was not, then things are very different, but the SD range in question Kosho and I were assuming was on the order of a foot to 15". We therefore have a problem seeing the kicks described as applicable in this range and suspect that the distances involved may have been a bit greater than those reported... in what I would describe as the preemptive striking range.

3. So, based on our estimates of what realistic personal self-defense ranges are, we are asking for some more solid corroboration of the possibility of doing these kicks in the SD (as vs. pre-emptive striking) range. All of this is rather self-evident, I think, if you pay a bit of attention to the content of the preceding posts in the thread.



DArnold said:


> Your logic is getting worse unless you meant to call those who have seen and have defended themselves with high kicks liars.
> Is that what you meant?
> Did you mean to call me a liar, because I have defended myself with high section kicks?[
> Did you mean to call Kacey a liar because you did not see it?



You've read the preceding posts in the thread carefully and you're seriously asking if I was accusing anyone of lying??




DArnold said:


> Please clarify because your logic keeps changing?



Does the preceding constitute sufficient clarification for you?




DArnold said:


> So for those of you out there that defended yourself with high section kicks, we now know for a fact that it was a miracle.



On the contrary, DA. I don't believe in miracles, or their invocation as part of any rational explanation. That's why I'm skeptical of the closeness of the estimated distances. The question is whether someone with a 20"&#8211;22" lower leg can do the kind of kick Kacey described to the head of an assailant around 12" distant from the defender, when the latter's leg must pass through a position where it's parallel to the ground (hence, seemingly, requiring at least 20"-22" inches separation if the attacker's body is not to interfere with the completion of the kick to the head). Miracles notwithstanding, the numbers suggest to us a minimum separation of close to two feet between the attacker and the defender. 



DArnold said:


> I don't know if this is the approch, nor logic, that many would want to take. But as you said, that is just me.



No comment, DA! 



DArnold said:


> So as far as your experts, you have stated experts who are not experts in the field that you are discussing (High section kicking). Kind of where your logic started to fall apart.



I haven't `stated experts'. You can't `state experts'. You can state facts, or opinions, or information, but experts are something else! :wink1: But once again, you've missed the crucial, fundamental point at issue, DA, and I'm sorry to say it, but you _keep doing it!_. My references are to people who are _experts in self-defense applications of TMAs._ They do expermimental work&#8212;serious research, of the kind that Iain Abernethy regularly reports on in his newsletter&#8212;on SD applications of kata and hyungs. Abernethy is a sixth dan Issin-ryu karateka, and most of the people in what is, in effect, an expermental research group are similarly qualified. Your assumption that they do not know how to execute any high kick you can think of is... well, breathtaking. Given your evident unfamiliarity with about the karateka and TKDists who Abernethy's group comprises, I'm genuinely surprised that you feel comfortable making these kinds of statements about them.



DArnold said:


> But as far as the situation, BAHH, that is just a matter of focus.
> So I don't know why I would lose my ability to hit a target if I'm in a bar, or in street cloathes (well, in the 70's when skin tight jeans were in at the disco it was a problem), or outside. With the logic you have used so far this would extrapolate to you couldn't punch in a bar either. Not sure why the situation would impead my focus.
> A target is a target (Book of 5 rings -ahh, you didn't see Musashi so therfore it's not true  )



Let me put this as politely as possible: this last quoted section makes no sense whatever. Why wouldn't you be able to punch in a bar? Punching and kicking range are significantly different; I can punch an opponent who's literally pressed up against me. Surely you wouldn claim that you can deliver head kicks to someone who's pressed up against you? 



DArnold said:


> You may now call me St. Doug
> :angel:



All right, St. Doug. So I just want to point out that in this, um, debate we're having, you're attempting to defend a certain position and convince the readers of this thread that you're right and I'm wrong. I'm kind of annoyed that you put me in the position of having to do your work for you, but you'd have a much better chance of convincing people if you (i) stopped being so rude to me and other posters&#8212;it doesn't bother _us_ and it makes you look mean and petty; and (ii) tried to construct prose that was more coherent. You lose your audience if every paragraph you type leaves people wondering just what it is you could possibly be getting at. I'm all for serious argument and severe disagreement&#8212;that's how discoveries are made and the wheat and chaff are sorted out&#8212;but if you continue to be as uncivil as you've been, that's what people will focus on, instead of what you have to say, to the extent that they're able to piece that together.


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Thanks,
> I probably did get more carried away than I should but some do not realize that juniors read this. I tend to bristle when someone states something based on some bar-room, hand-fighter, and then wants to pass it off to the world, and juniors, as written in stone fact. Could you immagine if everyone did this. Man, this site would look like the Bulshido site.


 
You know, you bring up an interesting point with this statement. I agree and disagree with portions of it. Let me explain.

There are countless threads on here discussing TMA and MMA. You will hear the MMAist state that if "X" doesn't work in the ring, its a useless technique. Now, when I hear that, I usually tend to disagree. Just because the MMAist doesnt make it work, doesnt mean that someone else can't. Therefore, my comment, and yours pretty much are in sync. 

Now, if I wanted to improve on my takedown defense, there is a very good chance that I'd seek out someone who really understands the ground, such as someone who trains in a grappling art, ie: BJJ, Sambo, Judo or Wrestling. Why? Because their art is based on the ground. Why would I go to another standup art to learn a specialty? That being said, when Exile mentions the folks such as Geoff Thompson, Marc MacYoung, etc., its because these are folks that deal with the real world most likely much more than any of us have or ever will. A bouncer at a club or a police officer is more apt to deal with violence on a regular basis, therefore, despite what we may have done a few times, they've done much more.

Like I said, for myself, during sparring sessions, I've thrown and landed high kicks. Is there room for error? Absolutely. In the real world, if I had to pick between a low or high kick, I'm most likely going to go for the low one.

Mike


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 8, 2007)

Having just read the thread... I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in.

CAN a head-level kick work in a real combat/real self defense situation?  Absolutely.  People have done it.  Of course, you can also probably successfully use a banana peel for self defense under optimum conditions...  I don't think I'm gonna add a pouch for a banana peel on my gunbelt, though.  In other words -- just because something has worked once, or might work, it's not necessarily a smart idea.

So... since we've established that high kicks can, at least sometimes, work, we have to ask how practical they are for real combat/self-defense.  My opinion?  Not very.  In the real world, we're called on to use self defense skills without warning and under less than ideal circumstances.  We tend to be wearing our "normal" clothes, while carrying stuff in our hands, and when we're not warmed up and ready.  (In fact, Murphy's Law tells us that we're most likely to attacked when we're nursing a bad back or sore knee or other impairing injury...)  The surface won't be a nice, clean, smooth dojo floor; it will be an uneven, messy, slippery surface, with stuff (or other people) in the way.  

So...  How practical are head high kicks?  I'd say not very.  I know that in my professional experience, I've never kicked another person outside of some training scenarios; I've tripped them, thrown them, struck them, hit them with a wall...  The only real kicking I've done has been to open a door, so that's a little higher than waist level.  Generally, my gunbelt and other gear impairs the ability to kick much higher.  (It also changes my balance...)  Even in plainclothes, there are significant concerns with kicking at all -- and they only multiply with head high kicks.  It seems as if others have already addressed most of them; I'm not rehashing them.  Suffice to say that life sucks when you're trying to manhandle someone (or keep them from manhandling you) and you fall on your ***.

High kicks are a good training exercise, and they're a good tool for some sparring situations.  They're fantastic fun to watch.  And, in some circumstances, they're very effective tools for self-defense.  They shouldn't be automatically discarded.  But they're also not something that probably ought to be in your first rank of choices.

Now -- as to this one "high kick" or "high section kick."  I do have a problem with it; I simply can't picture it.  I'm not suggesting that it doesn't exist.  I'm not suggesting that any of you can't do it.  I just can't picture it, as it's been described here.  If someone can post a link to a clip of it, or somewhere that it's been described in more detail, maybe I'll understand it.  Because right now, all I can imagine it as being is some sort of crescent/arcing kick.  I can't see how your foot can go almost straight up without swinging outward.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Ok,
> 
> 3) *Nebuchadnezzar* - But not getting that kick off successfully could spell disasterous mistake for the person who threw the kick. Once your foot is off the ground, you're at risk. The higher off the ground, the greater the risk.
> 
> ...


 
1) *The question was regarding the PRACTICALITY of that type of kick in self defense.*

1a) DUHHHHHH, what are the odds of that punch not landing as opposed to that kick landing?

2) Who are you and when did I comment on how fast you kick?

2a) Since you ask, what makes you think you kick that fast?

3) Who stated that the kicker would HOLD THEIR LEG UP after throwing the kick, and when did I say that YOU hold your leg up after kicking?

*Again, Kosho's question was regarding the PRACTICALITY of this type of kick in a self defense situation.*

You and others are taking this as an attack on your training and you're taking it personally.

This sounds like a lack of confidence in your own training.  'Nuff Said.


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

Speaking as a member here, not a mod., because I'm involved in this thread, but I'd just like to say that we already had one warning already posted in this thread.  We have alot of good info in here and I'd hate to see it get locked.  Lets do our best to keep the discussions civil to avoid further issues.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 8, 2007)

Nebuchadnezzar said:


> 1) *The question was regarding the PRACTICALITY of that type of kick in self defense.*
> 
> 1a) DUHHHHHH, what are the odds of that punch not landing as opposed to that kick landing?
> 
> ...


 

Nah, your absolutely correct!
I let someone who obviously has no knowlege of high kicks or what he is talking about get to me.

And not being an expert in BJJ, KungFu, or other styles I couldn't concieve of comeing on to a BBS and spout items about any style that I don't know about, and then call them facts. This is the oldest sales trick in the book and I fell for the sucker punch. LOL 

And as the logic to "prove" that high kicks are useful came from people who don't do high kicks, as a skilled MA I am ashamed I didn't see the futility of this arguement. It is the old "My style is better than your style crap".

I can only deduce that the countless people who have saved their lives using high kicks, including myself, must be an illusion since we did not publish it.

I was taken back and suprised on a TKD fourm by questions that all the TKD classes I have ever been associate with around the world teach these basic to beginners.

But alas, I made an assumption, that most on here know, or knew of the capabilities of TKD. And you know what they say about assumptions. 
I apologise to those whom I responded to grufflly,
CHEERS


----------



## DArnold (Jul 8, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> Having just read the thread... I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in.
> 
> CAN a head-level kick work in a real combat/real self defense situation? Absolutely. People have done it. Of course, you can also probably successfully use a banana peel for self defense under optimum conditions... I don't think I'm gonna add a pouch for a banana peel on my gunbelt, though. In other words -- just because something has worked once, or might work, it's not necessarily a smart idea.
> 
> ...


 
Mr. Jim,
Are you a law inforcement agent?
Since the mentioning of your gun belt.


I need clarification to explain what you can't picture.

A *front kick *is done anywhere from the sternum down. As the ball of the foot must be horizontally level with the target, thus your knee must be higher and when you kick the knee drops so that the striking tool travels straight into the target (at a 90 degree angle)

As all TKD kicks are defined against an opponent of your own size, then obviously this would change against opponents of varying size.

This by physics is the most power that you can impart into an object, also why breaking competitions are done at belt level. 
Simple physics.
If not your striking tool goes into the target at an angle that is how you loose power. (Vector physics)

There is no such thing in TKD as a high front kick because you would have to bring your knee above a head high target. Virtually impossible.

At this point we are talking about a *high kick* which is where you change the tragectory up to a 45 degree angle (depending on your distance from your target).
You still bring the knee up first but your targets also change,  to say the point of the chin.

Chuck Norris used to use this all the time.  The infamous scene where one person is holding each arm and the bad guy is in his face saying, "Yeah, your in for it now"
In which case he kicks straight up into the opponents chin (ball of foot or heel, no matter).  Do you have to lean back, sometimes, but as you kick you can lean forward with your body mass, and as a leg weighs a bit more than your head, usually the lean is for focus, not power. 

When I first started fighting PKA they showed us films of a really great Heavy weight fight, one fighter had the other on the ropes in a clinch, just then the fighter on the inside stepped back about a foots distance away from the other fighter, he did a high kick and lifted the other fighter clear up and over the top rope and out of the ring.  (This was a great video that was supposed to discourage everyone from doing PKA and to let you know what you were in for)

A *high section kick * is not a kick but mearly a denotation of an area on the body, shoulder and above. It can be any kick done above shoulder level.
So I could kick you in the temple, filtrum, point of chin, mandibular angle, vegas nerve, ganglea connection... with a:

- turning kick
- crescent kick
- verticle kick
- reverse turning kick
- hook kick
- twist kick
- high kick
... and the list goes on
... with a variety of foot, or leg striking tools...

all of which will put you down if done properly.


----------



## MJS (Jul 8, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Nah, your absolutely correct!
> I let someone who obviously has no knowlege of high kicks or what he is talking about get to me.
> 
> And not being an expert in BJJ, KungFu, or other styles I couldn't concieve of comeing on to a BBS and spout items about any style that I don't know about, and then call them facts. This is the oldest sales trick in the book and I fell for the sucker punch. LOL
> ...


 
Well, hopefully I can get a sincere answer to these questions and not one hidden with sarcasm.  My questions are as follows:

1) When faced with a situation, do you always opt for a high kick or do you base your response to the conditions present at that time?

2) Would you describe the encounter(s) in which you used the high kick?

Mike


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

MJS said:


> Well, hopefully I can get a sincere answer to these questions and not one hidden with sarcasm. My questions are as follows:
> 
> 1) When faced with a situation, do you always opt for a high kick or do you base your response to the conditions present at that time?
> 
> ...


 
No problem, I would be happy to share with you offline.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 9, 2007)

Personally, For the street, I'd never kick to the head unless the opponent is on their knees or the ground. Kicking high can get your leg caught up on their shoulders with a simple reflexive response. Which leads to you on the ground, and them on top of you.


----------



## 14 Kempo (Jul 9, 2007)

exile said:


> 14 Kempo said:
> 
> 
> > I believe kicking to the head is valid in a fight situation ... of course, for me, that is after I've buckled them with a kick to the groin. However, even in this situation, being a Kempoist, I would most likely drop them with a hand strike from this position, or maybe a knee to the face.
> ...


 
Cool, we agree on this point.



exile said:


> 14 Kempo said:
> 
> 
> > In a practice situation, kicks to head level are conceivable, balance is comprimised while on one foot, especially with the other foot some 6 feet off the ground, but again, it is practice. There is no doubt that TKD, and other kicking arts, practitioners are much more effective kicking to higher levels, I truly believe that, kicking is thier art's way. As a Kempoist, my training has me trying to be in a body check situation with a kicker, constantly checking legs, pinning arms and striking to vital areas. _(I've never studied TKD or another art of that type, so I know I'm making assumptions, don't quote please)_
> ...


 
You made my point for me, thank you, I dropped the ball here. I do it in the dojo, I practice it, and for me it works for a point in sparring, but is not something I, personally, would do in a street situation, ever, unless they are doubled over and although I'm hitting the head, it is at belt level. Whether I'm checking the legs and arms of a TKD artist, or a half drunk street fighter, it's all the same. It's how I practice, it's how I fight. What I was trying to say here is that if it were done, a kicking art would have a better chance of pulling it off than would I.



exile said:


> 14 Kempo said:
> 
> 
> > Don't get me wrong here, I'm in no way saying that a kicking art would not have a chance against a Kempoist, what I am saying is that I try to jam them, keep them off balance, take their favorite weapons away ... but then again, they are trying to do what they do best and it can go either way at any given time! It's a matter of space, they want to work from their space and range, I'm trying to work from mine. Whoever finds it, has a better chance of coming out on top in that particular confrontation. With most ranked kicking artists, it can very often only take one good shot.
> ...


 
Here I was trying to let people know that I was in no way trying to say Kempo is better than a kicking art, to avoid getting into a flame war. I made a reference to a fight between a kicker and a puncher, whether it is me against TKD, or me against a street fighter that likes to kick, it's all the same. I can only speak for myself and I try to do just that. No matter who I'm up against, I'm going to evaluate the situation and deal with it. What I said here is that I am a Kempoist, I will take my opponents weapons away, whether or not that opponent is a kicker or a puncher, I'll try to take the weapon of choice away, make them change up.

I will add here that I will do what is necessary to survive in an altercation. If that means using my feet from a distance, I'll do it. closer in, punches, done. Even closer, knees, elbows, hooks and uppercuts, I'll deal it. If it goes to the ground, not where a Kempoist wants to be, but I'll deal with it.

My point in the original post, which I guess I failed to make, was that a TKD or kicking stylist will have a better chance of pulling off a high level kick than will I. I won't speak for all Kempoists, some are more flexible and better balanced than am I, so they may see a high level kick as an advantage, their call. We all do what works for us.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Mr. Jim,
> Are you a law inforcement agent?
> Since the mentioning of your gun belt.


 
Yes.




> I need clarification to explain what you can't picture.
> 
> A *front kick *is done anywhere from the sternum down. As the ball of the foot must be horizontally level with the target, thus your knee must be higher and when you kick the knee drops so that the striking tool travels straight into the target (at a 90 degree angle)
> 
> ...


 
I'm still unclear how a person may kick upward without the shin, ankle and foot extending past the knee.  The knee is a hinge joint; wherever you raise it to, and whatever you call it -- if you're kicking forward, the lower portion of the leg has to arc outward.  I can place a front kick into a person's chest at surprisingly close range; namely, inside my own arm length.  But I've not seen anyone able to deliver that motion above the chest.

Right now, it appears to me that you're locked on a "we're talking high kicks; we must be talking TKD" mindset, and that anyone who doesn't do TKD or doesn't feel that high kicks are automatically and perfectly acceptable for real use doesn't know what they're talking about.  It seems to me if a vast number of people with real world experience feel that high kicks are seldom an ideal choice for the real world situations -- they might be onto something.  If it were only one person, or only a group of people who train together, I'd suspect maybe it was only their experience.  But that's not the case.  It's lots of people, from many systems, who say that.

Yet, even then, I didn't say that they were absolutely impractical and never useful.  Nor did I discount anyone's personal experience.  But -- my experience, my professional training, and what I've been taught in more than 20 years of martial arts training all say that, in the real world, the utility of high kicks is *limited*.  When you don't have a safety net of rules, they leave you vulnerable to multiple defenses and counterattacks.  They rely on stable footing, and, should they miss, they very likely will leave you off balance.  They expose numerous vulnerable targets on your own body.  Now, perhaps you're comfortable training and preparing only to defend against drunken frat boys and homeless bums.  I'm not; my world says that I have every likelihood of having to defend myself who has trained at least as much as I have, in a much harder school than almost any of us here have trained in.  And who feels no hesitation about doing serious bodily harm to me.


----------



## exile (Jul 9, 2007)

14 Kempo said:


> You made my point for me, thank you, I dropped the ball here. I do it in the dojo, I practice it, and for me it works for a point in sparring, but is not something I, personally, would do in a street situation, ever, unless they are doubled over and although I'm hitting the head, it is at belt level. Whether I'm checking the legs and arms of a TKD artist, or a half drunk street fighter, it's all the same. It's how I practice, it's how I fight. What I was trying to say here is that if it were done, a kicking art would have a better chance of pulling it off than would I.



There's a very well thought out school of thought _within_ TKD that takes the same perspective you do, K14. Simon O'Neil published an article in _Taekwondo Times_ back in 2005... I think I've lost my copy of that issue alas so can't be more specificin which he discussed the role of kicking in TKD as reflected in competitive sparring as vs. the role that the hyungs assign kicks. The Palgwe series of forms, for example, has only a few tokens of kicks per hyung, and they were originally low (big chunks of the Palgwes are taken over whole from the Pinan/Heian kata, but resequenced). As O'Neil discusses in his article, and explores in detail in his _Combat_TKD_ publications, the hyungs use mostly hand techs for deflection and striking, with kicks playing a decidedly secondary role, as setups for finishing strikes to head, neck, throat, eyes or collarbone, or still nastier moves like sharp neck twists. This is the military TKD of the 
RoK Marines and Tiger Commando units during the 1950s and 60s, and an increasing number of us in TKD train the art that way, with all of the old techslocks, pins, throws and so on that the Kwan era TKD had, at least in some of the kwans.  Dang, I wish I hadn't lost that article... 




14 Kempo said:


> Here I was trying to let people know that I was in no way trying to say Kempo is better than a kicking art, to avoid getting into a flame war.



No danger of that, 14K! We tend not to have that kind of argument here. I've seen it happen, someone starts up along those lines and it's like a piano dropped on them!  It's regarded as trolling behavior and people who do that sort of thing don't last long on the board. And by the same token, most people don't _look_ for that kind of interpretation of what other people are saying, just because it's pretty alien to the culture here...




14 Kempo said:


> I made a reference to a fight between a kicker and a puncher, whether it is me against TKD, or me against a street fighter that likes to kick, it's all the same. I can only speak for myself and I try to do just that. No matter who I'm up against, I'm going to evaluate the situation and deal with it. What I said here is that I am a Kempoist, I will take my opponents weapons away, whether or not that opponent is a kicker or a puncher, I'll try to take the weapon of choice away, make them change up.



I know, that's a very Kempo-ish kind of strategic idea, from what little I know about it.



14 Kempo said:


> I will add here that I will do what is necessary to survive in an altercation. If that means using my feet from a distance, I'll do it. closer in, punches, done. Even closer, knees, elbows, hooks and uppercuts, I'll deal it. If it goes to the ground, not where a Kempoist wants to be, but I'll deal with it.
> 
> My point in the original post, which I guess I failed to make, was that a TKD or kicking stylist will have a better chance of pulling off a high level kick than will I. I won't speak for all Kempoists, some are more flexible and better balanced than am I, so they may see a high level kick as an advantage, their call. We all do what works for us.



I agree, a TKDist trains kicks a lot more than most other karate-based MAists, and I think you did communicate that idea (you guys, if I'm not mistaken, do a lot more flow drills than TKD people do, by and large). But in the close range, my choice of weapons will very likely be the same as what you've described as your own preferences...


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> ....And as the logic to "prove" that high kicks are useful came from people who don't do high kicks, as a skilled MA I am ashamed I didn't see the futility of this arguement. It is the old "My style is better than your style crap".
> 
> I can only deduce that the countless people who have saved their lives using high kicks, including myself, must be an illusion since we did not publish it.
> 
> ...


 
No, it isn't.  It was about the practicality of high kicks in a self defense situation.  One simple question.

As to the rest is an insincere response. :sadsong:


----------



## Carol (Jul 9, 2007)

There is a poster on MT that can talk about this much more competently than I can.  I hope he corrects me if I'm saying anything amiss here.

High kicks are not uncommon in Southeast Asian/Indochinese arts. Sikaran's signature kick is a wheel kick that targets the vunerabilities of the back of the head/neck.  Vovinam's signature kick is a flying scissors kick to the front neck.  These are battlefield arts.  The concept was to kill the enemy in such a way that didn't exhaust all the energy out of the fighter....because in wartime environment, the fighter may have to kill over and over again.  

I can't perform these kicks.  Perhaps I will be able to someday but they are not in my arsenal now.  If I could, they certainly wouldn't be the first weapon I reach for.  But personally...I'd still like to work my way there.

I'll suprise the hell out of myself if I can do it too... :lol:


----------



## Yeti (Jul 9, 2007)

As mom always said...

There's a place for everything and everything in it's place. 

It's always good to have another tool in the toolbox. As others have said, however, unless trained consistently, it's probably going to be hard to pull off - especially since most arts that kick high (TKD, TSD, etc.) train in bare feet. Throw on some shoes and try to do that. 

Plus, one thing that I have noticed in those arts (I spent 6 yrs in TKD so I know at least a little of what I speak), is that most people will tend to pick up the heel of their support foot in order to get a little more height on their high kicks - not so muh on a back kick, but on roundhouse and front kicks (FK's especially).  While that enables you to kick a little higher, the moment your heel comes up, you lose your grounding (i.e. stability) and you lose power - two things I think you'd need if you tried to pull that off on the street. 

Again though, if properly trained and trained consistently, it's another tool to keep in the shed. Like any tool though, it needs to be properly taken care of so that it works when it needs to.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 9, 2007)

I find this kind of thread to be both amusing, and a shame at the same time. Firstly, it is amusing because many of the posters are saying basically the same thing in different ways, thus it sounds like they are disagreeing. Also, some of the "changing parameters" are comical if you take a closer look at them.

However, before I address the amusement in detail, I would like to say why I think this is a shame. We are going to have a wide range of opinions and experiences contributed here. The shame of it is that some of the posters (on both sides of the discussion), are not showing respect to others. Perhaps unconsciously, without intention, they are belittling one another with jabs and insults. Sometimes it is a subtle comment that refutes the other person's belief or the way they phrased their argument.

Yes, we are in pursuit of knowledge and we want to get our facts straight, but at what price? At the price of insulting our friends and respected colleagues. In this thread, I have seen Kacey (a respected and well-liked member of MT) brought to task over the difference of a few inches in her story. Does that really matter as to what she was trying to say? I don't mean to speak on behalf of Kacey, but I have a right to express my opinion, and I think a few people owe Kacey an apology (Don't bother excusing your behavior because you had "good reason" for challenging the specifics of her story - - the way it was done was inexcusable - IMHO!)

As to the comical progression of the question at hand (and I have no intention of doing any back-tracking into another thread for the story where this originated because this thread stands on its own, and the question posed is clearly stated in the OP), let's look at what was asked.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> the effectiveness of high kicks to the head. What are your thoughts about high kicks on the street?


 
Then comes the amusing adjustments of the parameters.... 
(I'm not going to quote who said what, because that is not really important.)

*seems to me to be rather indicative of the singular weakness of thee as *CQ tactics* for self defense.

*wants to pursue them in a nasty confrontation *in a bar*.

*The question is whether they are useful in a close-quarters self-defense situation against an *unsought* attack by a *dangerous*, but *likely street-savvy* assailant who's probably not much more than *a foot away* from you, and when *every other avenue of escape from the situation has failed*.

*But not when the target's *14" or less away* from me hand has just *grabbed my shi*rt or thown *a haymaker* at me from that distance.

**We aren't discussing the feasibility of a kick to the head per se*. We're discussing the *feasibility of doing a standing split*, in an upright position, on a *bad surface* surrounded by *tables/trashcans/jostling bodies/*etc. in the *fraction of second* you need to terminate the fight.

**What is at issue is not the possibility of executing high kicks, even high kicks at relatively close range*, but the practicality of training for these very risky, difficult moves whose execution at CQ ranges requires, however you slice it, a practitioner's kicking leg to reach a position very near a standing split, whether driven by momentum or anything else, _in the context of a streetfight_.

**What is being debated here is not if a high kick would be effective*.

*I'm sorry but *within 18"* is not the appropriate range for a high kick much the same way standing 3' to 4' away is not the appropriate range for grappling.



Nebuchadnezzar said:


> Kosho's question was about high kicks in the street. I would assume he's asking about it's practicality. Is this what you're asking Kosho?


 


Kosho Gakkusei said:


> yes.
> 
> _Don Flatt


 
*Boy! I'm glad we got that straight* -  :lol:

Yes, Exile, many of the quotes were yours, but I'm not really intending to pick on you or argue the valid points you made. It just amuses me how the general topic of "high kicks" and their "effectiveness in the street" can become so restricted in the scenarios. :ultracool

This reminds me of an experience I had when I was a young instructor (about 19 years old in 1979). A rough bully at a bar, and his buddy were threatening me, and provoking a fight. I ran the security at this bar, but it was my night off and I was there with a date. The security on duty were Black Belt students of my instructor. After relentless annoyances, I agreed to meet this guy off property in a parking lot. This guy's friend was so confident he told me the fight would be over in a few seconds (actually, I agreed).

At the end of the evening, we each drove to the pre-determined destination (My Black Belt friends came to cover my back in case of foul play). He pulled in riding in his friends van, but the tough talking bully wouldn't step out (I think he believed I wouldn't show). He had found out I was a Black Belt, and told me he wouldn't get out unless I agreed not to use my kicks. I said "you threaten me, challenge me to a fight, then you're going to tell me how to fight?" I knew this would be no match, so I agreed not to kick. He wouldn't get out. Then, I said I would tie one hand behind my back and agree not to kick. He wouldn't get out. His friend became embarrassed and drove the van away. :lfao:

The point is, if we are going to discuss the use of "high kicks," I think it should be left to the kicker as to when, where, and how they would use them. "Scenario: kicks are not effective in self defense because if you try to balance on one leg on a snow covered hill of greater than 35 degree incline, while wearing rubber soul tennis shoes, and carrying 52 lbs of groceries, while facing West, into an Easterly wind of 23 mph or greater...." 

Reality check - - almost any Martial Artist of significant knowledge is going to use the appropriate technique (hand, foot, knee, elbow, head, stance, takedown, etc) at the proper time, on the proper terrain, so let's dispense with the "it is not a good idea because a,b, or c could go wrong."

As to crowded bars, I have worked this environment for many years, and was the director of security at a nightclub for seven years. I have seen lesser skilled Martial Artists who were trouble makers use high kicks successfully against other people in fights (and no, they weren't drunk). I have also used high kicks quite successfully (a couple of them were drunk, but still dangerous).

My introduction to kicking in Taekwondo came from an assistant instructor I had in my early training. He was a 16 year old 2nd Dan, and was phenomenal with his kicks. He was short, and slight in build (a real bully target) One night, at a McDonald's a guy the size of football lineman picked a fight with him in the parking lot. The guy punched, my friend blocked with a forearm, and did a jump-spin wheel kick that passed the guys nose by less than an inch (intentionally missing), and landed in a fighting stance. The guys eyes got real wide, turned white as a ghost, then turned and walked away (I did not witness the event, but trust those who did).

I'm trained as a kicker, but I will agree with much of what has been said that l would only use a high kick in the street if the situation was right, and the opportunity presented itself. Being very good at kicking, I can usually make the opportunity present itself. One misconception that has been brought up is the ease, and safety of punching over kicking. Here, I would disagree, but it does depend on the person defending. If your muscles do not stretch well, or you have not trained to kick high, then a "high section kick" in the street would be out of the question (setting aside the reality of preferring to kick low to cause the opponent to bend over first, or taking them down then kicking the head - - I prefer that method too!)

On the other hand (or foot), one can only speak to one's own abilities and personal preferences. To say that kicking to the head at a high level target in the street is "too risky," "dangerous," "impractical," etc., is not to understand the skill involved as well as an expert. A fight is "risky" but any technique thrown makes you vulnerable, but kicks are not more risky because risk is reduced when expert knowledge is applied at the optimum timing. Now, I don't disagree with the "experts" that exile quotes, because I do not know them personally, and I have no knowledge of what their full training in kicking might entail.

However, if someone says that kicking high is a bad idea, then I would agree that "*their* experience" of kicking high was a bad one. Did they actually try it, and it failed? If so, *how many times* before they said this isn't working? Why wasn't it working? Did they use the wrong kick at the wrong distance, or kick on a poor surface and fell, or had too many objects or people around them and couldn't get their leg up to the target? Were they great street-fighters/bar bouncers/cops/military soldiers, but not truly "experts" at kicking? I know this is possible - - I have had a few like that as students of mine (I train bouncers/LEO/military/executive protection personnel).

If a person is in a wheel chair with legs amputated, then they will say that kicks are not a good idea (at least not for them). If a person can kick, but trains more to kick low, then High Kicks are not a good idea. If they are experts at kicking high, but don't have much training or experience at how to use it in real-life, then they might not do well at its application. It does not take a world-class athlete, or a "Chuck Norris" type to be successful. It takes the proper training, and the proper application.

Ok, Don, I enjoyed your tongue-in-cheek approach to stating the obvious...



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> *CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ALLOW FOR KICKING HIGH TO THE HEAD*
> 
> *1. Fight someone else who is also trying to kick high to the head.*
> 
> ...


 
(note my red highlight. Just how much time do you think it takes for a kick to the head? Mine are not super-human, but get there faster than a block.)

Yes, there are many situations which aide in the application of a High Kick, and they all make sense (especially #4) Isn't that what we're supposed to do - - distract them first? You know, there are really skilled pick-pockets who can remove your wallet, watch, jewelry, etc., without you even knowing it. Now, they don't say to you, "I'm going to take your valuables, see if you can detect it, and stop me." Yet, millions of people fall victim to their skills every year.

In a real fight, not every opponent is an "expert at hand-to-hand." In all my years of training (45+), I have encountered very few opponents who were Martial Artists at all, and have yet to face an "expert." Perhaps the real experts know better than to fight unnecessarily. The vast majority of opponents, I could have told them what I was going to do, and they still would not have succeeded in avoiding it. Opponents in the street don't know I'm going to kick, and they certainly don't know when it is coming to the head. 

Unless you have a unique set if circumstances, where all of your street encounters are against sober, muscular, combat hardened, Martial Art experts, my guess is that the "average opponent" is not going to see a kick coming unless you just don't know what you are doing. It is my experience that a poor kicker, kicks poorly. An expert kicker knows how to apply his craft, and does not need a specific set of circumstances to do it successfully in most street fights (parking lots, bowling alleys, bars, theaters, etc). I have found that when a fight breaks out in a wall-to-wall crowded bar, there is still the phenomenon that people back off and form a circle with enough room for a fight to take place, but if not - - then don't kick high there (also - don't go there anymore - lol).

As to "close quarters" High Kicks, I have used them, and it is not risky if done right. One example (which has been alluded to) can be seen in "A Force of One" with Chuck Norris and Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. Bill is fighting another opponent in the ring, and is against the ropes. He leans back, flings the hook kick up and nails the guy in the back of the head. This does work in the street. Another scenario is when I was being punched rapidly by a guy at close range. I blocked, and stood within arms reach as I brought my right roundhouse over his shoulder and smacked him in the side of the head. He never saw it coming, I was never off balance, and I could have used those "pesky hand techniques" of his as a control option if I wanted.

The risky think about punching is that you have to get your own face close to your opponent. If you miss, you are vulnerable to a counter-strike. Kicking (even to the head) is designed to "reach" an opponent who is still out of range of the hands, thus you remain relatively safe. As to comparing the speed of a punch to a kick, remember that an opponent knows to stand outside your arms reach, thus any punch has to be accompanied by closing the distance (telegraphing), so not likely to land.

Conversely, a kick can be within range without the opponent realizing it, and reach the head before the brain can react. You don't pose, and stand for long, and you don't risk balance unless you are slow and don't know how to strike effectively. Plus, a kick that goes "south" is not the end of all things. I can think of a hundred things an opponent can do against my kick, and I prevent most of them, but even if they are lucky, I can think of a hundred ways to hurt them "*bad*" as a counter to whatever they do during my kick. 



DArnold said:


> Ok,
> This has got to be one of the funniest threads I have ever read.


 
DArnlod - the points you made in your post were absolutely, without question, *brilliant* (and not just because I agree with them). I saw that your profile says you are a "VI Dan" and I was not surprised. Not to throw the issue of rank around here (tacky), but it sometimes takes a high ranking expert of a subject to fully grasp the insights as you presented them, even if others don't see it the same way (I don't mean that in a demeaning way to anyone else, so keep cool everyone).

The only problem is that you did so with the harshness of an "expert" imparting their knowledge on the "less knowledgeable" (an offense that I repeat far too often). Although I believe you have a lot to offer here, and I would like to get to know you better, it is a fact that survival in this forum means that you might want to tone down the brash approach and sarcastic quips. I, for one, would like to see you stick around and share your knowledge with all of us, and compare it with what I have experienced.

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> I'm still unclear how a person may kick upward without the shin, ankle and foot extending past the knee. The knee is a hinge joint; wherever you raise it to, and whatever you call it -- if you're kicking forward, the lower portion of the leg has to arc outward. I can place a front kick into a person's chest at surprisingly close range; namely, inside my own arm length. But I've not seen anyone able to deliver that motion above the chest.


 
I just threw a few kicks prior to typing this post.  The results:  just what you typed.



> Right now, it appears to me that you're locked on a "we're talking high kicks; we must be talking TKD" mindset, and that anyone who doesn't do TKD or doesn't feel that high kicks are automatically and perfectly acceptable for real use doesn't know what they're talking about.


 
This is the impression I was getting earlier in the thread as well.  I've been training for 21yrs so I feel that I'm very comfortable executing kicks.  Do I train the TKD way? Nope, because I'm not TKD.  So, unless there is some secret out there I'm missing. Doesnt mean I am clueless on kicking.  There are still factors that seem to be getting either missed or avoided.  Timing of the kick, speed of the kick, telegraphing of the kick, as well as environmental factors.  Grass, pavement, sand, rocks, rain, snow and ice come into play.



> It seems to me if a vast number of people with real world experience feel that high kicks are seldom an ideal choice for the real world situations -- they might be onto something. If it were only one person, or only a group of people who train together, I'd suspect maybe it was only their experience. But that's not the case. It's lots of people, from many systems, who say that.


 
I said the same thing back at post #67.  




> Yet, even then, I didn't say that they were absolutely impractical and never useful. Nor did I discount anyone's personal experience. But -- my experience, my professional training, and what I've been taught in more than 20 years of martial arts training all say that, in the real world, the utility of high kicks is *limited*. When you don't have a safety net of rules, they leave you vulnerable to multiple defenses and counterattacks. They rely on stable footing, and, should they miss, they very likely will leave you off balance. They expose numerous vulnerable targets on your own body. Now, perhaps you're comfortable training and preparing only to defend against drunken frat boys and homeless bums. I'm not; my world says that I have every likelihood of having to defend myself who has trained at least as much as I have, in a much harder school than almost any of us here have trained in. And who feels no hesitation about doing serious bodily harm to me.


 
Likewise, I have said countless times, that every art has something to offer.  I'm not a cop, but I'd much rather gear my training without the safety nets. 

Mike


----------



## Adept (Jul 9, 2007)

My thoughts on high kicks in a real-life situation:

Appropriate times to be kicking to someones head are far fewer than appropriate times to be striking someones head with another tool.

For example:

A head high kick takes longer to reach it's target than the equivalent hand technique. This gives your opponent more reaction time.

A head high kick places you in a vulnerable position, standing on one leg within 'shoot' range of your opponent.

A head high kick often requires some kind of twist of the grounded foot, which increases the risk of falling or slipping.

A head high kick has a slower recovery time, and until the kicking foot is planted on the ground your balance and mobility is limited.

A effective head high kick, for most people, requires warming up and loose pants.

A head high kick limits the ability to move and strike simultaneously, unlike handstrikes.

Having said all that, I won't say you should never kick someone in the head.

Simply that it is _rarely_ the best option and should always be a fail-safe strike where even if it goes pear shaped, you don't end up eating asphalt.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jul 9, 2007)

After reading through this thread I must say that good points have been made by those that think they would use a high kick in the street and those that would never do so.
That being said I will say that I have personaly seen head high kicks used against unsuspecting opponets in bars and on the street. The fact that the kick was not expected made the difference plus the fact that the kicker was fast as hell. I know of a case where jaws where broken by a spinning kick even. 
Now will these things work against an experenced stret fighter Maybe ,Maybe not, it all depends on the timeing and the circumstances. For the most part I would say anyone trying these kicks that has not done them for many years would be foolish to do so. A good low kick to the groin or knees would be more effective for most people, however that is not to say that someone who hasd practiced these kicks for years would not be able to pull them off.
It all comes down to your training and the opponents ability.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 9, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> Ok, Don, I enjoyed your tongue-in-cheek approach to stating the obvious...


I'm glad someone got it.  My objective in starting this thread was to discuss the effectiveness of high kicks in SD.  That is not to discount them altogether but to intelligently discuss how they could be utilized as well as debunk myths associated with this technique.  Unfortunately for some people this technique seems to be a sacred cow to some and this debate has degraded to a debate of the use of kicks in close range.  Please, note the amount of times I've stated a high kick could work.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Relevant post on TKD Forms/Poomse thread.
> Originally Posted by *Kosho Gakkusei*
> 
> 
> ...





Kosho Gakkusei said:


> *We have an apparrent scenario where the high kick worked. My posts have not been to say that a high kick won't work *but that for the reasons I've mentioned on this thread & the TKD forms thread, I don't think it is the strategy of choice. I practice kicking high to develop balance, flexibility, and power and will use the high kick if the opening is present. What your friend had was the element of surprise. His attackers did not expect him to defend himself this is more critical than the choice of weapon he made.





Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Kacey,
> *What is being debated here is not if a high kick would be effective. I think it could be effective given the right set of circumstances* - that was the point of my original post. I even reposted to this effect a less humorous but more technical analysis.





Kosho Gakkusei said:


> *Retell me the story and substitute 26" to 30" for the distance and I will no longer have a dispute.* Please stop trying to pass off a high kick to the head as a close range defense.
> 
> *High kicks can work under the right circumstances* but in close (18" or less) is not one of them.





Last Fearner said:


> (note my red highlight. Just how much time do you think it takes for a kick to the head? Mine are not super-human, but get there faster than a block.)


I don't agree with this statement.  The arm has less distance to travel and is innately faster.


Last Fearner said:


> Yes, there are many situations which aide in the application of a High Kick, and they all make sense (especially #4) Isn't that what we're supposed to do - - distract them first? You know, there are really skilled pick-pockets who can remove your wallet, watch, jewelry, etc., without you even knowing it. Now, they don't say to you, "I'm going to take your valuables, see if you can detect it, and stop me." Yet, millions of people fall victim to their skills every year.
> 
> In a real fight, not every opponent is an "expert at hand-to-hand." In all my years of training (45+), I have encountered very few opponents who were Martial Artists at all, and have yet to face an "expert." Perhaps the real experts know better than to fight unnecessarily. The vast majority of opponents, I could have told them what I was going to do, and they still would not have succeeded in avoiding it. Opponents in the street don't know I'm going to kick, and they certainly don't know when it is coming to the head.
> 
> Unless you have a unique set if circumstances, where all of your street encounters are against sober, muscular, combat hardened, Martial Art experts, my guess is that the "average opponent" is not going to see a kick coming unless you just don't know what you are doing. It is my experience that a poor kicker, kicks poorly. An expert kicker knows how to apply his craft, and does not need a specific set of circumstances to do it successfully in most street fights (parking lots, bowling alleys, bars, theaters, etc). I have found that when a fight breaks out in a wall-to-wall crowded bar, there is still the phenomenon that people back off and form a circle with enough room for a fight to take place, but if not - - then don't kick high there (also - don't go there anymore - lol).


Some very good points here pertaining to the successful application of high kicks in SD.


Last Fearner said:


> As to "close quarters" High Kicks, I have used them, and it is not risky if done right. One example (which has been alluded to) can be seen in "A Force of One" with Chuck Norris and Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. Bill is fighting another opponent in the ring, and is against the ropes. He leans back, flings the hook kick up and nails the guy in the back of the head. This does work in the street. Another scenario is when I was being punched rapidly by a guy at close range. I blocked, and stood within arms reach as I brought my right roundhouse over his shoulder and smacked him in the side of the head. He never saw it coming, I was never off balance, and I could have used those "pesky hand techniques" of his as a control option if I wanted.


The hook kick you describe would be viable in close range and has been mostly overlooked so far in the discussion.  Personally, I would not be comfortable on one leg for even .1 seconds that close to an attacker.


Last Fearner said:


> The risky think about punching is that you have to get your own face close to your opponent. If you miss, you are vulnerable to a counter-strike. *Kicking (even to the head) is designed to "reach" an opponent who is still out of range of the hands, thus you remain relatively safe.* As to comparing the speed of a punch to a kick, remember that an opponent knows to stand outside your arms reach, thus any punch has to be accompanied by closing the distance (telegraphing), so not likely to land.
> 
> Conversely, *a kick can be within range without the opponent realizing it*, and reach the head before the brain can react. You don't pose, and stand for long, and you don't risk balance unless you are slow and don't know how to strike effectively.


 
LF, it seems you are one of the 1st pro-high kick posters to acknowledge range as a critical issue in the use of kicks.  I think it is unwise for someone who uses a technique that is dependant on range due to physiological restrictions not be a big student of distance and timing.

The use of a Hook Kick to the head or a Crescent Kick is possible within close range but the high front (don't debate me on terms) as has been discussed on the majority of this thread up to know in my view only applies to close range in mythology and Power Rangers.  Anyone who disagrees with me is free to prove me wrong with a tape measure and a video camera.

As far as the "treatment" of Kacey you find shameful.  I don't see it the same way.  Some of the details of the story were being called into question - not in the sense of accusing her to be lying but in that details were not making sense but she has since acknowledged that the distances may have been different than she described initially.



Kacey said:


> *Could I be off on the distance?* *Certainly.* Does that change the fact that a high kick to the head was effective in a self-defense situation? Not at all - and that _was_ the original question, sparked in the thread this came from - could kicks to the head really work in a self-defense situation. All of the discussion about distance and angles and everything else saying why it couldn't have worked does not change the fact that it _did_ work... and therefore I see no reason to respond further to those who say it can't.


 
I think it's been agreed by most that given the right set of circumstances they can work even if it's not the strategey we would chose.  Perhaps we could elaborate on right and wrong circumstance as well as how to spot and create opportunities.  I'd be interested in what those of you who train & prefer head kicks would have to say about this.

_Don Flatt


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> I find this kind of thread to be both amusing, and a shame at the same time. Firstly, it is amusing because many of the posters are saying basically the same thing in different ways, thus it sounds like they are disagreeing. Also, some of the "changing parameters" are comical if you take a closer look at them.
> 
> However, before I address the amusement in detail, I would like to say why I think this is a shame. We are going to have a wide range of opinions and experiences contributed here. The shame of it is that some of the posters (on both sides of the discussion), are not showing respect to others. Perhaps unconsciously, without intention, they are belittling one another with jabs and insults. Sometimes it is a subtle comment that refutes the other person's belief or the way they phrased their argument.
> 
> Yes, we are in pursuit of knowledge and we want to get our facts straight, but at what price? At the price of insulting our friends and respected colleagues. In this thread, I have seen Kacey (a respected and well-liked member of MT) brought to task over the difference of a few inches in her story. Does that really matter as to what she was trying to say? I don't mean to speak on behalf of Kacey, but I have a right to express my opinion, and I think a few people owe Kacey an apology (Don't bother excusing your behavior because you had "good reason" for challenging the specifics of her story - - the way it was done was inexcusable - IMHO!)


 
Yes, this happens from time to time.  We (The mods) strive to keep this place as friendly as possible.  While there have been some snippy posts, I'd say for the most part, things are civil. 



> As to the comical progression of the question at hand (and I have no intention of doing any back-tracking into another thread for the story where this originated because this thread stands on its own, and the question posed is clearly stated in the OP), let's look at what was asked.[/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I would say that the parameters, what ifs or whatever else we may choose to call them, are in fact very important.  As I said in another post, target availability and environment dictate what I do.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but I get the impression that you're saying these factors are not important.  So someone wearing a suit, a dress, jeans, sneakers, work boots, high heels is going to be able to execute these kicks without any issues?  I have heard the "Well, if need be, I'll just take my shoes off." comment.  So in the middle of winter and I know that CO can get some whopper snow storms, as I used to live there, people are going to take off their boots?  Even if this happened during warm weather, what about the pavement?  Unless the bottoms of ones feet are so dry and crusty, that one wouldn't feel anything, the pavement isn't that forgiving. 









> The point is, if we are going to discuss the use of "high kicks," I think it should be left to the kicker as to when, where, and how they would use them. "Scenario: kicks are not effective in self defense because if you try to balance on one leg on a snow covered hill of greater than 35 degree incline, while wearing rubber soul tennis shoes, and carrying 52 lbs of groceries, while facing West, into an Easterly wind of 23 mph or greater...."
> 
> Reality check - - almost any Martial Artist of significant knowledge is going to use the appropriate technique (hand, foot, knee, elbow, head, stance, takedown, etc) at the proper time, on the proper terrain, so let's dispense with the "it is not a good idea because a,b, or c could go wrong."


 
Well, now where getting somewhere.   Looks like we're in agreement with this.  



> As to crowded bars, I have worked this environment for many years, and was the director of security at a nightclub for seven years. I have seen lesser skilled Martial Artists who were trouble makers use high kicks successfully against other people in fights (and no, they weren't drunk). I have also used high kicks quite successfully (a couple of them were drunk, but still dangerous).


 
In another post here, I had comment how this weekend I was at a casino watching a show.  When it was done, it was literally wall to wall people.  Everyone walking in every direction.  In a situation like that, I can't imagine a high kick even being thought of.  Goes back to my environment theory. 




> I'm trained as a kicker, but I will agree with much of what has been said that l would only use a high kick in the street if the situation was right, and the opportunity presented itself. Being very good at kicking, I can usually make the opportunity present itself. One misconception that has been brought up is the ease, and safety of punching over kicking. Here, I would disagree, but it does depend on the person defending. If your muscles do not stretch well, or you have not trained to kick high, then a "high section kick" in the street would be out of the question (setting aside the reality of preferring to kick low to cause the opponent to bend over first, or taking them down then kicking the head - - I prefer that method too!)


 
Depending once again on the situation, punching my be the best option.  In a clinch or if you're grabbed, I dont think anything other than knees and stomps would be coming into play.  



> On the other hand (or foot), one can only speak to one's own abilities and personal preferences. To say that kicking to the head at a high level target in the street is "too risky," "dangerous," "impractical," etc., is not to understand the skill involved as well as an expert. A fight is "risky" but any technique thrown makes you vulnerable, but kicks are not more risky because risk is reduced when expert knowledge is applied at the optimum timing. Now, I don't disagree with the "experts" that exile quotes, because I do not know them personally, and I have no knowledge of what their full training in kicking might entail.
> 
> However, if someone says that kicking high is a bad idea, then I would agree that "*their* experience" of kicking high was a bad one. Did they actually try it, and it failed? If so, *how many times* before they said this isn't working? Why wasn't it working? Did they use the wrong kick at the wrong distance, or kick on a poor surface and fell, or had too many objects or people around them and couldn't get their leg up to the target? Were they great street-fighters/bar bouncers/cops/military soldiers, but not truly "experts" at kicking? I know this is possible - - I have had a few like that as students of mine (I train bouncers/LEO/military/executive protection personnel).
> 
> ...


 
Out of curiosity, how do you position your hands?  Do you primarily throw these high kicks from the front or rear leg?  How much telegraphing or weight adjustment do you notice when you're kicking?





> Yes, there are many situations which aide in the application of a High Kick, and they all make sense (especially #4) Isn't that what we're supposed to do - - distract them first? You know, there are really skilled pick-pockets who can remove your wallet, watch, jewelry, etc., without you even knowing it. Now, they don't say to you, "I'm going to take your valuables, see if you can detect it, and stop me." Yet, millions of people fall victim to their skills every year.


 
Good point.



> In a real fight, not every opponent is an "expert at hand-to-hand." In all my years of training (45+), I have encountered very few opponents who were Martial Artists at all, and have yet to face an "expert." Perhaps the real experts know better than to fight unnecessarily. The vast majority of opponents, I could have told them what I was going to do, and they still would not have succeeded in avoiding it. Opponents in the street don't know I'm going to kick, and they certainly don't know when it is coming to the head.


 
Yes, I've said the same thing, many times.  Chances are, we're not going to face a UFC fighter.  Then again, I dont want to assume that I know this persons skill.




> As to "close quarters" High Kicks, I have used them, and it is not risky if done right. One example (which has been alluded to) can be seen in "A Force of One" with Chuck Norris and Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. Bill is fighting another opponent in the ring, and is against the ropes. He leans back, flings the hook kick up and nails the guy in the back of the head. This does work in the street. Another scenario is when I was being punched rapidly by a guy at close range. I blocked, and stood within arms reach as I brought my right roundhouse over his shoulder and smacked him in the side of the head. He never saw it coming, I was never off balance, and I could have used those "pesky hand techniques" of his as a control option if I wanted.


 
Well, at least we're admitting there is a potential risk involved.  



> The risky think about punching is that you have to get your own face close to your opponent. If you miss, you are vulnerable to a counter-strike. Kicking (even to the head) is designed to "reach" an opponent who is still out of range of the hands, thus you remain relatively safe. As to comparing the speed of a punch to a kick, remember that an opponent knows to stand outside your arms reach, thus any punch has to be accompanied by closing the distance (telegraphing), so not likely to land.
> 
> Conversely, a kick can be within range without the opponent realizing it, and reach the head before the brain can react. You don't pose, and stand for long, and you don't risk balance unless you are slow and don't know how to strike effectively. Plus, a kick that goes "south" is not the end of all things. I can think of a hundred things an opponent can do against my kick, and I prevent most of them, but even if they are lucky, I can think of a hundred ways to hurt them "*bad*" as a counter to whatever they do during my kick.


 
Ultimately there is a risk with everything.  





> DArnlod - the points you made in your post were absolutely, without question, *brilliant* (and not just because I agree with them). I saw that your profile says you are a "VI Dan" and I was not surprised. Not to throw the issue of rank around here (tacky), but it sometimes takes a high ranking expert of a subject to fully grasp the insights as you presented them, even if others don't see it the same way (I don't mean that in a demeaning way to anyone else, so keep cool everyone).
> 
> The only problem is that you did so with the harshness of an "expert" imparting their knowledge on the "less knowledgeable" (an offense that I repeat far too often). Although I believe you have a lot to offer here, and I would like to get to know you better, it is a fact that survival in this forum means that you might want to tone down the brash approach and sarcastic quips. I, for one, would like to see you stick around and share your knowledge with all of us, and compare it with what I have experienced.
> 
> CM D.J. Eisenhart


 
I think, for the sake of the thread, I'll refrain from further comment on that. 

Mike


----------



## exile (Jul 9, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> Then comes the amusing adjustments of the parameters....
> (I'm not going to quote who said what, because that is not really important.)
> 
> *seems to me to be rather indicative of the singular weakness of thee as *CQ tactics* for self defense.
> ...



LF, you've made some interesting and useful points in the discussion, and I appreciate the tone of your post very much!

But I think that you have a misimpression of what the different statements about the parameters&#8212;the conditions that those of us who remain skeptical about high kicks at close range in the opening phase of a streetfight in a complex environment, i.e., pretty much anything that's not a dojang floor or an open field&#8212;actually represent. You're taking the various numbers and qualifications specified as though they came from a _single_ poster and were intended to be fixed and literal each time, so that the poster in question keeps changing his or her story. In fact, what they represent are several different posters, all of whom are trying (i) to outline a combat range, corresponding to their various experiences of the distance at which a physical attack begins and (ii) to indicate the kind of conditions which hold for the original question about the practicality of the kind of kicks the OP asked about. As the discussion proceeds, people bring in different numbers or sets of conditions as a way to fine-tune their response to what previous posters have been saying. People are using different numbers because they are _approximating_ the conditions&#8212;that's hardly changing the parameters!  So far as I can see, those of us who remain unconvinced of the wisdom of high kicks in close-range, all-in fighting are talking about the same general range and the same set of conditions:

*Range:* at or closer than 12"&#8211;18". A foot correspnding to a double handed grab with a head butt coming (very popular in the UK especially and other parts of the Commonwealth, but far from unknown in North America),  or someone trying to set you up for a sucker punch, always more effective delivered close in, to a foot and a half (arm grab with left hand to anchor you for the John Wayne with the right). We're talking _order of magnitude here,_ LF. What you _don't_ note is that all of these numbers are comfortably smaller than the length of the average person's lower leg&#8212;from the knee hinge down&#8212;let alone that length _plus_ the distance of the maximally raised knee. Regardless of what the description is, the kicking leg, travelling up, has got to get past the assailant's body en route to his head, which puts us in a significantly different fighting range. If I kick someone to the head at that range, say 26"&#8211;30"&#8212;and yes, I _can_ comfortably crack the jaw of someone my own 6'+  height with a front kick held in close to my body&#8212;that is not going to be a response to an attempted head butt, grab-and-punch, or shove. That is going to be a preemptive strike, which I will happily deliver if someone who seems menacing comes into my roughly 2' away `line in the sand' distance (again, LF, an _approximation_  ) after I've warned them not to get any closer. It's going to be a hard and accurate kick and they will hurt. But that is not what the OP was about. 

*Conditions:* Every streetfight is different. But the ones I have had the misfortune to be involved in, and those I've witnessed, have invariably taken place in very chaotic environment: inside a bar (several of these), once on a very densely trafficked main street in Victoria, B. C. (I'm still a little confused on what actually happened) and on subway cars in NYC back in the pre-Giuliani days. People are _approximate_ in their descriptions of these because the conditions are wildly variable. People in the environment, the nature of the ground (moving, in the case of subways), tables and chairs, glass, gravel bits... in other words,  non-dojang conditions. 

Now, the topic of the original post is the feasibility of high kicks `on the street.' The purpose of specifying `on the street' is, if I understand Kosho's intentions correctly (as borne out by his subsequent posts) to distinguish high head kicks under sparring conditions in normal dojos from those attempted in streetfights. I have made the critical assumption in my posts that the fight has been initiated, so preemptive striking is not at issue, and I've made that explicit repeatedly. I think anyone who reads the posts carefully, without any particular view or agenda on the subject, will see that the skeptics are all talking about a particular _range_&#8212;a range, by definition, is a set of numbers, not a single fixed number&#8212;and the kind of conditions which hold in the streetfights we've either witnessed or been involved in. 



Last Fearner said:


> It just amuses me how the general topic of "high kicks" and their "effectiveness in the street" can become so restricted in the scenarios.



The restrictions in question are not arbitrary, however, but are rooted in facts about the body, in relation to the situation and the enviroment that the OP is asking about. This is why the scenario Kacey described&#8212;a nearly vertical kick delivered from very close to the defender's body&#8212;became the focus of discussion at one point. The OP, and the background discussion in the thread this one split off from, are about a very specific technique which requires certain specific configurations to deliver&#8212;a fact that has lead Mike, jks, Kosho, me and various other to express bafflement at just how the techs described could be physically realized, given the way bone and muscle work in relation to certain absolutely nonnegotiable facts about geometry. And people who've spent considerable time effort studying the actual `habitual acts of physical violence', like Patrick McCarthy, have identified a _typical_ range of attack initiation. Finally, the kinds of environments that represent specific problems for real-world self-defense&#8212;constraining the defender much more than the attacker, who can pick his time, angle and approach, whereas the defender has to work with where he is and what else is around once the fight begins&#8212;are implicit in the notion `street', as most of us seem to understand the term in a MA context. Put them together&#8212;the fighting range implicit in the OP, the anatomical constraints on, specifically,  _high_ kicking movement (again as per the OP), and the kind of environments in which that kind of fighting takes place most problematically from the defender's point of view&#8212;and yes, you're going to be talking about a restricted range in the general case. 



			
				Last Fearner said:
			
		

> However, if someone says that kicking high is a bad idea, then I would agree that "*their* experience" of kicking high was a bad one. Did they actually try it, and it failed? If so, *how many times* before they said this isn't working? Why wasn't it working? Did they use the wrong kick at the wrong distance, or kick on a poor surface and fell, or had too many objects or people around them and couldn't get their leg up to the target? Were they great street-fighters/bar bouncers/cops/military soldiers, but not truly "experts" at kicking? I know this is possible - - I have had a few like that as students of mine (I train bouncers/LEO/military/executive protection personnel).


 
The people I've cited are experimentalists, LF; they work on SD techs in live training that very few people would wish to experience themselves. They are rather nonsectarian in their toolkit, and try to construct technique sets for every range. I don't know what your experience has been; I know that Geoff Thompson, for example, has been in hundreds of fights, and Lawrence Kane, part of Abernethy's extended research newtwork, estimates that a security consultent, operative and enforcer at NFL football games for many years he's been personally involved in in excess of 300 violent conflicts. These guys regularly get together at seminars with each other with people from BJJ and other JJ styles, various reality-based systems similar to Brian van C.'s Instinctive Response Training, TKD, various Okinawan/Japanese karate styles, wrestling, and FMAs (our own Don Anderson of MT has participated in Abernethy's  elite-groups training seminars; he's actually got a post somewhile back about the most recent one he attended). They haven't said, hmmm, this probably won't work, I won't train it; if it works, they'll add it to their toolkit, and if it doesn't in their scenario training&#8212;live, noncompliant and hard enough that people get bones broken during them, even with protective gear&#8212;they won't. The people of cited, as I've said before, are violence professionals, as I am not and would not want to be; I find their credentials bona fide and impressive, am glad they do what they do to make the results available for those of us who's just as soon do something a little less dangerous for a living, and am happly not to do things that, from their vastly greater experience, they've judged to be, in most cases, a serious mistake.

Taking my cue from their expertise&#8212;please note, I'm claiming nothing along those lines for myself, eh?&#8212;I have to look at stories about high kicks that were successful in confrontations in the following way: there is little doubt now that smoking is heavily implicated causally in lung cancer incidence. The death rate for women who smoke ~1.5 packs per day is on the order of _twenty times_ that of women who do not smoke; as I recall, if you then remove women who are regularly subject to serious second-hand smoke from the `non-smoker' pool, you will wind up with a still more lopsided ratio. But as we also know, not everyone who smokes develops lung cancer over the course of a lifetime. The numbers are hard to obtain; I believe I saw an estimate that something like six out of ten long-term heavy smokers will develop lung cancer. That means that four out of ten, though they may well develop other life-threatening/terminating conditions as a result of smoking, never develop what we think of as the `signature dish' of a lifetime of smoking. Does that mean that given the choice, smoking is a health-wise thing to take up? The inherent risks of exposing yourself to that kind of danger make it unlikely. And analogously, the people whose work in this area I take seriously are saying that given the inherent risks and inherent difficulties in executing a head high kick at close range in a `street'-style conflict and environment your odds are worse if you opt to do so, and that you're probably much better off training other weapons than trying to train high head kicks as way to improve your odds. If I'm discussing smoking with a nonsmoker and a 90-year old smoker and urge the former not to take it up, and the latter chips in with, `Oh yes, you say what you like, and those of us who smoke and enjoy it and know it's safe, because here we still are, will just puff away happily', I think most of us would shake our heads; the SD people I've mentioned have come to the same conclusions about the risk of high kicking, based on their repeated, constant involvement in serious dangerous fights on a regular basis, but just as with the older smoker who never develops lung cancer, there are going to be MAists who make comparable retorts based their own experience in which they _didn_ get hurt. But I myself think the two cases are quite comparable, if the people I've referred to are right in their assessment. The 90-year old is off there chuckling, `Oh yes, you go ahead and listen to those doctors, they don't know anything.' And I'm sure there are people whose views are the same about high kicks. Adept's point nonetheless seem to me to correspond to the doctors' best advice: 



Adept said:


> My thoughts on high kicks in a real-life situation:
> 
> Appropriate times to be kicking to someones head are far fewer than appropriate times to be striking someones head with another tool.
> 
> ...



In connection with this last point, LF, you mentioned that you find arm techs risky because you have to be in vulnerable range to apply them. But again, the assumption is that _the fight has already come to you_, your best effort to avoid it notwithstanding. If an attacker throws a close-up round house or jab at you, you are already in that range. As to whether you should let that happen, there are a couple of threads running now on preemptive strikes; that's not, if I understand the OP correctly, what's at issue. So the assumption of this whole thread is that you're involved in an unsought close range attack already; what's your best shot at ending it quickly? 

Finally, I think it would be best to avoid the issue of who has been rude to whom, who owes whom an apology for what, and so on for the rest of this discussion; just as Kosho's previous post suggests, there are very different view on this depending on who you ask. The Mods have spoken to us discussants and we need to adhere to their directives. Henceforth, speaking strictly as a participant in this discussion, it would probably be _much_ better for the health of the thread to try to avoid charged _personal_ topics and issues, and stick to the issues raised in the OP.


----------



## kaizasosei (Jul 9, 2007)

Granted High kicks and spinning are risky and sometimes practically sacrifice moves.
however, aside from that, as far as flexibility and agility permit i say ANY KICK, ANY ANGLE,ANY TARGET,ANY HEIGHT.
  A kick is a kick...but let it be a solid good and nice one!!!


j


----------



## LawDog (Jul 9, 2007)

High kicks in a street situation, not with standing a surprise attack, can be done if,
1) the kicking range is correct,
2) your opponent is either in a stationary position or moving forward much like a heavy footed boxer / kickboxer. Note, I am not saying that all boxers / kickboxer are heavy footed.
3) the lead in / setup technique is proper for the situation,
4) the follow up technique is proper for the situation,
5) the kicker is flexible enough to execute a high kick when he is not fully warmed up,
6) the ground surface is not slippery or does not have a high friction factor,
7) the kickers surroundings will allow for a wide radius for either horizontal or verticle high kick,
8) and the kicker has the nades to do it.
:boxing:


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 9, 2007)

Eck!  What a long thread, packed to gunnels with good posts from various points of view.  

To those who have contributed positively, regardless of stance (yeah, Martial Arts pun attack :lol:!), many hearty 'well dones'.

'Axe grinding' has little place in serious discourse so kudos to those that rise above it :rei:.

My own puny tuppence on this is that I trained for more than a decade in Kung Fu (a style not reknowned for the conservativeness of it's kicking techniques ) and from almost day one was advised that high kicks were probably not your best option in 'street fighting' (Lord, how I hate that term ).

We sparred using head kicks, indeed it was one of my favourite tecniques to put a wrist lock on as I evaded a punch and follow that with a roundhouse to the head whilst I still had hold of the opponent (sighs with memory of ever being that flexible ).  We trained them into reflex just like all the other techniques.  

When the time came for me to put it into practical use, it never even entered my head to try a head kick (wet cobbles, alley-way, cowboy boots, tight jeans) - after all, a low kick that breaks a leg is just as effective at stopping someone than a more flamboyant high kick and I think is lower risk.

To those that have opined that they can employ such kicks with ease in a fight in a pub, then I'm not going to argue as you obviously have reason to believe so.  I can only speak fo rmyself when all is said and done.


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

MJS said:


> Well, hopefully I can get a sincere answer to these questions and not one hidden with sarcasm. My questions are as follows:
> 
> 1) When faced with a situation, do you always opt for a high kick or do you base your response to the conditions present at that time?
> 
> ...


 


DArnold said:


> No problem, I would be happy to share with you offline.


 
Hi Doug,

Just wondering if I could get some feedback on these questions.  I asked here, you said you'd rather take it offline.  I took it to PM, but still no reply.:idunno:


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

Adept said:


> My thoughts on high kicks in a real-life situation:
> 
> .


 
Last Fearner,
You are correct for chideing me and I am deserving of that.

Adept,
All that you post here are myths that could be dispeled by working out with a good TKD instructor.

You are playing the "what if" game with kicks and assumeing that kicking posture is stagnent or absolute. Using the logic in your assumptions above even hand techniques falls apart also. 

Like the assumption (which you did not make) where someone said, "Well, what if your in shoes and street cloathes". As if no one who practices high kicks ever thought to practice in shoes or steet cloaths, or outside, or on uneven surfaces. Could you really conceive that no one who does high kicks every really thought about this? Man, if these questions were followed to their natural conclusions then everyone in TKD or that uses high section kicks would be a moron and deserve to have their butt kicked. 

Appropriate times to be kicking to someones head are far fewer than appropriate times to be striking someones head with another tool.

This is your preference for fighting. In TKD, our theory is that we would rather be at legs lenght than at hands length. I don't like the thought of someone else getting their hands on me. So this is just fighting preference. Is it absolute, no. But just as it sounds like you perfer hands, a grappler would perfer taking you to the gournd and does not agree whith what you think appropriate either.

A head high kick takes longer to reach it's target than the equivalent hand technique. This gives your opponent more reaction time.

Myth, Is the distance longer. Sure. But there are more factors at play than distance, sure. If trained your legs can be faster than your arms. I know people who could kick you in the head three times before your hand could be raised from your shoulder level to cover your face. It was Bill Wallace who taught me to work out with a speed bag with my kicks. I think he knew what he was doing! 

A head high kick places you in a vulnerable position, standing on one leg within 'shoot' range of your opponent.

Shoot range? Ok, yes, and punching puts you within that range also??? So run in and let me use my knees on you like MT. Or as anyone knows when you start to attack you will open up and I can kick you agian. Any time you go on offence you are in a vulnerable position. Unless you have figured out a way to attack and not open up. This is what most call coming-and-going at the same time. Not possible.

A head high kick often requires some kind of twist of the grounded foot, which increases the risk of falling or slipping.

Every technique be it hand or foot derives its power from the ground.
A boxer can not do a knock out punch without twisting their feet on the ground. Many make it sound like when you kick you leave your leg up and stand like a stork. When you walk you lift your foot off the ground and based on this could fall or slip. When you kick at mid section or at low section (Knee, groin...) do you also fall over or just stand there and let your opponent decimate you? Can you do multiple techniques when kicking lower or follow with hands? If not their then why not when kicking high?
When applied to high section , do all natural laws of physics and fighting stop applying? The basis of your mass is approximately where your hips are and in order to maximize power in any technique you use your hips, which in most all cases requires you to move/pivot your feet. It again narrows down to if you practice this.

A head high kick has a slower recovery time, and until the kicking foot is planted on the ground your balance and mobility is limited.

Slower recovery time, maybe in milliseconds, but the deliverance of power is based on your base which can be controlled by many factors, of which muscle size is not one. It is basically dependent on your base, how you connect to the earth, and once again, when you do a knock out punch you must increase your base, and WALLA, your mobility is limited. But does a boxer only throw one punch? Must a kicker only throw one kick?
As with anything your base will be controlled by the angle(lean) of the base leg. And basic physics dictates that if you wish to increase your balance you simply lower you center of gravity (bend your knee(s)). Also read below about skipping, jumping, sliding...

A effective head high kick, for most people, requires warming up and loose pants.

Why? can you not thow a full lenght punch without warmups and a loose shirt? I don't know many MA's who have reverted to disco pants as they understand this. Also, as most injuries do not occure in the muscles (they will usually stretch 150% before tearing) This means you must be more aware of the joints and your extension as this is where most injuries occure. However, this is the same as punching, jumping, spinning... I have never heard anyone say, "Wait you can't attack me until I warm up"
What amount of injuries occure fighting vs. moving around in your home?

A head high kick limits the ability to move and strike simultaneously, unlike handstrikes.

So are you saying you must be stationary to throw a high section kick?
100 lbs hitting you in the temple is really irrelivant if its moving or stationary. What is your logic?

Sliding kicks
Jumping kicks
Running kicks
Reflex kicks
Pushing kicks....

Having said all that, I won't say you should never kick someone in the head.

Based on your training!

Simply that it is _rarely_ the best option and should always be a fail-safe strike where even if it goes pear shaped, you don't end up eating asphalt

The "option" depends on how you train and the tools you are trained in. As many have said, if all you train in is mostly hand techniques, then yes, kicking seems unreasonable. But conversly, if your primary tools are kicking, then getting in and letting someone put their hands on you also seems unreasonable. Having both tools is the optimum war chest.

I need to make clear that I am not proposing that high section kicks are the end-all-be-all of anything. They are mearly one more tool in my arsenal of weapons.

Ditto,
And I also would agree with you that most people would not use this as part of their arsenal. If just for the simple reasons, the larger majority of people are not skilled or trained this way. You go with how you are trained, and then usually what you like which is also what you practice. So if you train with a 45 and I train with a 9mm I fail to see how either of us could discount the others training and have the odacity to call it FACT.

When I refer to the what if game I mean where you show a student a technique, say a release from a straight across grab to the wrist. You use the most basic Hapkido release. Then the student says, yeah, well that doesn't work because what if I grabbed both wrist. Then your technique doesn't work. No, it works, I simply use a different variation.

Therefore, based upon the logic (what ifs) people are using to refute kicking this would mean that releases from grabs were useless because your opponent could use two hands.

No Martial art or Style is that shallow and unthought out. All styles account for this where the scenarios and possibilitys are as flowing and as beautiful as an Aikido 5 on 1 defense.

But the what ifs usually range from the unthought out to the absure.
What is your standing on Ice, I bet you wouldn't kick him in the head. No, and I probably wouldn't punch either. As in any case you have lost your base of power.

Where I bristled is when someone came on and said, High kicks do not work. AND THAT IS A FACT.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 9, 2007)

Exile,
In all fairness to people who favor the High Kicks we should allow discussion on pre-emptive High Kicks because that's probably the area of SD they'd be the most useful.

All,
I think that even in that context there are questions that need to be answered to make a pre-emptive high kick useful.
How do you set up the kick to gain the necessary element of surprise?
Which kicks are easiest to throw with the least amount of telegraphing?
Which kicks are most applicable in different terrains, environments, attire, & with cold unstretched muscles?
In the event you've missed the kick or it didn't knock the attacker out, now what?

Since the majority of us agree that most kicks can not be performed in close range and those that can are too risky for most of us.  I'd also like to hear how those whose first choice of weapon would be a kick to the head regain the necessary range and how they deal with an attacker's momentum once they've gotten too close.

_Don Flatt


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

LawDog said:


> High kicks in a street situation, not with standing a surprise attack, can be done if,
> 1) the kicking range is correct,
> 2) your opponent is either in a stationary position or moving forward much like a heavy footed boxer / kickboxer. Note, I am not saying that all boxers / kickboxer are heavy footed.
> 3) the lead in / setup technique is proper for the situation,
> ...


 
Law dog,
I'm baffled by your logic.  

Let's say #1. Would you punch if the punching range were not correct?

Let's say #2. why does someone have to be moving toward you? Why do they have to be heavy footed? Is this your logic for punching also? You can only punch someone in the head if they are moving toward you and heavy footed? I've seen thousands knocked out who were small and moving away. What am I missing?

# 3 is true of any technique so I'm not sure what this has to do with kicking?

#4 you lost me here. Ok, I knock them out. does that mean that the proper follow up is????

#5 Only logic I can not disagree with!

#6 And standing on a slipper surface does not affect hand techniques????
Or a high friction factor would not stop you from moving your feet to do a punch?

#7 If these are the only two high section kicks you know of and are trained in!

#8 I don't know, do you have the nads to punch someone???? What is the difference? 

Like Mushashi, if you can hit your point then everything else is irrelivant.
What are we all missing here other than it's not your perfered way?


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

Ok,
I hit post and it said you must wait to post.
I waited then hit post again and it posted my reply twice.
And now it's gone?


----------



## Carol (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Ok,
> I hit post and it said you must wait to post.
> I waited then hit post again and it posted my reply twice.
> And now it's gone?



Hi Mr. Arnold...sometimes glitches happen.  I tossed the duplicate post for you  :asian:

- Carol Kaur -
- MT Moderator -


----------



## Kacey (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Ok,
> I hit post and it said you must wait to post.
> I waited then hit post again and it posted my reply twice.
> And now it's gone?



The duplicate was tossed by another moderator; sorry, she must have thought you didn't notice.  Tossing duplicate posts is a standard action on this board, because everyone double posts from time to time, generally without meaning to.

***EDIT*** Just like Carol posted while I was writing this...


----------



## LawDog (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold,
I am at work right now, I will respond later after I close my school for the evening and get home.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold,

I'm baffled that a man of your experience doesn't see the difference between a punch and a kick. How come you don't see how a kick can magnify concerns over risks associated?

Your claims about people that can kick someone in the head three times before they can raise their hand sound like they belong in a full page ad in Black Belt Magazine titled _KICKING SECRETS_ where you charge $175 for the course.  That would be 2 pages after the ad about the Nebraska Mountain Man with the magnetic chi powers that sells his secrets too.

Forgive my skepticism but I'd need to witness claims like this before I'd give them any credulity.

_Don Flatt


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> I'm glad someone got it. My objective in starting this thread was to discuss the effectiveness of high kicks in SD. That is not to discount them altogether but to intelligently discuss how they could be utilized as well as debunk myths associated with this technique. Unfortunately for some people this technique seems to be a sacred cow to some and this debate has degraded to a debate of the use of kicks in close range. Please, note the amount of times I've stated a high kick could work.
> [/i]
> 
> I don't agree with this statement. The arm has less distance to travel and is innately faster.
> ...


 
I think it can be agreed by most that given the right set of circumstances punching can work even if it's not the strategy we would chose.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying as high kicks are only one more tool.  What I questions is the logic of the questions used when such statements like the above are used.

All you need to do is apply most all of the question posed here to any technique and you see how silly the questions are?

Therefore, once you see how silly the qustions are it just boils down to using the proper technique to the proper sitiuation.  If this technique is not part of your arsenal, then it is your loss.

For example you state that range is critical to kicking.  Is it not critical to hand techniques? What would make anyone think that when learning high section kicks you would not be learning distancing and timeing for them as well?

The following exercise will help.
Answer the following questions but replace kick with punch and kicking with punching.
All high section kicking questions answered.

Is the distancing the same on all kicks?
Can I stike with different parts of the foot?
Must my leg be fully extended when it strikes?
Can I lean forward and back when kick?
Can you change the timeing of your kick? 
Can you fake with kicks? 
Can you thow multiple kicks? 
Can you move while kicking?
Should I hold my kick out after the technique.
Should I kick slow?

Youl find that the same rules of physics and body dynamics apply to your arms apply to your legs.

If you want to learn these facets about kicking and become a power ranger (your pun, not mine) you may want to find a good TKD instructor as you do not learn from a BBS or a book. You learn by experienced instruction from experts in the fields.
Good Luck


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Exile,
> In all fairness to people who favor the High Kicks we should allow discussion on pre-emptive High Kicks because that's probably the area of SD they'd be the most useful.
> 
> Since the majority of us agree that most kicks can not be performed in close range and those that can are too risky for most of us. I'd also like to hear how those whose first choice of weapon would be a kick to the head regain the necessary range and how they deal with an attacker's momentum once they've gotten too close.
> ...


Ok,
Back up and be clear!
I did not say it was or is always the first choice, but mearly A choice. The problem came to being when someone stated that high section kicks do not work and then tried to pass it off as FACT. This has already been debunked. My statement was that this person is claiming things about which they are obviously inexperienced. Then everyone started with the what if game. what if you miss... Also, in no manner did I ever say that I would not use hands, elbows, knees...

So as you stated, basicly the majority of you agree that you have never been trained and do not know how to use high section kicking. Therefore it is not understood and too risky. (I just paraphrased what you said above) That is a much clearer statment than they don't work and that is FACT

About your points, many of them you can easly answer.

How do you set up the kick to gain the necessary element of surprise?

How do you set up a punch to the head to gain the necessary element of suprise. Fakes, faints, lead-in techniques, misdirection, timeing, distanceing...

Which kicks are easiest to throw with the least amount of telegraphing?

Lead leg, less movemtent of the body, less telegraphing, quicker. If your looking for specific techniques, just as hands that depends on the situation which is a matter of training.  Do you use a hook at long range? Different kicks have different applications and work in different situations. just like hands.  How long would it take you to explaine the many ways to use your hands?

Which kicks are most applicable in different terrains, environments, attire, & with cold unstretched muscles?

Which hand techniques are most applicable in different terrains, environments, attire & with cold unstretched muscles.

In the event you've missed the kick or it didn't knock the attacker out, now what?

In the event you've missed the kick or it didn't knock the attacker out, now what?


----------



## kaizasosei (Jul 9, 2007)

i think it is good to use kicks like any other strike with the added caution to not be surprised the moment you're off balance.

i would think usually for most all people, there is no kick that is not  completely untelegraphed. people are often more sensitive and ready to deal with kicks. maybe certain suckerfrontkicks, or  a  tkd  backkick  with the targetperson  unable to see  just why or how you raised your knee.
 but it is possible to begin using footwork, stancework and other parts of body such as arms to conceal the upcoming kicks.
i saw this once in a movie when i was a kid and ended up actually practicing; there was this one kungfu master who would not move his upperbody in the slightest when he kicked.  in the movie it was cool because he really didn't move a centimeter kicking practically in all directions. after a while i noticed aside from the physical, there is something worthwhile practicing this because just as left and right are separated so can be also upper and lower.
it's like you look someone straight in the eye and then suddenly your foot shoots into their mouth as you smile casually unmoved above the waist.

i do think that skill and flexibility are needed for good striking with kicks.
the problems with striking well or not with kicks exists with punching too.  being on one leg may be unbalanced, but everything depens on....depends on...there are weakness and strengths everywhere if one search diligently and make use of ones senses and knowledge.
otherwise, everything is is up chance, but true skill waits for certain victory.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Is the distancing the same on all kicks?


No.  But the actual range is determined by the individual's anatomy.  The majority of kicks will be similar in range.


DArnold said:


> Can I stike with different parts of the foot?


Yes, but some parts are more delicate than others.


DArnold said:


> Must my leg be fully extended when it strikes?


No.  If the leg is fully extended when it strikes the technique will have no penetration on the other hand if it is not extended enough the technique will be jammed.


DArnold said:


> Can I lean forward and back when kick?


Sure.  How much do you want to do that on the street or in close proximity to a dangerous foe?


DArnold said:


> Can you change the timeing of your kick?
> Can you fake with kicks?
> Can you thow multiple kicks?


Sure.  What's the point?  These are valid strategies for kicks in sparring or in the dojo/dojang not necessarily the best approach for the street with a dangerous attacker.


DArnold said:


> Can you move while kicking?


No.  You can move before kicking or kick while already moving but you can not move while kicking.


DArnold said:


> Should I hold my kick out after the technique.
> Should I kick slow?


I suppose this is meant to be an answer for those who have said kicking puts you at risk for the "shot".  Why is it you feel that other's are not taking your mobility in consideration, yet it seems you do not consider the mobility of others?


DArnold said:


> Youl find that the same rules of physics and body dynamics apply to your arms apply to your legs.


And you'll find that physics, body dynamics, and simple logic teaches us that; the arms are shorter than the legs and fit into tighter spaces than legs can, the arms are closer to the head and therefore don't have to move as far to reach the head, legs are required to initiate body movements such as walking-jumping-stepping-running, it's possible to cirlcle around your opponent throwing continuous strikes with the arms, you can hit someone in the head with your hands without specialized flexibility or leaning, and your favorite: the legs are significantly more powerful than arms.

Gee you're right those are stupid questions.

_Don Flatt


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 9, 2007)

I'm only adressing a few points for the moment.



DArnold said:


> #4 you lost me here. Ok, I knock them out. does that mean that the proper follow up is????


 
And if your kick doesn't knock them out, whether it's because you missed or they just didn't go down so easy...  what then?  What's your follow-up, because it's been my experience both in the ring and in the streets that people aren't nearly so easy to knock out as TV suggests...  And, there's a good chance that they won't be alone...  That might affect my choice to do something that could leave me unbalanced, or worse...



> #6 And standing on a slipper surface does not affect hand techniques????
> Or a high friction factor would not stop you from moving your feet to do a punch?


 
Anytime you attempt to deliver power standing on one foot, whether with a punch (yes, it can be done) or a kick, you place a lot of reliance on that foot and knee.  And a lot of stress and torque.  Most kicks magnify this...  I kind of feel that it's a less than ideal situation to kick someone in the head, only to dislocate or injure my knee, meaning I can't run away.  But maybe that's just my silly opinion...


> #7 If these are the only two high section kicks you know of and are trained in!


 
Again -- many of us don't seem to be able to understand this amazing kick that manages to go upward in less space than we can figure out.  I know what's coming...  We obviously aren't privileged to have a great TKD instructor teach us.  Again -- if I'm kicking high, my knee must raise up.  Let's assume that I actually place my knee flush on my chest; I still don't see how you can extend the lower leg straight up without swinging it outward or around.



> #8 I don't know, do you have the nads to punch someone???? What is the difference?


 
I do believe that LawDog was suggesting that it does require a certain amount of courage to throw the head level kick on the street, given that there are inherent concerns.  

As I've said several times -- there are indeed circumstances where a high level kick is practical for self defense.  But, they're few and far between.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Ok,
> Back up and be clear!
> I did not say it was or is always the first choice, but mearly A choice. *The problem came to being when someone stated that high section kicks do not work and then tried to pass it off as FACT.* This has already been debunked.


 
I'm curious as to when that was said and by whom? I don't recall that on this thread.  I do recall several incidents of people trying to claim some things as possible that are biomechanicly impossible or highly implausible at best.  Such as a claim of a front high section kick delivered standing only 18" away from an opponent or people that can kick to the head so fast that they deliver head kicks at 3 times most people's punching speed.
*But no one has stated that high kicks don't work on this thread!*
Many have brought up what I would call legitimate risks with the technique.
_Don Flatt


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Last Fearner,
> You are correct for chideing me and I am deserving of that.


 
Speaking for myself here...I've been on this forum for a long time.  I've interacted with some great people.  One thing that impresses me, is when someone shows the ability to be humble.  Things are said in a nice fashion.  Things that do not impress me:  When people have to brag about high rank.  Did you or anyone else do this?  I dont know..did you?




> Like the assumption (which you did not make) where someone said, "Well, what if your in shoes and street cloathes". As if no one who practices high kicks ever thought to practice in shoes or steet cloaths, or outside, or on uneven surfaces. Could you really conceive that no one who does high kicks every really thought about this? Man, if these questions were followed to their natural conclusions then everyone in TKD or that uses high section kicks would be a moron and deserve to have their butt kicked.


 
Looks like you're addressing Adept with this, but I thought I'd comment.  Perhaps the above comment was directed at me..maybe, maybe not.  In any case, if this is something you do, great.  However, you should know that you need to adapt what you do to the environment you're in.  Will that high kick always work?





> Myth, Is the distance longer. Sure. But there are more factors at play than distance, sure. If trained your legs can be faster than your arms. I know people who could kick you in the head three times before your hand could be raised from your shoulder level to cover your face. It was Bill Wallace who taught me to work out with a speed bag with my kicks. I think he knew what he was doing!


 
So, you're saying that if faced with a boxer who has their hands up, your leg will be faster, coming from the ground, than their hand which is already up? BTW, I dont know how you hold your hands, but mine are already up near my head. 




> Shoot range? Ok, yes, and punching puts you within that range also??? So run in and let me use my knees on you like MT. Or as anyone knows when you start to attack you will open up and I can kick you agian. Any time you go on offence you are in a vulnerable position. Unless you have figured out a way to attack and not open up. This is what most call coming-and-going at the same time. Not possible.


 
Are you an offensive or defensive fighter?  Likewise, when you kick, you're open as well. 




> Every technique be it hand or foot derives its power from the ground.
> A boxer can not do a knock out punch without twisting their feet on the ground. Many make it sound like when you kick you leave your leg up and stand like a stork. When you walk you lift your foot off the ground and based on this could fall or slip. When you kick at mid section or at low section (Knee, groin...) do you also fall over or just stand there and let your opponent decimate you? Can you do multiple techniques when kicking lower or follow with hands? If not their then why not when kicking high?
> When applied to high section , do all natural laws of physics and fighting stop applying? The basis of your mass is approximately where your hips are and in order to maximize power in any technique you use your hips, which in most all cases requires you to move/pivot your feet. It again narrows down to if you practice this.


 
Nobody said anything about a stork. LOL!  Its easier to throw a low kick and fire off another, compared to mult. high kicks.  Unless you're talking about throwing more than one kick while your leg is up, which then, yes, you will look like a stork, on 1 foot.  Your foot needs to come down before you can throw another kick.  Its going to take time from that height.  





> Why? can you not thow a full lenght punch without warmups and a loose shirt? I don't know many MA's who have reverted to disco pants as they understand this. Also, as most injuries do not occure in the muscles (they will usually stretch 150% before tearing) This means you must be more aware of the joints and your extension as this is where most injuries occure. However, this is the same as punching, jumping, spinning... I have never heard anyone say, "Wait you can't attack me until I warm up"
> What amount of injuries occure fighting vs. moving around in your home?


 
So, without warming up, you're capable of throwing a high or jumping kick?  


Mike


----------



## Kacey (Jul 9, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> No.  But the actual range is determined by the individual's anatomy.  The majority of kicks will be close in range.



They might be for you - they're not for me... but some of that depends on your definition of close, medium, and long range.  I have kicks - as well as hand techniques - that work in all of those ranges.  For kicks to the head, yes, they are more likely to be short range kicks... but not necessarily.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Yes, but some parts are more delicate than others.



Some parts of the foot _are_ more delicate than others - but the same thing can be said for parts of the hand, as well.  This is where proper technique comes into play - you will perform as you practice, so if you consistently practice proper technique, using the appropriate tool surface (hand or foot) for the technique you're doing, I don't see why this would be a problem.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> No.  If the leg is fully extended when it strikes the technique will have no penetration on the other hand if it is not extended enough the technique will be jammed.



Again - this is different from hand techniques, how?  If a punch, or knifehand, or any other hand technique is fully extended when it strikes the technique will have no penetration, while if it is not extended enough the technique will be jammed.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Sure.  How much do you want to do that on the street or in close proximity to a dangerous foe?



It depends on the situation.  I cannot give a definite "I will always do X in Y situation" because SD situations, by their very nature, are fluid.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Sure.  What's the point?  These are valid strategies for kicks in sparring or in the dojo/dojang not necessarily the best approach for the street with a dangerous attacker.



I don't recall anyone disputing that some things work better in one environment than another - but because a technique does not work for you in the dojang or in the street, does not mean it cannot work for anyone else as well.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> No.  You can move before kicking or kick while already moving but you can not move while kicking.



Sure you can... when I do it, I call it skip kicking, or jump kicking, or sliding... Again, because it works for me, and the people who trained me and those I train, doesn't mean it works for you.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> I suppose this is meant to be an answer for those who have said kicking puts you at risk for the "shot".  Why is it you feel that other's are not taking your mobility in consideration, yet it seems you do not consider the mobility of others?



Of course it's meant for himself and those he knows; why would he speak for people he doesn't know?  You perfect what you practice; if you are convinced something doesn't work, why would you practice it, and if you don't practice it, then you won't be able to do it.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> And you'll find that physics, body dynamics, and simple logic teaches us that; the arms are shorter than the legs and fit into tighter spaces than legs can, the arms are closer to the head and therefore don't have to move as far to reach the head, legs are required to initiate body movements such as walking-jumping-stepping-running, it's possible to cirlcle around your opponent throwing continuous strikes with the arms, you can hit someone in the head with your hands without specialized flexibility or leaning, and your favorite: the legs are significantly more powerful than arms.


 
Again... you are welcome to your opinion; my training and experiences teach me otherwise.  If you train your legs, your feet can become faster than an untrained person's hands - and given that my legs are longer and stronger than my arms, I'd just as soon kick someone before they get into hand range.  Does that mean that _all_ attackers will be untrained?  No.  Does it mean that kicking is my only response in every situation?  No.  But it does mean that I will train every technique I can, practice every technique I am taught, explore every possible application I can, so that when I do need to defend myself, I will react quickly, reflexively, from my training, instead of missing an opening because someone not familiar with my training told me that the technique appropriate to the opening "doesn't work".  Does that mean that high section kicks are the answer in any situation?  Of course not... but neither are knee level kicks, punches to the sternum, or any other technique you could name.  The situation dictates the response; to think otherwise is to blind yourself to possibilities.



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Gee you're right those are stupid questions.
> 
> _Don Flatt



"Stupid is as stupid does"  Forrest Gump 



jks9199 said:


> And if your *kick *doesn't knock them out, whether it's because you missed or they just didn't go down so easy...  what then?  What's your follow-up, because it's been my experience both in the ring and in the streets that people aren't nearly so easy to knock out as TV suggests...  And, there's a good chance that they won't be alone...  That might affect my choice to do something that could leave me unbalanced, or worse...


 
And if your *punch *doesn't knock them out, whether it's because you missed or they just didn't go down so easy... what then?  What's your follow-up? (etc.)

Based on your training and experiences, you may be off-balance after you kick - I'm not.  Did I lose my balance while kicking when I was learning how to kick?  Of course I did... and I learned how to kick faster, to not lose my balance (the faster you kick, the less time you have to lose your balance, or be unbalanced by an opponent or poor footing), and so on.  When I started TKD 20 years ago, I fell down just getting into stance - so does that mean stances are worthless too?  No - it means I was badly coordinated and had bad balance.  Was I able to punch without losing my balance sooner than kick?  I honestly don't remember - but based on my experience with my own students, it was pretty close.



jks9199 said:


> Anytime you attempt to deliver power standing on one foot, whether with a punch (yes, it can be done) or a kick, you place a lot of reliance on that foot and knee.  And a lot of stress and torque.  Most kicks magnify this...  I kind of feel that it's a less than ideal situation to kick someone in the head, only to dislocate or injure my knee, meaning I can't run away.  But maybe that's just my silly opinion...



As I've said repeatedly, you react the way you train, and you train based on what you've been taught and what you understand.  If you've been taught that head-high kicks are slow, unbalanced, dangerous, and not useful - then you're going to train them in that fashion, and for you, they will be just that - slow, unbalanced, dangerous, and not useful.  I was trained with a different theory, and therefore have a different understanding of what high sections kicks are and can do.



jks9199 said:


> Again -- many of us don't seem to be able to understand this amazing kick that manages to go upward in less space than we can figure out.  I know what's coming...  We obviously aren't privileged to have a great TKD instructor teach us.  Again -- if I'm kicking high, my knee must raise up.  Let's assume that I actually place my knee flush on my chest; I still don't see how you can extend the lower leg straight up without swinging it outward or around.


 
Lean your body back for a the minimal time needed to clear the person's body and then forward again to kick the person under the chin.  This is, admittedly, difficult to describe, and hard to do without a demonstration - and I'm sure many people will say that this "leaning" will place you off balance - but if done properly and with the correct timing, you are no more off balance than with any other technique that has been properly trained.



jks9199 said:


> I do believe that LawDog was suggesting that it does require a certain amount of courage to throw the head level kick on the street, given that there are inherent concerns.


 
I don't believe anyone has disputed that.  But then, it takes a certain amount of courage to throw _any_ technique on the street, given that there are inherent concerns... is the person _really _attacking me?  Am I really in danger?  Can I run, or must I fight?  How many of them are there?  Are they armed?  Do they want my stuff, or to rape me?  If they only want my stuff - they can have it - rape is a different issue... and so on.



jks9199 said:


> As I've said several times -- there are indeed circumstances where a high level kick is practical for self defense.  But, they're few and far between.



See above, and thank you for stating your concerns in a courteous fashion.  Please let me know if you have further questions.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 9, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> No. But the actual range is determined by the individual's anatomy. The majority of kicks will be close in range.
> 
> Yes, but some parts are more delicate than others.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kacey (Jul 9, 2007)

MJS said:


> So, without warming up, you're capable of throwing a high or jumping kick?



Yes.  It may not be quite as high as when I am warmed up - but it will be high 
enough to be effective... which is why I practice kicking above the head of my tallest student (6'1") - if I can kick _him_ in the head and higher, then I don't have a whole lot of problems with most people... and it's also one reason why I don't wear skin-tight jeans!  Loose cut is _so_ much easier to move in...


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Yes. It may not be quite as high as when I am warmed up - but it will be high
> enough to be effective... which is why I practice kicking above the head of my tallest student (6'1") - if I can kick _him_ in the head and higher, then I don't have a whole lot of problems with most people... and it's also one reason why I don't wear skin-tight jeans! Loose cut is _so_ much easier to move in...


 
In addition to the reasons already listed on the pros/cons of this subject, I'm going to take a slight turn with my questions.

-Obviously you've been doing this for a while.  I'm sure you must have had the chance to see many people of various shape, size and flexability.  In your opinion, if trained properly, regardless of body genetics, would even the least flexable person be able to kick head height and higher?

-I think you mentioned how tall you were, but I forgot which post it was in.  Anyway, I'm going to assume you're shorter than the person you're speaking of.  You're in full balance thru-out the entire kick?  How much or how far do you have to lean over in order to execute this kick to his head?

-When you're throwing the head high kick to this person, I'm assuming you're in a gi?  Although you're wearing loose fitting jeans, you're still capable of executing that same kick?


----------



## Kacey (Jul 9, 2007)

MJS said:


> In addition to the reasons already listed on the pros/cons of this subject, I'm going to take a slight turn with my questions.



No problem... and those are good questions, too.



MJS said:


> -Obviously you've been doing this for a while.



You could say that... I've been in TKD for 20 years; like Terry, I am a IV Dan, but in the ITF, that's expert rank, not master.  Anyway, there're always people around who know more, or are better at something, or younger, faster, stronger... you get the idea.



MJS said:


> I'm sure you must have had the chance to see many people of various shape, size and flexability.  In your opinion, if trained properly, regardless of body genetics, would even the least flexable person be able to kick head height and higher?



As an absolute?  I doubt it - but I've never said that head high kicks are for everyone or every situation either; I've merely said that they can be appropriate in certain situations, and that I've heard - and sometimes seen - some of those situations.  I will say, however, that every student I've had who was serious about their training became more flexible over time, and quite a few students who came in unable to kick above their knees were kicking the height of their own shoulders or higher by green belt - about a year.  Very few are unable to kick head high by that time - but there are always some people who just aren't good at it; some don't practice, some have back or knee or hip problems that prevent it, and so on.

Some of high kicking is flexibility; some of it is momentum.  Static stretches are good for flexibility, and certainly, people with flexible legs are generally _better_ at kicking in general - and therefore high section kicking - than people who are less flexible.  But some people who are - based on static stretch distance, as an example - less flexible, are better at high section kicks than the more flexible, because they have better balance, because they practice more, because they set themselves a goal to kick a certain height with a certain amount of control and focus... it's very individual.



MJS said:


> -I think you mentioned how tall you were, but I forgot which post it was in.  Anyway, I'm going to assume you're shorter than the person you're speaking of.  You're in full balance thru-out the entire kick?  How much or how far do you have to lean over in order to execute this kick to his head?



I'm 5'5" - so yes, I'm a lot shorter than the student I mentioned, who is one of those tall, slender, disgustingly flexible people... but my focus is better than his (something about 18 years more practice...  ).  And yes, I'm in full balance throughout the kick, and for high kick, which goes straight up (knee up as high as it will go, then let the lower leg flip up so the sole of the foot is up, ball of foot extended, toes back) I don't lean unless I have to lean back slightly to clear the body of the person I'm aiming at.  I don't extend my foot until the very end of the kick, which gives me a little more clearance on the body, as well.  This kick is pretty hard to explain in writing... but if you have access to a horizontal target (hands are good - but they have to be on other people!) try it yourself - start out about shoulder high (lower if you need to) and see - the motion, except for your knee being bent, is very much like a rising/stretch kick.



MJS said:


> -When you're throwing the head high kick to this person, I'm assuming you're in a gi?  Although you're wearing loose fitting jeans, you're still capable of executing that same kick?



Yes, and yes.  Any height I lose due to the constriction of the jeans is made up by the length of my shoes; since I usually train barefoot, and I usually wear jeans and sneakers to work (I spend way to much time kneeling next to student desks to wear anything that's not sturdy), it more or less balances out.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 9, 2007)

Kacey said:


> And if your *punch *doesn't knock them out, whether it's because you missed or they just didn't go down so easy... what then? What's your follow-up? (etc.)


 
What's my follow-up?  It all depends.  My comment was a reaction to DArnold's difficulty with LawDog's post.  DArnold seemed to be absolutely certain that once he throws his head kick, the fight's over.  And -- maybe it is.  All I know is that even the best martial artists I've had the privilige to train with and know feel that they need to plan beyond one-strike/one-kill.  I haven't seen many people able to come off of a head high kick, especially one thrown with knock-out power and intent, without some compromise in their balance.  But that is just my experience; there's is undoubtedly someone out there who can do it.  But there's a second concern; while your foot is up there, you can be knocked over very easily.  If the guy you're kicking isn't alone... You can be knocked to the ground with very little effort.  Low kicks are much more easily turned into steps to reacquire balance -- and if you're foots already close to the ground in a step, it's even easier.



> Based on your training and experiences, you may be off-balance after you kick - I'm not. Did I lose my balance while kicking when I was learning how to kick? Of course I did... and I learned how to kick faster, to not lose my balance (the faster you kick, the less time you have to lose your balance, or be unbalanced by an opponent or poor footing), and so on. When I started TKD 20 years ago, I fell down just getting into stance - so does that mean stances are worthless too? No - it means I was badly coordinated and had bad balance. Was I able to punch without losing my balance sooner than kick? I honestly don't remember - but based on my experience with my own students, it was pretty close.


 
Actually, my training has emphasized returning to stance and balance after I kick (or punch).  But, in the real world -- things don't always work that way.  Throw a kick with boots on; your leg carries much more momentum than bare or even sneakers.  Same thing happens sometimes when you make contact with something or someone.  And, again, in self defense you have to account for the possibility (or probability) that the one guy you're dealing with has friends.





> As I've said repeatedly, you react the way you train, and you train based on what you've been taught and what you understand. If you've been taught that head-high kicks are slow, unbalanced, dangerous, and not useful - then you're going to train them in that fashion, and for you, they will be just that - slow, unbalanced, dangerous, and not useful. I was trained with a different theory, and therefore have a different understanding of what high sections kicks are and can do.
> 
> Lean your body back for a the minimal time needed to clear the person's body and then forward again to kick the person under the chin. This is, admittedly, difficult to describe, and hard to do without a demonstration - and I'm sure many people will say that this "leaning" will place you off balance - but if done properly and with the correct timing, you are no more off balance than with any other technique that has been properly trained.


 
This is the first post that mentioned the hip adjustment.  It makes more sense now.  Thank you.  As to the effect of leaning and balance... that's very variable.  And I know you're not talking a held backwards leaning pose...  Each style has its own principles and rules.  As I mentioned, I know I can generate knock out power with multiple punches thrown while standing one one foot, even though many systems would say there's no power in that position.  Adjusting your balance for the brief moment to lean the hips back as I believe your describing makes sense.  But let me throw one monkey-wrench in...  Can you do that wearing the belts, pants and shoes you normally do?  



> See above, and thank you for stating your concerns in a courteous fashion. Please let me know if you have further questions.


 
Courteous and respectful responses go a long way in furthering communication and understanding.  The appreciation is mutual.


----------



## howard (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Ok,
> So as you stated, basicly the majority of you agree that you have never been trained and do not know how to use high section kicking. Therefore it is not understood and too risky. (I just paraphrased what you said above)


That's not what he said at all.

Here's an excerpt of what you yourself quoted from his post:

_"Since the majority of us agree that most kicks can not be performed in close range and those that can are too risky for most of us. I'd also like to hear how those whose first choice of weapon would be a kick to the head regain the necessary range and how they deal with an attacker's momentum once they've gotten too close..."_

There is nothing in that comment that leads logically to the conclusion that he has never been trained in high kicking (although he may never have - insufficient information from that quote).  Acknowledging that most of us agree that high kicks are risky at close range in no way implies that the poster does not know how to do them.

I trained high kicks for several years in Ji Do Kwan.  Used them in sparring all the time.  My teachers were guys who could knock the taste out of your mouth with their high kicks.  I understand them well.  I acknowledge that I'm now too old to use them effectively, and that I haven't trained them in years, but even when I was younger and still able to throw them, I never would never have used one in self defense - least of all at close range.  Not because I don't understand them.  No, because I believe there are far more appropriate techniques for close-range fighting.  Low kicks; hand, knee and elbow strikes; joint locks; throws; takedowns, pressure point attacks to the face and neck - I find any of these preferable to a kick to the head.

IMO, you simply need to acknowledge that there are at least a few of us in this thread who: a). _have_ trained high kicks, and know how to throw them; and b). have concluded that they are inappropriate for a close-quarters self defense situation, especially when ranked on a probability scale of highest to lowest likelihood of success.  It's no big deal - it doesn't mean we don't believe you couldn't pull off a high-kick self defense. It simply means that we've concluded through training and experience that there are better ways.


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

Kacey said:


> As an absolute? I doubt it - but I've never said that head high kicks are for everyone or every situation either; I've merely said that they can be appropriate in certain situations, and that I've heard - and sometimes seen - some of those situations. I will say, however, that every student I've had who was serious about their training became more flexible over time, and quite a few students who came in unable to kick above their knees were kicking the height of their own shoulders or higher by green belt - about a year. Very few are unable to kick head high by that time - but there are always some people who just aren't good at it; some don't practice, some have back or knee or hip problems that prevent it, and so on.
> 
> Some of high kicking is flexibility; some of it is momentum. Static stretches are good for flexibility, and certainly, people with flexible legs are generally _better_ at kicking in general - and therefore high section kicking - than people who are less flexible. But some people who are - based on static stretch distance, as an example - less flexible, are better at high section kicks than the more flexible, because they have better balance, because they practice more, because they set themselves a goal to kick a certain height with a certain amount of control and focus... it's very individual.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks Kacey.   Great reply.  Obviously, there are two different camps, and its unlikely that either side will budge, but in the long run, I guess it comes down to what each of us is capable of doing, how each of us was trained, and the goals we're looking to achieve.

edit to add:  I have thrown head height kicks in the ring, but as for when its time to defend myself, I'd prefer to keep 'em low.   The arts I've trained in are not known for high kicks.  If someone is capable of pulling one off in a SD situation, thats great.  For myself, I'd prefer to taking a lower risk route, but thats just me...and maybe a few others here too.


----------



## exile (Jul 9, 2007)

MJS said:


> I have thrown head height kicks in the ring, but as for when its time to defend myself, I'd prefer to keep 'em low.   The arts I've trained in are not known for high kicks.  If someone is capable of pulling one off in a SD situation, thats great.  For myself, I'd prefer to taking a lower risk route, but thats just me...and maybe a few others here too.



With a better understanding of the dynamics of this kicks from the recent posts and discussions, I became aware that this is a kick I do, and have done for quite a while, and can do under dojang conditions securely and hard enough that someone standing in front of me about 22" away minimum would get a hell of a shock to their brain and maybe a disassembled lower jaw. No question. And it's also clear to me that it would be impossible for me to have delivered it in any of the actual street fights I've ever been in, at least with the bottom of the jaw as the target, given my proximity to the attacker. I'm actually quite secure with this kickand I wouldn't _dream_ of risking using it in response to a typical attack initiation move, with so many lower risk moves that allow my elbows, forearms and knifehand strikes to come into play.


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

exile said:


> With a better understanding of the dynamics of this kicks from the recent posts and discussions, I became aware that this is a kick I do, and have done for quite a while, and can do under dojang conditions securely and hard enough that someone standing in front of me about 22" away minimum would get a hell of a shock to their brain and maybe a disassembled lower jaw. No question. And it's also clear to me that it would be impossible for me to have delivered it in any of the actual street fights I've ever been in, at least with the bottom of the jaw as the target, given my proximity to the attacker. I'm actually quite secure with this kickand I wouldn't _dream_ of risking using it in response to a typical attack initiation move, with so many lower risk moves that allow my elbows, forearms and knifehand strikes to come into play.


 
Well, thats my thought, as you know.  For myself, I'd much rather target the groin or the leg.  Then again, if you look back at a good portion of the MMA fights, you'll see Thai kicks to the leg.  Sure, from time to time, you see a high kick, but the majority are all low.


----------



## exile (Jul 9, 2007)

MJS said:


> Well, thats my thought, as you know.  For myself, I'd much rather target the groin or the leg.  Then again, if you look back at a good portion of the MMA fights, you'll see Thai kicks to the leg.  Sure, from time to time, you see a high kick, but the majority are all low.



The legs are a great and probably underrated target, at least in KMAs. They're much more accessible, much harder to miss, and require far less range of motion than head shots, and if someone can't stand, or at least can't stand comfortably, they're not going to want to continue the fight all that much. And a groin shot... again, not the easiest to hit, but a lot of advantages. 

Simon O'Neil pointed out in his _TKD Times_ article a couple of years back that a hard strike to the knee or just below triggers a reflexive throwing back of the head by the assailant... opening up the throat to a `rising block' (forearm strike to the throat), a sequence actually recorded in one of the very early Taegeuks. Funny, that...


----------



## MJS (Jul 9, 2007)

exile said:


> The legs are a great and probably underrated target, at least in KMAs. They're much more accessible, much harder to miss, and require far less range of motion than head shots, and if someone can't stand, or at least can't stand comfortably, they're not going to want to continue the fight all that much. And a groin shot... again, not the easiest to hit, but a lot of advantages.


 
My Kenpo instructor will put on some protective gear, similar to a redman suit.  We'll spar and/or run thru techniques, which allows me to really unload and specifically target the legs.  UFC 7 is one example that comes to mind.  Marco Ruas threw some hard Thai kicks at the legs of Paul Varleans (sp) which took quite a toll on him.  One of the Extreme Fighting matches, featured Maurice Smith vs. Marcus Silveria.  Mo threw a number of kicks at the legs of Marcus.  His hands eventually started to drop and he pulled off a head kick, which resulted in a KO.  Viable move? Sure, but notice he hit the legs to set up the head.



> Simon O'Neil pointed out in his _TKD Times_ article a couple of years back that a hard strike to the knee or just below triggers a reflexive throwing back of the head by the assailant... opening up the throat to a `rising block' (forearm strike to the throat), a sequence actually recorded in one of the very early Taegeuks. Funny, that...


 
See, those katas have fighting application after all. 

Mike


----------



## Carol (Jul 9, 2007)

Kickin' it old school with the pride of Boston.

Mr. Pedro Xavier, Mr. Ronald Brady, Mr. Donald Brady.

Enjoy 

[yt]n_UNBzcwtlI[/yt]


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 9, 2007)

Wow! Ron and Don were my friends, and Ron was a school mate of mine. (Helped to throw some hands with me too, back in the day!)

I remember Pedro as well. Outstanding Find Carol!


----------



## bluemtn (Jul 9, 2007)

Great find, Carol, and thanks!


----------



## Boomer (Jul 9, 2007)

:soapbox:

Sorry, I have to be the dissident here.
I used to fight in NASKA, and competed with Pedro Xavier, Hakeem Alston and that lot.  

The whole point sparring thing under NASKA had turned into a glorified "extreme tag" match.  Fighting was ignored, the competition seemd to be "who could wear the gaudiest outfit".  And the whole putting your hand up in the air after scoring a supposed point is downright disrespectful and about the most un humble thing ever...ie: un martial artslike.

Was it entertaining?  I suppose.  Heck, I competed, too.  Was it conducive to martial arts?  Not in the least.

I am glad those days are behind me.  My 7 year old son, who has seen me compete in MMA and muay thai, made his way into the attic one day and found half of the space taken up by old trophies.  He was all wonderment and awe.... and I was embarassed.  How could I tell him that I used to ..."play tag"?


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 9, 2007)

Boomer said:


> :soapbox:
> 
> Sorry, I have to be the dissident here.
> I used to fight in NASKA, and competed with Pedro Xavier, Hakeem Alston and that lot.
> ...


 
Tell him the truth, you were once a kid too. :angel:


----------



## Boomer (Jul 9, 2007)

> Tell him the truth, you were once a kid too. :angel:


 

LOL!:lfao:


I did!  

That's funny tho...


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 9, 2007)

Boomer said:


> :soapbox:
> 
> Sorry, I have to be the dissident here.
> I used to fight in NASKA, and competed with Pedro Xavier, Hakeem Alston and that lot.
> ...


 
I can speak first hand about the real skills of Ron. He was not non conducive to the arts. Those on the receiving end are usually the first to spout off about that stuff. That spouting off is what is not conducive to the arts.


----------



## Adept (Jul 9, 2007)

DArnold said:


> A head high kick takes longer to reach it's target than the equivalent hand technique. This gives your opponent more reaction time.
> 
> Myth, Is the distance longer. Sure. But there are more factors at play than distance, sure. If trained your legs can be faster than your arms.



The mechanics of the leg and the arm are such that, with a comparable amount of training vested in each, a foot will always take more time to reach a high target than a fist.




> A head high kick places you in a vulnerable position, standing on one leg within 'shoot' range of your opponent.





> Shoot range? Ok, yes, and punching puts you within that range also???



Punching does not require you to stand on one leg. It allows you to mount an effective 'sprawl' defence




> A head high kick often requires some kind of twist of the grounded foot, which increases the risk of falling or slipping.





> Every technique be it hand or foot derives its power from the ground.
> A boxer can not do a knock out punch without twisting their feet on the ground.



However, standing on one foot, and then twisting that foot, leaves one more vulnerable to slipping or falling, especially when one is rapidly shifting their centre of balance during a high kick.




> A head high kick has a slower recovery time, and until the kicking foot is planted on the ground your balance and mobility is limited.





> Slower recovery time, maybe in milliseconds



Times during a violent conflict can easily be measured in fractions of a second. A longer recovery time is a disadvantage.




> A effective head high kick, for most people, requires warming up and loose pants.





> Why? can you not thow a full lenght punch without warmups and a loose shirt?



Why? because it requires an extreme flex of the lower body which, for most people, is not possible without warming up. I know I can't kick to head height in my normal street jeans, which are hardly a tight fit.




> A head high kick limits the ability to move and strike simultaneously, unlike handstrikes.





> So are you saying you must be stationary to throw a high section kick?



By and large, yes. While that kick is moving from the ground to the target, your mobility is very limited. Perhaps not to the point where you must be stationary, as a small amount of sliding is possible, but you certainly don't have the option of taking a step to side while your attack is actually travelling.

Now, obviously you can move right up until the point of attack, but once that attacking foot leaves the ground, your options become very limited. Not so with a hand technique.



> if your primary tools are kicking, then getting in and letting someone put their hands on you also seems unreasonable. Having both tools is the optimum war chest.



The concerns I outlined above are always relevant, no matter how much time is invested in training your kicks.

You'll note that I conclude by saying that high kicks are *not* useless. Simply that their drawbacks must be acknowledged before you commit to using one.


----------



## seasoned (Jul 10, 2007)

exile said:


> The legs are a great and probably underrated target, at least in KMAs. They're much more accessible, much harder to miss, and require far less range of motion than head shots, and if someone can't stand, or at least can't stand comfortably, they're not going to want to continue the fight all that much. And a groin shot... again, not the easiest to hit, but a lot of advantages.
> 
> Simon O'Neil pointed out in his _TKD Times_ article a couple of years back that a hard strike to the knee or just below triggers a reflexive throwing back of the head by the assailant... opening up the throat to a `rising block' (forearm strike to the throat), a sequence actually recorded in one of the very early Taegeuks. Funny, that...


 
I can remember many years ago at a tournament I came in with a side kick to my opponents midsection and he blocked it. Funny thing is, but not for him, is when he blocked the kick he redirected it into his own hip. He went off his feet and could not get up for awhile. "You can take a sledge hammer to the top of a car and do a lot of damage, but flatten a few tires and that car is not going any where. Not to good anyway .


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 10, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Kickin' it old school with the pride of Boston.
> 
> Mr. Pedro Xavier, Mr. Ronald Brady, Mr. Donald Brady.
> 
> ...


 
Carol,
That video display much of what my understanding of the limitations of high kicking.  Notice how their arms extend downward and the elbow relevant to the kicking leg rolls outward and upward to get the reach and height needed for the kicks.  The positioning of the hands is what makes them vunerable to kicks in the head.  Kind of brings some validity to my toungue and cheek OP??

*"1. Fight someone else who is also trying to kick high to the head.* They will definitely be hanging back at the right range and you won't have to worry about those pesky throws, takedowns, or hand techniques. Just hope your kicking is better than theirs."

Carol, a few pages back you mentioned some very interesting Indonesian kicks - I'd love to see a video of those!

_Don Flatt


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 10, 2007)

DArnold said:


> You never lean when doing a hand technique?



I consider that poor technique as it limits your mobility and compromises your balance.  If your experience is with fighters who use leaning to land a hand technique then they are not very skilled at hand techniques.  People that are skilled with their hands may lean to evade but not to strike.  That's why one practices footwork to get proper position.


DArnold said:


> Really? I can hop, slide, jump off one leg.... And jumping and skiping are done while kicking. I have always been mobile. Who would just stand and kick and expect their opponent to walk into it. That seems silly!
> 
> Single kicks, multiple kicks, kicking with both legs at the same time...
> 
> I know that both hands and feet are mobil. But many imply that you can just grab my leg and throw me over. Only my grandmother kicks that slow. So that was the point. You don't punch slow enough for people to grab, neither is kicking. Besides, *while your grabbing my leg with both hands then I can have fun punching you in the head or kicking you in the head with the other foot!*



So you can kick to the head with no feet on the ground, and generate power in your hands with a captured leg.  Besides why do I need both hands to grab your leg?  Why go I even need to grab your leg?  I could just attack the one that your standing on or blast you in the head.  You're assumption is I can not read your body to see the kick before it happens.  Your assumption is also that I'd be so afraid of the kick that I wouldn't close the distance as you tried kicking.  All I need to do is move a few inches for the kick to miss then I have alot of options as far as counters while your on one leg.  I could move when you shift your weight to one leg or when you begin your chamber and be in a position where I'm safe and you're not.


DArnold said:


> Legs are more versital than most know. I.e. the example one person gave of hook kicking you in the back of the head while in a clinch.
> 
> Legs are not expected. (I could side kick you in the head while our shoulers are touching.)


What?? Both these statements are completely unrealisitic. How can a side kick get to someone's head while your shoulders are touching?? As far as the hook kick which is possible in close proximity but very risky, I don't see it happening in a clinch (someone grabbing your neck or with 1 or 2 underhooks under your arm).  Try punching, elbows, knees, or low kicks they'll work better.


DArnold said:


> It os possible to circle around your opponent throwing continous kicks.


I'm impressed to hear that you are equally mobile with one leg on the ground as you are with two.


DArnold said:


> And so tit for tat...
> You are mearly stating your preferances based on your training, but applying your training to other styles is about as fun as underestimating your opponent.
> 
> At no time have I ever stated that I would not use my other weapons. Or that I had to use high kicks first. The weapon is not a choice I make but rather made by the holes in my opponents armor.
> ...


At no time have I stated that I wouldn't use a high kick under the right circumstances but I am surprised to find so many proponents of the technique that are being unrealistic about the right circumstances.

By the way I have more than 4 weapons, I have 8> hands, elbows, knees, & feet and more if I pick something up.

You can add the one leg mobility art, the elastic side kicks, the kicks with no support leg, & the elastic hook kick to your one page ad in Black Belt Magazine.


Kosho Gakkusei said:


> DArnold,
> 
> I'm baffled that a man of your experience doesn't see the difference between a punch and a kick. How come you don't see how a kick can magnify concerns over risks associated?
> 
> ...


 
_Don Flatt


----------



## zDom (Jul 10, 2007)

MJS said:


> So, without warming up, you're capable of throwing a high or jumping kick?




I am


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 10, 2007)

zDom said:
			
		

> I am


So am I.

The question is not whether the kick can be done or not - it clearly can.  The question is the efficacy of the kick on the str33t.

:shrug:

Folks, we have reached no man's land - where everyone's right and everyone's wrong.

The kick can be done effectively, quickly, by a select few people and *might* work in a self-defense situation with the right people, the right circumstances, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.  Therefore we cannot within the rules of logic correctly state that it can't be done and is worthless because of those few people who could do it.

The vast majority of people would not choose it as a viable self-defense tool because of the percentage of people who can make it work.  Because that percentage is so low, and because the likely physique of those who make a living at doing this is likely not conducive to doing so, it is considered totally unviable by those people.

So ... everybody's right ... and everybody's wrong.  Two schools of thought and really, they will likely never agree.

Let's move on, folks, and refrain from cheap shots, accusations of falsehoods, personal digs, etcetera.

:asian:


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 10, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> So you can kick to the head with no feet on the ground, and generate power in your hands with a captured leg. Besides why do I need both hands to grab your leg? Why go I even need to grab your leg? I could just attack the one that your standing on or blast you in the head. You're assumption is I can not read your body to see the kick before it happens. Your assumption is also that I'd be so afraid of the kick that I wouldn't close the distance as you tried kicking. All I need to do is move a few inches for the kick to miss then I have alot of options as far as counters while your on one leg. I could move when you shift your weight to one leg or when you begin your chamber and be in a position where I'm safe and you're not.


I forgot to mention I could also move just out of range as the kick is thrown and follow the retraction in.
_Don Flatt


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Jul 10, 2007)

For me it is simple when I'm in the tussle.  I have a few points (I'm a shin kicker myself).

1.  A leg is bigger, weighs more and  generally delivers a much harder strike than a punch.
2.  The head.  If you hit anything enough, it doesn't work anymore.
3.  Except for accute pressure point tactics, a harder hit is generally a better hit.  A leg is generally capable of much more power.
4.  You can headbutt a fist more effectively than a shin.
5.  Sometimes the only thing to do when a powerhouse kick is en route is to get outta the way.  If they get outta your way you may be in a bad position.
6.  I find using knees to be a much better alternative.
7.  Shin kicks keep me in a less comprimised position.
8.  When I kick I try to break something (knee, jewels, my foot off in their @$$.)  So it's pretty dedicated and I HATE getting 'jammed' in the middle of a high kick.
9.  No matter how good I get, I beleive the simplest techniques are the best.
10.  I tend to beleive Chuck Norris would sooner kick your leg off than your head.
11.  There is a time and a place for everything.  I train it, but don't use it.  Not that that I've never ended a fight with it but it was a lucky reflex.  Not something I want to make a habit of.
12.  What would you do if someone tried to kick you in the head?


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 10, 2007)

Chaps, I really think it's time to take on board the sentiments that *shesulsa* expressed above.

There are two irreconcilable camps here and no amount of logic, emoting or anecdotal evidence is going to change anyones mind.

Stick the serpents tail in its mouth and let it feed on itself and stop bothering everyone else i.e. let this thread go and sink out of sight so we can get on with reading posts that don't make us grind our teeth.


----------



## Carol (Jul 10, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Carol,
> That video display much of what my understanding of the limitations of high kicking. Notice how their arms extend downward and the elbow relevant to the kicking leg rolls outward and upward to get the reach and height needed for the kicks. The positioning of the hands is what makes them vunerable to kicks in the head. Kind of brings some validity to my toungue and cheek OP??
> 
> *"1. Fight someone else who is also trying to kick high to the head.* They will definitely be hanging back at the right range and you won't have to worry about those pesky throws, takedowns, or hand techniques. Just hope your kicking is better than theirs."



Hi Don, if I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment.   Isn't what you are saying (someone also trying to kick you in the head) a matter of taking advantage of an opportunity presented...and having the experience to know when such a move would be advantageous?

My experience with sparring is very limited (I'm still an MA noobie) but the way I find myself fighting is...I survey my opponent looking for areas of opportunity. If I see a target that looks "more avaliable" than others, I attack that target.  I'm noticing that as my own abilities slowly increase, I'm seeing different targets when I spar.

Will I ever be personally able to kick like that...I honestly don't know.  It seems to me that with the proper training and with the proper teaching, one can get a sense for when to work it in to their training...but I can't speak from experience as to whether that's the case.  :asian:



> Carol, a few pages back you mentioned some very interesting Indonesian kicks - I'd love to see a video of those!



Me too.  I don't have much of a video collection.  I don't personally learn very well just from watching (I'm painful to teach), I need an instructor that can explain something to me eleven-teen different ways so I have to admit I don't have a very good catalog of the arts that interest me.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 10, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Hi Don, if I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment.  Isn't what you are saying (someone also trying to kick you in the head) a matter of taking advantage of an opportunity presented...and having the experience to know when such a move would be advantageous?


 
Exactly.  Too many people that probably have tons of insight into high kicking have treated this thread as an argument as to whether high kicking works or not, when the discussion should be when does high kicking work and under what circumstance is it not the best idea.

With that in mind, I will not tolerate the exaggeration of abilities, ignorance of physical limitations, or borderline supernatural claims.  The point is for street effectiveness.

_Don Flatt


----------



## MJS (Jul 10, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Exactly. Too many people that probably have tons of insight into high kicking have treated this thread as an argument as to whether high kicking works or not, when the discussion should be when does high kicking work and under what circumstance is it not the best idea.


 
AFAIK, there was mention of that.  However, those claims were part of the split camp.  Some were saying, yes they had done high kicks in a SD situation and the other side saying impossible and/or it was not a wise thing to do.



> With that in mind, I will not tolerate the exaggeration of abilities, ignorance of physical limitations, or borderline supernatural claims. The point is for street effectiveness.
> 
> _Don Flatt


 
Likewise, this is why I'm done with this thread as well.

Mike


----------



## Carol (Jul 10, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Exactly.  Too many people that probably have tons of insight into high kicking have treated this thread as an argument as to whether high kicking works or not, when the discussion should be when does high kicking work and under what circumstance is it not the best idea.
> 
> With that in mind, I will not tolerate the exaggeration of abilities, ignorance of physical limitations, or borderline supernatural claims.  The point is for street effectiveness.
> 
> _Don Flatt



*puts away the magic amulets*  

IMO...it comes down to training.  I don't think anyone would advocate picking up a gun and shooting it if they have not had gun safety and marksmanship training. 

I also don't think marksmanship proficiency is required to be a martial artist.  However, should a firearm be the choice of defense, it should ONLY be used if one has marksmanship proficiency.  

High kicks...they are an unusual weapon.  Like firearms, I don't personally believe that one must specifically be able to use high kicks in a combat situation to be a martial artist.  However, if they are used, they should _only _be used if one has been trained to be effective in combat with them.  

Just my thoughts though.


----------



## LawDog (Jul 10, 2007)

Princess Carol,
Excellent point of view.
:asian:


----------



## Boomer (Jul 11, 2007)

> High kicks...they are an unusual weapon. Like firearms, I don't personally believe that one must specifically be able to use high kicks in a combat situation to be a martial artist. However, if they are used, they should _only _be used if one has been trained to be effective in combat with them.
> 
> Just my thoughts though.


 
I do agree, it is a good point of view.
I will however, add this sentiment:
*You DO what you TRAIN*.

If you are a student of _martial sport_, where high kicks are the norm, then when confronted, you will react as your body naturally knows how...depending on the environment, this could be a bad thing.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 11, 2007)

There is one factor that I have seen happen quite a few times as well. It comes from those attackers (I'll assume we are all doing this as defense-RIGHT?) that have not trained in the arts. They are unfamiliar with seeing kicks come their way. When it does, you sometimes see, what I call the deer in the headlights syndrome. It's where they freeze motionless with a blank look in their eyes, and react after the hit happens. In my experiences I have seen some kicks that were really wound up and blatant land flush! After, you would hear the explanation from those on the receiving end go like "I saw it coming, I just couldn't get my body to move..I don't know what happened". As a 3rd person watching, it was the syndrome. It's almost like your brain searches through it's files of defensive measures against this unfamiliar attack, while the body waits.

The only other problem is accuracy. Those that train do have more with high kicks, but, even they have a problem scoring flush. If they do, then the rest of us, luck aside, will have a near impossible time. Going with above, those kicks that landed flush did damage but the fights continued.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 11, 2007)

Boomer said:


> I do agree, it is a good point of view.
> I will however, add this sentiment:
> *You DO what you TRAIN*.
> 
> *If you are a student of martial sport, where high kicks are the norm, then when confronted, you will react as your body naturally knows how...depending on the environment, this could be a bad thing*.


Great point!!  Alot of people's arguments have been, "I can do them because I train them and if you don't train them too they won't work for you."  This puts a whole other spin on that argument.

It's surprising to me that not many proponents of this technique even seem willing to talk about environmental concerns and issues with range.  I think to make any technique useful learning when to use a technique is equally important to learning how.



Hand Sword said:


> There is one factor that I have seen happen quite a few times as well. It comes from those attackers (I'll assume we are all doing this as defense-RIGHT?) that have not trained in the arts. They are unfamiliar with seeing kicks come their way. When it does, you sometimes see, what I call the deer in the headlights syndrome. It's where they freeze motionless with a blank look in their eyes, and react after the hit happens. In my experiences I have seen some kicks that were really wound up and blatant land flush! After, you would hear the explanation from those on the receiving end go like "I saw it coming, I just couldn't get my body to move..I don't know what happened". As a 3rd person watching, it was the syndrome. It's almost like your brain searches through it's files of defensive measures against this unfamiliar attack, while the body waits.


 
Good point as well.  High Kicks that work on the street have alot to do with the ignorance and often fear of the attacker on how to handle them.  One question, with the recent surge of popularity of the UFC, do you think high kicks have become demystified thus this advantage could be neutralized?



Hand Sword said:


> The only other problem is accuracy. Those that train do have more with high kicks, but, even they have a problem scoring flush. If they do, then the rest of us, luck aside, will have a near impossible time. Going with above, *those kicks that landed flush did damage but the fights continued.*


 
I have a problem with buying into the one strike - one kill philosophy or building off assumed reactions to different strikes.  Be it with hands or feet.  It seems to blatantly ignore Murphy's Law and what happens when you ASSUME.  
:asian:I know most of us study eastern MAs but these western tidbits of wisdom still apply on western streets.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jul 11, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> .... One question, with the recent surge of popularity of the UFC, do you think high kicks have become demystified thus this advantage could be neutralized?
> 
> _Don Flatt


 
How'd I forget to mention this idea before you did?


----------



## Kacey (Jul 11, 2007)

Boomer said:


> I do agree, it is a good point of view.
> I will however, add this sentiment:
> *You DO what you TRAIN*.



I agree.



Boomer said:


> If you are a student of _martial sport_, where high kicks are the norm, then when confronted, you will react as your body naturally knows how...depending on the environment, this could be a bad thing.



And this is different from other techniques, how?  Depending on the environment, a punch could be a bad thing - for example, a student I knew at the middle school where I teach tried to punch the SRO (School Resource Officer - a local police officer assigned to our school) - but the student (13 years old) didn't realize the SRO was wearing a bullet proof vest, and broke his hand.  Environmental factors can affect *any *technique - and I don't think any of us who say that high kicks can be effective ever said they were the only kick - or even the technique of first choice - just another tool in the tool box, to be used as appropriate, like any other tool.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 11, 2007)

LawDog said:


> *Princess Carol,*
> 
> :asian:


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 11, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Good point as well. High Kicks that work on the street have alot to do with the ignorance and often fear of the attacker on how to handle them. One question, with the recent surge of popularity of the UFC, do you think high kicks have become demystified thus this advantage could be neutralized?
> _Don Flatt


 

Only if in goofing around they and their friends try kicking at each other. However, I still feel it would take a regular practice of it to overcome the freeze up. Based on that, I think the advantage will remain.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 12, 2007)

Well I'm rather peeved that while I've been busy working you've managed to make this last 10 pages!
My only comment however concerns Geoff Thompson, when Exile mentioned him people seemed to think he was just some guy who has written some books. I have trained with him, my instructor and he are good friends and I can tell you everything in his books is genuine. The same goes for Peter Conserdine and Iain Abernethy. Geoff is a very hard man and if he says something works or it doesn't, disbelieve him at you own risk. You will not get better 'reality' training than his.
In my job I do get confrontations invariably with males more often than not Fijians ( the British army is short of recruits so they went to Fiji, they've stopped recruiting them though as they are very violent when drunk and will rape and assault however we still have a great many of them, none under six foot and built like brick outhouses)Trust me, a head kick from Crocop will not stop these guys. A kick in the nuts, a smashed nose, a kick to the kneecap, a finger in the eye will however slow them down long enough to get a few of you restraining him. I have a kubatan aimed straight into his throat usually ( that little bit just above the sternum), a palm heel to the nose, grab his ears and knee him in the face does it too. They are usually sporting though and it's one on one. Then arrest the bugger. What's ideal though is the dog handler there! You can't beat the flashing white teeth of a GSD or Rottweiler who wants to 'play', you can keep the kicks give me a dog!


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 12, 2007)

Hand Sword said:


> Only if in goofing around they and their friends try kicking at each other. However, I still feel it would take a regular practice of it to overcome the freeze up. Based on that, I think the advantage will remain.


 
Just playing devil's advocate.  One thing the UFC teaches people is to charge in with a tackle or wrestling shot to neutralize kicks.  I've met many untrained young men who claim that's what they'd do against a "kicker" because of what they've seen on UFC.  Does that mean for these guys much of the psychological effect that causes a freeze up has been disapated by their entertainment?  Bearing this in mind I wouldn't want to take the chance my attacker(s) has a wrestling backround and attempt to lift my foot off the ground pre-emptively.  I probably wouldn't use a pre-emptive kick to the head unless the attacker gave such a blatant opening for the front head kick (or the high section kick described earlier, frontward direction) that I couldn't resist.  I wouldn't try to pull of a roundhouse or side kick to the head because it will be more difficult to recover from these as they cause you to turn your center away from the attacker.



Kacey said:


> And this is different from other techniques, how? Depending on the environment, a punch could be a bad thing.....


 
No one has ever said that a punch couldn't be a bad thing too.  I think kicking is a bad idea more often than punching.  Sometimes running away is the best idea, sometimes not.  Spotting trouble ahead of time and keeping out of it is always the best thing.  As to the differences between punching and kicking please re-read this thread as that's been discussed at length.  You are free, however, to believe what you wish.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 12, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> let  this thread go and sink out of sight so we can get on  with reading  posts that don't make us grind our teeth.


I beg to differ (and I don't beg often!  ).  I think this thread is a potentially beneficial discussion about practical application of classroom trained techniques, particularly kicking (one of my favorite subjects).  For me, it is a welcome change from the fluff threads of &#8220;what color are the walls in your dojo/dojang, and how does that make you feel (happy, sad, angry)?

Kosho, I want to clarify what I meant by my comment about the speed of kicks.


Kosho  Gakkusei said:


> 5. Your opponent is  drunk. (As long as they're drunk and you're not, you should have time  for  your high kick to the head.)





Last  Fearner said:


> (note my red highlight. Just how much time do you  think it takes for a kick to the head? Mine are not super-human,  but get there  faster than a block.)





Kosho  Gakkusei said:


> I don't agree with this statement. The arm has  less  distance to travel and is innately faster.


The reason I quoted #5 and highlighted the red, is because it implies that an opponent needs to be &#8220;drunk&#8221; in order for a kick to get to the head unnoticed, or unblocked.  My experience is that it does not take that much &#8220;time for your high kick&#8221; to reach the head, therefore it is fast enough to hit a sober person.  My comment is not a comparison of speed of a kick vs a punch or a block.  What I said is that the kick is fast enough to get to the head before a block is used to stop it.  All I have to do is be within kicking range, and execute the kick faster than the reaction time of the human brain (about .07 to .10 of a second).  Another way is to kick mid section first.  They either block, or get hit.  If they block, they are dropping a guard to do so which exposes the head.  It only takes a fraction of a fraction of a second to change to a head kick since my foot is already at their torso.


Kosho  Gakkusei said:


> The  hook kick you describe would be viable in close range and has been  mostly  overlooked so far in the discussion. Personally, I would  not be comfortable on  one leg for even .1 seconds that close to  an attacker.


Actually, when you think about it, everyone is on one leg for varying intervals during a fight.  Unless you can last through every fight with little &#8220;baby shuffles&#8221; of the feet, you are likely to step when you avoid an attack, while punching, or during that clinching phase, and the process of shoot and take-downs.  Judo practioners will often be on one foot while executing various sweeps, reaps and flips (often much longer than a kick and while standing closer).  Does this mean that throws and take-downs are too risky and should not be attempted in real life?  We might as well just end Judo training and Taekwondo kicking all together since it seems to be so ineffective in the street.  Or perhaps it just takes a little better understanding of how and when these moves should be executed.

It is my experience that those who &#8220;toy&#8221; with kicking, and have not perfected the street application yet, will telegraph, kick slow, and recover even slower.  They tend to adjust their weight before they kick, position their feet differently just before the kick, rotate their less flexible hip joints awkwardly, are off balance during the kick, and have a difficult time repeating a second or third kick, or follow up hand strike if the kick misses. A person could be an excellent kicker, in practice, and still not know how to do it correctly in the street.


Kosho  Gakkusei said:


> I think it's been agreed by most  that given the right set of circumstances  they can work even if  it's not the strategy we would chose. Perhaps we could  elaborate  on right and wrong circumstance as well as how to spot and create  opportunities. I'd be interested in what those of you who train & prefer  head kicks would have to say about this.


I think this is a fine objective, and I agree.  Like ANY technique, given the &#8220;right set of circumstances&#8221; it will work.  The only question of debate (in my opinion) is whether or not those circumstances are commonly present in most street fights, and is there any inherent risk once a head high kick is initiated that would exceed the normal risk of most any technique.  I do believe it depends on the particular fight and many variables, including the environment, how you are dressed, and the skill and tactics of your opponent.   As a general rule, I believe the high kicks should be avoided and reserved for specific moments, and only used by those who are trained sufficiently in how and when to use them in real-life self defense.

The downfall comes when otherwise skilled fighters, who are only beginning to develop their kicking skills, make foolish attempts at a head kick, spinning kick, jumping kick, or flying kick in the street.  Now take note of this.  I did not say that those kicks were &#8220;foolish&#8221; and should not be used.  It is the &#8220;foolish attempt&#8221; by those who are not adequately prepared to use them yet.  Some might choose never to go that route, and that is fine, but I think we have already established that it is not for everyone.

The real question is, should it be attempted by anyone, and how do they make it work with minimal risk.  I usually discourage my students from even considering a high kick in the street until they are a Black Belt, because they are not trained well enough in those early stages.  I have seen Black Belts around the world who were not ready, and might carelessly assume that they could kick high in self defense, only to be brought down.  These are the stories you hear about &#8220;Black Belts getting beaten up.&#8221;  Sometimes, good Black Belts can get careless, or over-confident, but in most cases, these &#8220;Black Belts&#8221; either come from a McDojo, or are just someone who has seen too many movies and claims to be a Black Belt.

Even if I am standing eye-to-eye (about 3 - 4 feet apart) from my attacker, and they have their guards right up to their head to prevent a head kick,  there are always ways around those fists including varying the angle and trajectory. 

There are many factors that apply when implementing any kick.  However, there are non-martial artists (street fighters) who would argue that &#8220;the Martial Art is useless,&#8221; and they would just hit you with a 2x4.  Those who don't train in the Martial Art, will put down its effectiveness, citing all kinds of weaknesses - - &#8220;you have to be wearing those pajamas for it to work and you don't have time to change&#8221; or &#8220;you won't be able to remember all that stuff, and it takes too long to get into those funny stances - - I would just jump you and take you down before you can think of your first karate move.&#8221;

For those who know better, the Martial Art does not work that way, and is very effective.  Yet, there are Martial Artists who don't want to kick at all because, if and when they have tried it, it didn't work for them.  They say, &#8220;kicking is a bad move, even kicking low.  You are off balance, and I would just grab your leg and throw you down or tackle you.&#8221;  If I were pathetic at kicking, my opponent might be able to do that, but that is not how it happens against a trained kicker.  The same thing applies to high kicks.  Those who have not trained in it at all, or those who have trained with kicks, but did not get the specifics of how and when to use them properly in the street will say it is too much of a risk.


CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 12, 2007)

MJS said:


> I  would say that the parameters, what ifs or whatever else  we may  choose to call them, are in fact very important....
> Maybe  I'm misunderstanding here, but I get the impression that you're  saying  these factors are not important.


Yes, I agree that they are important, and should always be taken into consideration.  However, sometimes people feel that each of these restrictions (shoes, clothes, terrain etc) will prevent the use of high kicks entirely, but that is of course not true.  In the 70s, I bought a pair of those Chuck Norris Kicking Jeans with the extra stretchy material in the crotch so that you can kick with ease in the street (anyone else remember those).  Anyway, whenever I go out, I take into consideration what I'm going to wear.  If I am going to a bar or someplace of higher risk, I dress in loose clothes.  In most situations, I wear shorts, sweat-pants, or other such clothes so as to not restrict my kicks. 


MJS said:


> So  someone wearing a suit, a dress, jeans, sneakers, work  boots,  high heels is going to be able to execute these kicks without any  issues?


If a person is not dressed appropriately for kicks, then don't kick at all - - simple common sense.  I teach female students how to adjust their stance for quick defense if they are wearing heels, but recommend they either break the heel off or remove the shoe at the first opportunity.  However, I believe the OP goes beyond the simple, what if I'm wearing cement shoes - - can I kick to the head?  In my every day life, there are rare times (if ever) that my dress restricts my ability to kick.
Many years ago, my older brother would get some tough guys threaten to come to his place of business (a mechanic's garage) and beat him up.  He would ask me to come hang out with him for the day.  I would show up in my good dress suit.  He would say, why are you dressed like that?  To which I would reply, I don't intend to get dirty!  My dress pants are a flex-material that stretches well, and I have always felt (like when working security) that there is a psychological factor with most people when attacking a person in street clothes as opposed to a person in a suit and tie (use a clip on or break-away tie for safety).


MJS said:


> I have heard  the "Well, if need be, I'll just take my shoes  off." comment.  So in the middle of winter and I know that CO can get some  whopper  snow storms, as I used to live there, people are going to take off  their  boots?


Here is one of those what ifs where I chuckle.  How did it get to be in the middle of winter all of a sudden, and how did I get in CO?  Ok, common sense again.  It's winter and snow and ice are on the ground.  Don't bother kicking regardless of what is on your feet.  On the other hand, you don't think fights occur indoors in the winter?  Feel free to take you boots off.... Billy Jack did.


MJS said:


> Even  if this happened during warm weather, what about the  pavement?  Unless the bottoms of ones feet are so dry and crusty, that one  wouldn't feel anything, the pavement isn't that forgiving.


Ok, now here's the other side of the what if coin.  The shoes are off.  Are we on a side walk?  Could I move over to a grassy lawn?  Am I in a parking lot or on gravel.  I have fought in those circumstances (while bare foot because my shoes were already off), and I kicked the guy in the head twice.  My feet suffered for the sake of the skirmish, but I didn't notice it till after the fight was over.  Plus, it wasn't just the kicking, but the moving about, blocking, punching, and defending against his aggression that scraped my feet up a bit.

Environement and what you are wearing are important factors.  However, no matter what the conditions, we use what techniques we are capable of doing safely, and try to use common sense when applying high kicks.  Don't rule them out entirely, just don't plan on using them constantly.

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## exile (Jul 12, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Well I'm rather peeved that while I've been busy working you've managed to make this last 10 pages!
> My only comment however concerns Geoff Thompson, when Exile mentioned him people seemed to think he was just some guy who has written some books. I have trained with him, my instructor and he are good friends and I can tell you everything in his books is genuine. The same goes for Peter Conserdine and Iain Abernethy. Geoff is a very hard man and if he says something works or it doesn't, disbelieve him at you own risk. You will not get better 'reality' training than his.
> In my job I do get confrontations invariably with males more often than not Fijians ( the British army is short of recruits so they went to Fiji, they've stopped recruiting them though as they are very violent when drunk and will rape and assault however we still have a great many of them, none under six foot and built like brick outhouses)Trust me, a head kick from Crocop will not stop these guys. A kick in the nuts, a smashed nose, a kick to the kneecap, a finger in the eye will however slow them down long enough to get a few of you restraining him. I have a kubatan aimed straight into his throat usually ( that little bit just above the sternum), a palm heel to the nose, grab his ears and knee him in the face does it too. They are usually sporting though and it's one on one. Then arrest the bugger. What's ideal though is the dog handler there! You can't beat the flashing white teeth of a GSD or Rottweiler who wants to 'play', you can keep the kicks give me a dog!



Tez' post is 100% on the money, and it raises a point that bears on the issue of head kicks in SD but goes well beyond it.

People earlier in this post seemed to be questioning the validity of bringing something written in a book to bear on matters with which they had direct or indirect experience. But the contents of these chaps' books reflects decades' worth of careers in confrontation and control of extreme violence on a regular and frequent basis; I'd be willing to bet everything I own that in the course of their `working' lives, People like Geoff Thompson or Marc MacYoung have been involved in more dangerous CQ fighting in the course of a single month than any of us who've posted on this thread have seen in the course of our entire lives. _This has been their livelihood_. Not the one-off abberation, a bit of eye contact in a subway gone wrong or a booze-fueled flash fight in a bar, but night after working night of this stuff. I won't speak for anyone else, but for myself, I would feel mortified if I had to put my own experience with street violence&#8212;a couple of times a year, maybe, over the 10 years or so I lived in NYC, and one or two other episodes&#8212;against what these guys have done. So if we're talking about `what works for self-defense' in a systematic, high-probability way, I wouldn't dream of putting my own _impression_ of what worked once or twice for me against someone who probably saw between fifty and a hundred fights a year during the course of his working life. Those careers are matters of public record; as Tez says, ask anyone in the `violence-control' business in the UK whether Geoff Thompson speaks from authority and watch the looks you get!

I also have observed that people apparently unfamiliar with the qualifications of guys like Thompson, Consterdine and the others refer to them dismissively as `bouncers' or `fighters.' I find this baffling: surely, if the issue is the effectiveness of some technique for streetfighting purposes, we should go for our best pool of opinion to those who know what we don't about streetfighting, and those people will be, pretty much by definition, `fighters', no?&#8212;and bouncers see a lot of fighting. But these folks are not just fighters, bouncers, club doormen, etc.; they are also trained martial artists, many of them quite high ranking. Peter Consterdine is a 7th Dan Shotokan karateka, one of the highest ranked in the UK, and a long-time student of Wing Chun (training extensively in Hong Kong) who has also been on British International karate competition teams&#8212;and worked for a club doorman in _Manchester_ [!!!]&#8212;a hell of way to have to make a living, if you ask me, but he did and he's here to tell the tale in robust good health. (And please, let's not forget that Matsumura and Itosu, the founders of modern linear karate, were involved in dozens of fights each during their lives, as were great karateka like Chotoku Kyan and Choki Motobu; and for the KMA folks here, remember that the Kwan founders and their students fought _kakidemishi_ challenges with each other in the desperate days right after Liberation in the early 1950s, and those fights were anything but the kind of gentlemanly sparring enforced by WTF rules. So I don't think the kind of either/or that has at times been put before us&#8212;you are either a martial artist or (implicitly a _mere_) fighter holds water if you look at the history of the MAs unromantically, without the kinds of strange chivalric assumptions many people seem unable to get away from in looking at Asian MAs.) 

The same kind of thing holds for the other people I mentioned, many of whom are part of or associated with the British Combat Association. And that's another important part of the story of why MAists who don't have to put their, um, skeletal integrity on the line on a nightly basis should pay the closest attention to what these people are telling us.

The BCA, and the group around Abernethy, is in effect an experimental research group in the MAs. These guys, with the collective equivalent of a century or two of the kind of experience I've described already, regularly get together to work out SD methods and techniques, putting everything they know about applications of MA techniques to the nastiest kind of fighting under the most practical scrutiny. These guys know how to kick high. They know how to use elbows and knees, they've been grabbed from front and behind in just about every way you can be, and they test out defenses and counters. Abernethy, in some of his newsletters, has described these symposia and workshops, and it sounds pretty bloody `live' to me! The assumption that these people don't actually know how to kick high, so they don't train high kicking for SD, strikes me as resoundingly... misinformed.

In bringing these people's experience into the discussion, therefore, I have only been trying to provide an avenue for us to get access to experience that very few if any of us actually _possess_. I think dismissal of these hard-won, battle-tested perspectives as merely "book-larnin' " from people who `don't know how to kick high', cuts you off from probably the most authentic source of information on real fighting that you're liable to get. I think a more considered view might include the possibility that these people systematically warn us about the considerable risks involved in high kicks in close-quarters SD situation precisely because they _are_ so high risk, and lower-risk, at least equally effective moves are readily available&#8212;the forms of TMAs are, in fact, all about that. The knowledge is there; not everyone might want to take it into account, but it's there.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 12, 2007)

exile said:


> LF, you've made some interesting and useful points in the discussion, and I appreciate the tone of your post very much!


No problem! I knew you really liked me, you've just had a difficult time expressing it! :ultracool



exile said:


> But I think that you have a misimpression of what the different statements about the parameters...


Not really, I'm only joking with you a bit about that. I'm just amused by the specifics that really speak for themselves. Example: Would you drive your car at night if both your headlights were burned out? No, not unless it was an emergency. Conclusion: Driving at night is inherently dangerous and shouldn't be done. That just doesn't make sense. Create a set of restrictive parameters that don't exist in every fight, and say that kicking high is too risky because of those parameters. If your headlights are out - don't drive at night. If it is not safe to do so, don't kick high. I say it can be safe when the parameters are right, so change the parameters during the fight, or don't kick high, but the kicks are still viable if you know how to change the parameters.



exile said:


> As the discussion proceeds, people bring in different numbers or sets of conditions as a way to fine-tune their response to what previous posters have been saying. People are using different numbers because they are approximating the conditionsthat's hardly changing the parameters!


I'm not really suggesting that anyone was changing their story and not following a logical train of thought as to what range kicks are used. The funny thing to me is when a general question is posed (if you go by the OP in this thread), it seems that this general topic of high kicks in street fights is discounted because of specifics that only exist in certain cases (not all, or even the majority of scenarios I have encountered have those parameters), in which it is obvious that the high kick is not practical. I say I might kick someone's head if the situation is right, and someone says something like that's foolish, high kicks don't work in real-life defense.

After all, they say, how are you going to kick a 7' tall guy in the head as he climbs over the bathroom stall door where you are sitting on the toilet in a public restroom, with a slippery-wet floor, and he drops down on you from above? Wait a minute!!! When did my opponent become a basketball player, and how did we get in a public john? If someone asked, would you kick the head of a tall guy jumping you in the toilet, I might answer, probably not. However, if someone says that kicks to the head are too risky because the bathroom floor might be wet, then I say don't kick in that situation. However, there are plenty of smooth, dry surfaces where people actually have to defend themselves.

Another argument is, Kicks won't work because 300 people are pressing against you in a bar with two tables on your left, and a trash can on your right. I just start chuckling when I hear these kinds of what ifs. Ok, I won't kick then, but that wasn't the original question. What about when there is only 200 people and the fifty or so who are actually around you, clear back enough, and the tables are far enough to allow your leg to go up with ease? Or, what about when the fight spills out into the parking lot, or the angry guy you walked away from in the bar (and five of his friends) jump you outside. Hmmmm, let's see - - check for loose gravel on the ground, wet pavement, uneven surfaces, curbs and cars and other obstacles, then proceed with caution. In other words, be aware of your environment, and act accordingly. Can I safely use a kick to the head in this parking lot scenario? Yes (been there - done that).

Then comes the what ifs. What if his friend punches you from behind? What if he charges you and tackles you? What if the wind blows and a tree branch falls on your head, and bird feathers get in your eyes? All answers are the same. Respond to the situation, and use stable stances, counter defenses to their attacks. For close quarters, use hand strikes and elbows to the head, and low kicks if available. Nothing changes between what you would do, and what I would do, except that I might occasionally find the glimpse of a safe opportunity and smack the guy in the head with a kick or two.



exile said:


> Range: We're talking order of magnitude here, LF. What you don't note is that all of these numbers are comfortably smaller than the length of the average person's lower legfrom the knee hinge downlet alone that length plus the distance of the maximally raised knee. Regardless of what the description is, the kicking leg, traveling up, has got to get past the assailant's body en route to his head, which puts us in a significantly different fighting range.


Range is always in issue. Are they out of range? Are they too close to execute this kick or that strike? Range is usually, constantly changing throughout a street fight. Kickers tend to prefer to kick before the range is closed (preemptive if you will). However, the idea that most attackers will zoom right in to that CQ range and make all high kicks null and void is not what I have experienced. If someone charges in, they are likely to run into a low kick, or a fast hand or elbow, then they are likely to back off (if they are not already seriously injured on their first foolish attempt to rush in).

There is the argument that kicking is risky, but is the Close-quarters tie up really less risky? How about the shoot in and take-down. I spent many years wrestling, and know how to take a person down quickly, and how to prevent it. No matter how good a guy is on the mat, there are usually several attempts to shoot that fail. What then? In a wrestling match, the rules prevent a dangerous counter-attack, but in the street, I am going to hurt anyone who goes for the shoot.

You say standing on one leg (for a brief fraction of a second) is too risky? What about lowering your body near their legs, charging in head first with your back to the sky and no protection of the spine and other vital targets? CQ range is only good against a person who does not know what to do in close. I don't want to be close to my attacker, for good reason, but the last place they want to be is close to me.  You don't shoot on an opponent in the street if they are standing there ready for you, and you don't kick them in the head if they are ready and waiting to defend against it.



exile said:


> Conditions: Every streetfight is different. People in the environment, the nature of the ground (moving, in the case of subways), tables and chairs, glass, gravel bits... in other words, non-dojang conditions.


This is absolutely correct. Every street-fight does present different conditions.  Therefore, no rule of, this will work and that won't applies to *any* technique. Use the right one at the right time. Training regularly for non-dojang conditions is exactly what students (and young Black Belts) need.



exile said:


> I have made the critical assumption in my posts that the fight has been initiated, so preemptive striking is not at issue...
> In connection with this last point, LF, you mentioned that you find arm techs risky because you have to be in vulnerable range to apply them. But again, the assumption is that the fight has already come to you, your best effort to avoid it notwithstanding. If an attacker throws a close-up round house or jab at you, you are already in that range. As to whether you should let that happen, there are a couple of threads running now on preemptive strikes; that's not, if I understand the OP correctly, what's at issue. So the assumption of this whole thread is that you're involved in an unsought close range attack already; what's your best shot at ending it quickly?


 
Well, exile, there is the problem when you make assumptions. You, and others might have moved the discussion to the specifics of unsought close range attack, but to claim (or assume) that this is the subject of the OP, please copy and paste the part of the OP that states that (in this thread only, not others you are involved in). This thread was an open question about kicks to the head in the street - - in general, with no parameters set. If you want to add into that a discussion including parameters, fine!

However, common misleading statements includes kicks are not a good idea for the street because they don't work at close range. Well, the do work at close range under certain circumstances which we could discuss, but to use the CQ argument to blanketly discount kicking to the head in street fights is unfounded, and a matter of personal opinion, personal experiences, and not based in fact. Neither is saying that the OP here does not include discussions of either preventing CQ attacks, or breaking free of them during the fight. Let's get to reality, and stop trying to restrict the fighter with what if parameters just so you can prove kicks are too risky.

The incorrect argument that I see represented in the *CQ fight has already started so no preemptive discussion is allowed,* is that, first of all, that was not part of the OP's stated question, and secondly, ranges change.  I can very well deal with an initial rush to CQ and then regain distance - - so we are right back to the original long distance kicking range. Even if someone maintains a close range on me, my training is designed to block, parry and redirect attacks, release from grabs and apply my own controls, and off balance my opponent so that I can move around and do what I want, including kicking to the head when the opportunity presents itself.

The cardboard-like description of those rejecting close quarter high kicks makes it sound (to my ears) like we kickers are just standing there on one leg while this super-skilled close-quarters grappler is all over us with stuff we don't know how to deal with. It sounds as though we are going to be nose to nose and try to do a front kick up the middle, and you say that's impossible! Well, of course it is!!! But no one says that this is how a kicker is going to respond. Common sense! The leg from the knee down has a set measurement for each person. If the opponent is closer than that distance, the front kick (or high kick) is not going to fit between.

The preemptive forward high kick to the chin is impressive if the opponent is charging in, and the kick reaches appropriate height while the distance is closing so that the impact of the chin drives the head back just as the attacker is laying hands on your chest. That is not the same as standing toe to toe and bringing the forward high kick up between two bodies where there is no room. So everyone is thinking, that's what I've been saying! Well, yes, of course. Common Sense!

Conversely, when my opponent is within a few inches, all is not lost for head kicks. It has been mentioned that you can quickly step back, or push your opponent away and create the distance needed to kick the chin. This is still using high kicks in CQ street fighting, it's just that you don't have to lock yourself into this 18 range, and stay there. I can also be at CQ, and bring the roundhouse kick over the side of the shoulder and strike the head as I described before.

The argument seems to be that once my attacker has started the fight, we are already at close quarters (not always true), and that once we do reach CQ range, we are going to stay there for the rest of the fight (absolutely not true). I am not an amateur at street fighting, and I don't train my students to be. My opponent does not control me, nor the range at which we fight, no matter how good they are. Every time they choose to get close, they take the risk of getting hurt, and I have the option of moving to increase the range.

It is foolish if they want to relentlessly pursue me to a close range because I am very dangerous there as well. So, if they want to last long in the fight, their best bet is outside of my kicking range, and far away from my hands, elbows and knees. The only safe thing for them to do is to turn and walk away (does that sound arrogant, or what!!!). It's not just true about me, but should be for anyone who knows how to kick, AND use their hands.


exile said:


> The people I've cited are experimentalists, LF; they work on SD techs in live training that very few people would wish to experience themselves.
> ...as I've said before, are violence professionals, as I am not and would not want to be; I find their credentials bona fide and impressive, am glad they do what they do to make the results available for those of us who's just as soon do something a little less dangerous for a living,
> ....the people whose work in this area I take seriously are saying that given the inherent risks and inherent difficulties in executing a head high kick at close range in a `street'-style conflict and environment your odds are worse if you opt to do so, and that you're probably much better off training other weapons than trying to train high head kicks as way to improve your odds.


I can appreciate your confidence and trust in professionals who have trained with a variety of other experts, experimented in hundreds of real-life situations, drawn conclusions, and published books. However, I think you should keep an open mind to opposing points of view from other experts. I don't want to come off here looking like I'm bragging, but I am also an expert with many years of experience in real-life combat, security and police work, military training (non-combat), and practical, Reality-based, Martial Art training with many other experts. 

Many of the security and LEO professionals in my area, who do the kind of work of violence in the workplace, Executive Protection for major corporations, international oversees bodyguards for political diplomats and VIPs, come to me for training. I have not yet published a book, but that does not make me any less knowledgeable on the subject as those with whom you are familiar. I am just less famous! :ultracool

There will always be groups of experts in any field that disagree on major points, and often times, you can not accurately say that one group has a better argument than the other simply because one group has not had success where the other group has, or because one group publishes books.


exile said:


> Finally, I think it would be best to avoid the issue of who has been rude to whom, who owes whom an apology for what...


You're right! It is difficult for people who have been rude to a friend to see their rudeness, let alone apologize for it. Among my friends, instead of trying to defend why we shouldn't have to apologize, we just apologize anyway so as to ensure we did not unintentionally offend someone we care about. My apologies for suggesting that anyone apologize to Kacey.


exile said:


> Henceforth, speaking strictly as a participant in this discussion, it would probably be much better for the health of the thread to try to avoid charged personal topics and issues, and stick to the issues raised in the OP.


Yes, lets stick to that OP....



Kosho Gakkusei said:


> I was checking out the thread in the TKD forum about Forms/Pooms and it morphed into a debate about the *effectiveness of high kicks to the head*. *What are your thoughts about high kicks on the street?*
> 
> _Don Flatt


----------



## exile (Jul 12, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> Yes, lets stick to that OP



I just want to point out that the OP is itself a reference to a debate in a different thread that this one split off from. And in the context of that earlier thread, the argument about head kicks began as the result of a particular post, which is here. Now what you'll note about that post that's relevant to question of the OP is the following passage:

_However, non of these techniques are fight enders. You may poke a man in the eye or rip at his groin but *as long as he maintains consciousness he maintains the ability to cause you harm. The only way to decisively end the altercation is to strike him in the head with a powerful blow, hence the high kicks in TKD.*_​
This was, if you read on in the thread, the basis of the disagreement about high kicks that morphed into the current debate. You'll also note that Kosho, stoneheart, me and others who were involved in the debate on that thread `transferred over' to this thread, which Kosho started in cooperation with the Moderator's request that we keep to the OP for that first thread, which concerned the value of forms. Now as the passage from the `triggering' post makes clear, the poster is assuming that (i) the fight is in progress, and has in fact reached the point where a finishing strike needs to be administered, and (ii) the high kicks in TKD _originated for the specific purpose of delivering those strikes._ In effect, if I've established sufficient control over the attacker to deliver a throat strike after deflecting his punch, bringing myself close in to him on the outside and delivering an elbow strike to his face, say, followed by a knifehand to his now exposed throat, while controlling his punching arm with a hikate-like grab/retraction, I now am going to need to put him out of action with a high kick or I'm going to be in danger, and that that's why there the high kicks of TKD.

Kosho's OP, as the initiation of a conversation about the SD value of high kicks, was made in this explicit context. Those of us who were participants in that earlier thread from the beginning, knowing what the discussion had been about, continued it with the same background assumptions, as is I think pretty natural, no? Pre-emptive strikes and so on were not included in the potential uses simply because the argument which we're now in a much later phase of began around the issue of a fight not just in progress, but at an advanced stage. I really don't see why any of the assumptions I've made in the discussion need special justification, therefore; they were part of the original debate from the _outset._


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 12, 2007)

I can see where both exile and LF are coming from but I say we open the discussion to pre-emptive kicks as well.

Personally, my favorite part of the thread has been playing mythbusters with some of the rediculous claims that have been made.  So open up the paramaters so we can get some more claims - I'm just waiting for someone to claim they can elongate their limbs like the Indian Guy in Street Fighter!!!

In all seriousness, I apreciate honest and inteligent discussion about the application. So, why not discuss and define the parameters of this technique with realistic assestment as to it's risk.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Odin (Jul 12, 2007)

I Just think that its one of those things if you can do it and are comfortable doing it and you are confident that it will work in the situation that you are in.............why not?


----------



## Marginal (Jul 12, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> Here is one of those what ifs where I chuckle. How did it get to be in the middle of winter all of a sudden, and how did I get in CO? Ok, common sense again. It's winter and snow and ice are on the ground. Don't bother kicking regardless of what is on your feet. On the other hand, you don't think fights occur indoors in the winter? Feel free to take you boots off.... Billy Jack did.


I'm lost on why you'd need to remove boots to kick in the first place. Why discard a force multiplier? Boots also simplify targeting a bit. (Not much of an issue hard vs soft target when the boot's taking the force vs the foot itself etc.) 

Wouldn't striking in general suffer in the winter? Heavy jackets etc would all act to disperse the force of strikes. A punch is still generating a lot of forces antagonistic to balance on ice...


----------



## zDom (Jul 12, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> One thing the UFC teaches people is to charge in with a tackle or wrestling shot to neutralize kicks.  I've met many untrained young men who claim that's what they'd do against a "kicker" because of what they've seen on UFC.



Isn't that what Matt Hughes was trying to do when he got knocked out by GSP's roundhouse?


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 12, 2007)

zDom said:


> Isn't that what Matt Hughes was trying to do when he got knocked out by GSP's roundhouse?


 
Not if we were watching the same fight.  He was trying to not get kicked in the nutz again, dropped his guard and took it on the side of the head.


----------



## zDom (Jul 12, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Not if we were watching the same fight.  He was trying to not get kicked in the nutz again, dropped his guard and took it on the side of the head.



Looked to me like he started to shoot in then flinched from a feint by GSP.

That's how I land 90 percent of my high kicks: I feint elsewhere and catch 'em wide open. It's almost too easy anymore.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 12, 2007)

zDom said:


> That's how I land 90 percent of my high kicks: I feint elsewhere and catch 'em wide open. It's almost too easy anymore.



Yeah because the least thing you'd expect when you drop your guard is an impossible, ineffective foot upside your head.


----------



## MJS (Jul 12, 2007)

A few posts back I stated I was no longer involving myself in this thread, however, since you took the time to reply back to me, I'll do the same for you.



Last Fearner said:


> Yes, I agree that they are important, and should always be taken into consideration. However, sometimes people feel that each of these restrictions (shoes, clothes, terrain etc) will prevent the use of high kicks entirely, but that is of course not true. In the 70s, I bought a pair of those Chuck Norris Kicking Jeans with the extra stretchy material in the crotch so that you can kick with ease in the street (anyone else remember those). Anyway, whenever I go out, I take into consideration what I'm going to wear. If I am going to a bar or someplace of higher risk, I dress in loose clothes. In most situations, I wear shorts, sweat-pants, or other such clothes so as to not restrict my kicks.


 
I guess I, as well as a few others were coming from the viewpoint of, why kick high, when you have alot of targets lower?  I'm also going to assume that people are taking the time to train in a variety of footwear, considering the bottom of a pair of dress shoes is different from sneakers.



> If a person is not dressed appropriately for kicks, then don't kick at all - - simple common sense. I teach female students how to adjust their stance for quick defense if they are wearing heels, but recommend they either break the heel off or remove the shoe at the first opportunity. However, I believe the OP goes beyond the simple, what if I'm wearing cement shoes - - can I kick to the head? In my every day life, there are rare times (if ever) that my dress restricts my ability to kick.
> Many years ago, my older brother would get some tough guys threaten to come to his place of business (a mechanic's garage) and beat him up. He would ask me to come hang out with him for the day. I would show up in my good dress suit. He would say, why are you dressed like that? To which I would reply, I don't intend to get dirty! My dress pants are a flex-material that stretches well, and I have always felt (like when working security) that there is a psychological factor with most people when attacking a person in street clothes as opposed to a person in a suit and tie (use a clip on or break-away tie for safety).


 
ok.



> Here is one of those what ifs where I chuckle. How did it get to be in the middle of winter all of a sudden, and how did I get in CO? Ok, common sense again. It's winter and snow and ice are on the ground. Don't bother kicking regardless of what is on your feet. On the other hand, you don't think fights occur indoors in the winter? Feel free to take you boots off.... Billy Jack did.


 
LOL, yeah, after I replied, I realized that mistake.  I was thinking about one of DArnolds posts, while replying to yours.  He is the one in CO.  In any case, limitations are going to happen no matter what.  I want to try to limit those as much as possible.  Just because there is some snow doesnt mean I cant pull off a kick to the leg or groin.  Again, I was speaking more of a higher kick.



> Ok, now here's the other side of the what if coin. The shoes are off. Are we on a side walk? Could I move over to a grassy lawn? Am I in a parking lot or on gravel. I have fought in those circumstances (while bare foot because my shoes were already off), and I kicked the guy in the head twice. My feet suffered for the sake of the skirmish, but I didn't notice it till after the fight was over. Plus, it wasn't just the kicking, but the moving about, blocking, punching, and defending against his aggression that scraped my feet up a bit.


 
So you're telling me that on gravel, you fought someone with no shoes on?  Do you routinely walk with no shoes on?  The first 3 days of this week, it was close to 100 here in CT.  I dont think I'd be walking around with no shoes.  Additionally, I'm wondering just how quick ones shoes can be removed during an attack.  This reminds me of someone saying, "Wait a minute I wasn't ready.  Can you throw that punch again?"



> Environement and what you are wearing are important factors. However, no matter what the conditions, we use what techniques we are capable of doing safely, and try to use common sense when applying high kicks. Don't rule them out entirely, just don't plan on using them constantly.
> 
> CM D.J. Eisenhart


 
As I've said in a few of my posts.  Can I do them? Yes.  Have I done them in a sparring situation? Yes.  Do I train them on a regular basis?  Not as much as the low line kicks.  Exile quote something further down.  Here is the post:

_However, non of these techniques are fight enders. You may poke a man in the eye or rip at his groin but *as long as he maintains consciousness he maintains the ability to cause you harm. The only way to decisively end the altercation is to strike him in the head with a powerful blow, hence the high kicks in TKD.*_​I'm assuming that this was a quote from someone in this thread.  I beg to differ, as if someone has to rely just on high kicks to end the altercation, they're missing something in their training.  I can't get the link that Exile posted to work, so I'm not sure who said that or what thread its from.

Mike


----------



## foot2face (Jul 12, 2007)

Exile is quoting me.  The conversation took place in the TKD forum, in a thread regarding the limited emphasis on forms.  I am a believer in the use of forms and was simply trying to relate *my* understanding of how to apply them bases on how *I* was taught. I never thought that a TKDist revealing his preference for head kicks would be so controversial.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 12, 2007)

MJS said:


> Additionally, I'm wondering just how quick ones shoes can be removed during an attack. This reminds me of someone saying, "Wait a minute I wasn't ready. Can you throw that punch again?"


 
This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest issues that get's the least attention.  You hear the "I'll take my shoe off" idea for defending against a knife, or if wearing shoes that would impair your ability to do kicks or whatever...  I can't speak for anyone else, but I can't take the boots I typically wear off easily.  And I tie my shoes tightly so that they won't come off easily...  I wear very few shoes that I can quickly remove.

I've checked with female students; some high heels are easily removed, but a lot of them don't come off that easy.  The best thing for getting better balance is to simply stomp the heels off, it seems to me (and them).  

Finally, several people have talked about feinting.  While I don't want to restart the whole debate, this time in the "feints in self defense" flavor, I think there are very limited roles for feints in an unarmed self defense situation.  Feints are a great tool in sparring; they're possibly even better in combat involving large or small groups fighting each other.  And they're vital in many forms of armed combat.  Nor am I saying that deception has limited applicability -- but, in my opinion, in unarmed self defense, there's seldom the time to set up and feint.  If you're acting preemptively, you almost certainly need to be hitting hard and fast -- not trying to fake someone out.  And, if you're responding to an attack, you almost certainly won't have the time to feint.  Finally, if you've successfully warded off one attempt -- you're almost certainly moving out of self-defense if you re-initiate the fight by feinting.  Again, there are times when any or all of the above are appropriate, but in the typical run of self-defense, they don't play a great role.


----------



## Carol (Jul 12, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> I've checked with female students; some high heels are easily removed, but a lot of them don't come off that easy.  The best thing for getting better balance is to simply stomp the heels off, it seems to me (and them).



Or the ladies can adapt the fighting style to their advantage.   High heels are like kubotans for the feet.  They can focus force and weight in to a concentrated point. The fact that some creepo attackers like to bring a lady close to the front of their body works further to their advantage.  Instead of a high kick...consider the lowest possible kick...a stomp to the instep.  Could break a bone or three...could mean issues with the law for using a deadly weapon (depending on your state) but its a quick fight-ender that also hamper's your attacker's ability to follow you.


----------



## Carol (Jul 12, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> I've checked with female students; some high heels are easily removed, but a lot of them don't come off that easy.  The best thing for getting better balance is to simply stomp the heels off, it seems to me (and them).



Or the ladies can adapt the fighting style to their advantage.   High heels are like kubotans for the feet.  They can focus force and weight in to a concentrated point. The fact that some creepo attackers like to bring a lady close to the front of their body works further to a woman's advantage.  Instead of a high kick...consider the lowest possible kick...a stomp to the instep.  Could break a bone or three...could mean issues with the law for using a deadly weapon (depending on your state) but its a quick fight-ender that also hamper's your attacker's ability to follow you.


----------



## seasoned (Jul 12, 2007)

I left for a day or two and when I came back everyone is still batting this high kick thing around. I did not want to pull the old person card but I will. This is my final thought on this whole thing . Some will listen and some will not but we will all get old.  When I was young and in my prime I use to head kick all the time, but now that I am old and gray Ill take a leg kick any day. In a day, long long ago, when my dojo sparred more then did kata, because kata was boring, a head kick was easier to get in then any other technique. For those of you that are very, very loose you know what I mean. We had to get loose and head kick because with no foot gear it wasnt made yet the tight people only had the body above the belt to kick at so they messed up their toes a lot J . I am not bragging but as a leg kicking advocate I feel someone has to help the head kickers out a bit. In the days when I ran the streets, pre-marriage or settled down, I had times when I would stick my foot in my mouth and also times when I would and could put one up side a few heads. Was I cocky, you bet, could I pull it off you bet. Then I got older, and guess what, what took me 5 minutes to do I cant do in an hour. What is it you ask, flexibility. It goes like a lot of other things when you get old, mature. So I did the next best thing, because I loved my art and I wanted to contunue to train. I started looking at my GoJu kata very closely. To my glee as I did my kata I found no high kicks, nada, none. All low to midrange kicks, I was in my glory and for many years now my training has taken a new turn. It is ok for me though because I dont see any of the over 60 Okinawan sensei doing high kicks either. So I guess the moral of the story is, did I yes can I now no so with this bias attitude of mine toward low kicking I will lay my typing fingers down J J . This may call for two smiley faces.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 13, 2007)

exile said:


> Kosho's OP, as the initiation of a conversation about the SD value of high kicks, was made in this explicit context. Those of us who were participants in that earlier thread from the beginning, knowing what the discussion had been about, continued it with the same background assumptions, as is I think pretty natural, no?


 
Hey exile, thanks for clearing that up for me!  I apologize for not taking the time to go back to read the original thread about forms, but I find that I have less and less time to read posts lately.

The thing about the parameters that I think is pertinent, is that I agree with you on what you say about using high kicks in each of those situations. When I was working security, I rarely did any kicks at all for fear of law suits to me and my employer. I had plenty of opportunities, but the reason my friend and I got hired to take over security was because the previous (international) security firm was fired because one of their uniformed/armed guards shoved a unruly woman out the door (using her body to open the door) as they ejected her, and she sued.

For safety sake, most of the criteria you have laid out in your scenarios would almost automatically click in my mind as "don't kick high here." If the majority of the fights I encountered were vicious, all out brawls, with limited mobility, rough terrain, or very aggressive, close quarter attackers, then I would probably never be using high kicks. That's why I say the parameters you describe pretty much answers the question. Don't kick high in those cases (unless you have already stunned the attacker, and a high kick will be quick and easy with virtually no chance of failure).

So, cheers to you for pursuing your original debate with a firm conviction, and allowing me to challenge some of the points of particular specifications. :ultracool

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 13, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> Just playing devil's advocate. One thing the UFC teaches people is to charge in with a tackle or wrestling shot to neutralize kicks. I've met many untrained young men who claim that's what they'd do against a "kicker" because of what they've seen on UFC. Does that mean for these guys much of the psychological effect that causes a freeze up has been disapated by their entertainment? Bearing this in mind I wouldn't want to take the chance my attacker(s) has a wrestling backround and attempt to lift my foot off the ground pre-emptively. I probably wouldn't use a pre-emptive kick to the head unless the attacker gave such a blatant opening for the front head kick (or the high section kick described earlier, frontward direction) that I couldn't resist. I wouldn't try to pull of a roundhouse or side kick to the head because it will be more difficult to recover from these as they cause you to turn your center away from the attacker.
> _Don Flatt


 
I wouldn't and haven't used high kicks myself for real. So I'd agree with your thoughts and reservations about using them. Going with your UFC scenario, I would add throughout my experience both in and watching many fights. Those diving tackles were very common by "street thugs" in the opening seconds of a fight. That's why my last post referred to an off chance scenario that I've seen occassionally as well.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 13, 2007)

Marginal said:


> I'm lost on why you'd need to remove boots to kick in the first place. Why discard a force multiplier? Boots also simplify targeting a bit. (Not much of an issue hard vs soft target when the boot's taking the force vs the foot itself etc.)
> 
> Wouldn't striking in general suffer in the winter? Heavy jackets etc would all act to disperse the force of strikes. A punch is still generating a lot of forces antagonistic to balance on ice...


 
These are excellent questions, Marginal! As to removing boots, I think it depends greatly on several factors.

*What type of boot (cowboy boots, light work boot, heavy winter boot)
*What are the winter conditions (just cold, light snow, deep snow, ice)
*Am I still outdoors, or have I gone inside a building
*Do I really have time to take the boots off, and would it matter.

The lightweight, hard boot is a good tool (especially the pointed toe or steel toe - oops! deadly weapon?). I live in Michigan, so some of my winter boots are those big rubber arctic type. I probably couldn't do a low kick to the knee fast enough in those, and if I ever missed, the weight and momentum would probably pull my other foot out from under me.

Most boots, and even some shoes, have a sluggish effect to kicking. Some are hard enough to hurt the attacker, but for the most part, heavier shoes and boots reduce the speed of my kicks so telegraphing is a factor. Pivoting properly and ankle support plays into it also. Sometimes, shoes can cause the foot to flip sideways during kicks (or just basic stances) causing a strain of the ankle, and possible fall.

Our Winters have a variety of conditions. Sometimes we are waist deep in snow. The following week, we could have little or no snow, and the ground is frozen solid (A nice hip throw or flip would not feel good). If dressed in heavy clothes, mobility can be limited, but a fall to the ground is sometimes padded, as well as strikes to the body (thus, the head might make a better target). It's like trying to punch the Stay Puft character from Ghostbusters.

I guess our advice needs to cover all people in all weather conditions. Winter in some states (and countries) means it drops from 110 degrees to 80 degrees. When I was in Arizona many years ago, people were wearing heavy jackets in November (70 degrees), and I was in a t-shirt and shorts. They thought I was crazy!

Anyhow, on slippery ground (indoors or out) I recommend to my students to go right to the floor, and start kicking and grappling as needed. No sense falling on an attempted punch or kick, and get injured on the way down. Let your opponent try to attack once your on the ground, and maybe they will take the hard fall.

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 13, 2007)

MJS said:


> I guess I, as well as a few others were coming from the viewpoint of, why kick high, when you have alot of targets lower?


For the most part, I agree.  I would prefer a solid base, with quick low kicks, and hands and elbows.  Why kick high?  If the low or mid targets are being well guarded, but the head is not.  If I have dazed my attacker with hand strikes to the head and I want to knock them out, but not break bones (an instep roundhouse to the side of the head as opposed to a side-kick to the knee).  If I want to end a fight fast, perhaps to deal with another attacker, someone attacking my friend or loved one a few feet away, and I don't have time to grapple, yet they are guarding against most every attack.  I will fake low, and kick high, or strike with the hand to the head, and finish with a power kick to be done in 1.5 seconds, and move on.  If I take a guy down with a leg break, but not knock him out, he might pull a gun and shoot me before I can finish him off, or go to help my loved one.  Why didn't he pull the gun in the first place?  Who knows?



MJS said:


> So you're telling me that on gravel, you fought someone with no shoes on? Do you routinely walk with no shoes on?


In the scenario I mentioned, I woke up in the middle of the night to a prowler outside.  I head a noise and went out to investigate (could have been animal in garbage).  I found myself face to face with him, in the driveway, on stones, in my bare feet.



MJS said:


> Additionally, I'm wondering just how quick ones shoes can be removed during an attack.


Most of the shoes I wear, come off in a split second (slip-on loafers, Martial Art shoes, tennis shoes tied loosely).  If I am being threatened, but the fight has not begun, I can step on the heel of each shoe and slip them off without bending over or taking my eyes off the guy.  It only takes 2 seconds or less.  If I am in a fight, and create distance from my opponent for a few seconds, I can remove them without anyone ever noticing it happened.

Otherwise, if it is not convenient to do so, or if the terrain would be better with shoes on, then I don't take them off.  I don't find it a requirement for kicking as long as my footwear moves fluently with my foot.

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 13, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> Most of the shoes I wear, come off in a split second (slip-on loafers, Martial Art shoes, tennis shoes tied loosely). If I am being threatened, but the fight has not begun, I can step on the heel of each shoe and slip them off without bending over or taking my eyes off the guy. It only takes 2 seconds or less. If I am in a fight, and create distance from my opponent for a few seconds, I can remove them without anyone ever noticing it happened.


 
But, if your shoes come off that easily -- will they stay on when you want them to? Or will you suddenly find yourself unexpectedly in bare feet when you're trying to run away?

Of course, you might find yourself in possession of a really unexpected distance impact weapon as your shoe goes flying in a kick!


----------



## zDom (Jul 13, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> And, if you're responding to an attack, you almost certainly won't have the time to feint.



No offense intended, but from this statement it appears you are talking about the type of feint used by beginners: a motion all by itself.

The type of feint I'm talking about takes a milisecond. A small motion low linked to the actual technique, much in the same was combination punching or kicking is linnked, NOT a "feint" ... pause...reset... real technique.

It is a subtle motion that happens as part of the technique &#8212; again, adding only a milisecond.


High kicking is almost always a finishing technique. Presume the attacker has been stunned, be it the "overhand right" or "backfist" or whatever.

Among the infinite options:

a) Take the attacker to the ground. Mount. "Rain down elbows" on him until he is unconcious, hoping none of his bodies hit you in the back of the head.

b) Plant a nice quick hard kick on their noggin. Friends may reconsider their willingness to continue the confrontation.

(shrug)

Not saying a high kick is always the best option, but it IS viable and COULD be, if you have the skills, a really good option given the right circumstances.

There are several local anecdotes going back over the 30-some years martial arts have been practiced and used around here (and its a small town &#8212; everybody knows everybody's business and stories are verified by many).

In street encounters here, the high kicks have proved effective and ended the conflict. High kickers have NOT ended up thrown down on the back by attacker grabbing their kick, shooting in on them, or them slipping.

Maybe we just kick better around here than the "experts" elsewhere  Maybe we're just lucky using "ineffective" techniques. Maybe we pick the right tools at the right time. 

Maybe techniques being effective/ineffective has something to do with local culture, how people fight*&#8212; I've long held the belief that "rolling" as BJJ'ists do works great in the Brazillian culture where mano y mano fights seem to be the norm, where around here it is a matter of "when" his friends will jump in &#8212; not IF.

Draw your own conclusions.


FWIW, in the very few conflicts I've had as a trained martial artist the situation has never been right for me to high kick, although one guy was so befuddled by my hand speed he THOUGHT I had kicked him in the face (that's what he told me)  It was a simple vertical first reverse punch 

Then there was the time I found myself in a bad situation with an injured hamstring WISHING I had my kicks available as an option. It worked out well for me, but I sure did feel vulnerable not having them as an option.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 13, 2007)

Everyone should train kicking with shoes on now and again.

And I'm going to disagree with Carol about women in high heels - I discourage them.  Ladies who have worn them for a while can achieve an *excellent* sense of balance in them but the position of the feet is not conducive to effective posture, power generation nor accuracy.


----------



## zDom (Jul 13, 2007)

After some further thought:

For the sake of disucssion, let's replace "high kicking" with "shooting" (as in the shoot tackle).

I could go on about: shooting works great "in the ring" but is horrible for the street. Concrete is bad on the knees. Too many risks "on the street" because they might:

- knee you in the face
- catch you in a guillitine choke
- sprawl on top of you
- kick you in the head (heheh.. just had to throw that one in there 
- catch you with an uppercut
- hammer down on the back of your neck

(backed up with video proof from many UFC fights..)

etc.

The truth is, if _*I*_ tried to "shoot" in on someone, one of these would probably happen because I just don't have the experience in shooting in on people.

I mean, sure: I've trained it, know how to shoot. I can pull off a better-than-decent shoot. 

But I don't have the kind of experience it takes to know WHEN to shoot, how to avoid the pitfalls. I don't have the deep confidence in my shooting ability.

For a BJJ black belt, a shoot is VERY viable. Not so much for me.

For ME a shoot has more risk than a high kick!


But to get to my point:

If someone is starting from scratch trying to build their self defense skills, I am NOT going to recommend high kicking.

I think in order to achieve the level of skill required where high kicking becomes a viable, useful technique takes a SIGNIFICANT time/training investment.

Maybe 10 years.

Honestly, out of the hundreds of TKD and HKD students I have trained with or been around, there are about a dozen that I think high kicking would be a viable option for in self defense.

Training low level kicking IS a much better option.

But for someone who has already invested in high kicking for other reasons (its FUN in the dojang!), I don't see any reason why to automatically just cross high kicking off the list of viable techniques as "too dangerous" or "impractical."


----------



## exile (Jul 13, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> Hey exile, thanks for clearing that up for me!  I apologize for not taking the time to go back to read the original thread about forms, but I find that I have less and less time to read posts lately.



I'm not sure an apology on your part is actually warranted, LF&#8212;after reading that post of yours about the OP I realized that none of us who had carried the original discussion over from the first thread had posted a link to it identifying it as the origin of the new thread, so that people coming in afresh very likely wouldn't have any idea of why the conversation was taking the form it did... it rerminded me that some kind of context, when a thread splits, whether by Mod action or in the kind of discretionary way that happened here, is almost always a good idea. Once I realized that, a lot of aspects to the discussion, especially the way people seemed to be talking past each other much of the time, became clearer....

... yet another problem with the nature of internet communication, eh?




Last Fearner said:


> The thing about the parameters that I think is pertinent, is that I agree with you on what you say about using high kicks in each of those situations. When I was working security, I rarely did any kicks at all for fear of law suits to me and my employer. I had plenty of opportunities, but the reason my friend and I got hired to take over security was because the previous (international) security firm was fired because one of their uniformed/armed guards shoved a unruly woman out the door (using her body to open the door) as they ejected her, and she sued.
> 
> For safety sake, most of the criteria you have laid out in your scenarios would almost automatically click in my mind as "don't kick high here." If the majority of the fights I encountered were vicious, all out brawls, with limited mobility, rough terrain, or very aggressive, close quarter attackers, then I would probably never be using high kicks. That's why I say the parameters you describe pretty much answers the question. Don't kick high in those cases (unless you have already stunned the attacker, and a high kick will be quick and easy with virtually no chance of failure).



And I can also see that under other circumstances, like preemption, or when opportunity presents itself with in the form of increased range and the like, a high kick by an experienced kicker can indeed pack an awful wallop without committing you to the riskiness of getting in closer than you'd like. 



Last Fearner said:


> So, cheers to you for pursuing your original debate with a firm conviction, and allowing me to challenge some of the points of particular specifications. :ultracool
> 
> CM D.J. Eisenhart



And cheers to you also, LF!  I feel much better that we're able to see what each other were getting at.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 14, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> But, if your shoes come off that easily -- will they stay on when you want them to? Or will you suddenly find yourself unexpectedly in bare feet when you're trying to run away?


 
My shoes tend to stay on pretty good when I want them to.  It just takes a quick pressure on the heel to take them off intentionally though.  However, that doe present a problem with some of the loafers I wear, thus I would just have to run with one shoe off until the other flies, and then leave them both behind!

The truth is, I don't plan on running much these days (I can kick fast, but I'm not much of a sprinter).  I know the maxim in the Martial Art has always been to run first, if you can, but these days I don't recommend that to my students.  Backing away from an opponent, and keeping your eye on them as you cautiously walk away is a good way to avoid an unnecessary risk of fighting a dangerous battle.

In my opinion, modern conflicts present too much of a chance that an attacker will just pull a gun and shoot you in the back by your third step as you run away. I usually suggest to look for near cover that you can duck behind if the lead flies.  Besides, if I run, and one or more chases me, then what if they eventually catch me.  Then I might be too exhausted to fight well.  I'd rather finish it where it started.



jks9199 said:


> Of course, you might find yourself in possession of a really unexpected distance impact weapon as your shoe goes flying in a kick!


 
Actually, I've had this happen in practice a few times.  Many years ago (in the '70s), I used to work out in casual clothes in my front yard, with a friend of mine.  I was practicing a front kick toward him while he was several feet away.  My slip-on shoe flew off and smacked him right in the forehead.  I couldn't have planned it better if I tried!  We both agreed that would be an excellent tactic if you could perfect it with consistency.

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 14, 2007)

exile said:


> And cheers to you also, LF!  I feel much better that we're able to see what each other were getting at.


 
Me too!


----------



## DArnold (Jul 19, 2007)

MJS said:


> I guess I, as well as a few others were coming from the viewpoint of, why kick high, when you have alot of targets lower? I'm also going to assume that people are taking the time to train in a variety of footwear, considering the bottom of a pair of dress shoes is different from sneakers.
> 
> ok.
> 
> ...


 
Mike,
Great posts!

As I said offline, "why use a high kick, because their head is open!"
For every what if based on those who don't train with these techniques there is a simple answer.
As I said offline there are several factors determining what you use.

Just study PPCT which most everyone uses (police, secret service, military, courts... but mostly your opponent determines what happens.

As for your example above.
If the leg and groin are not open but the head is, then the head is your target.
If the head and groin are covered, then the knee is your target...
Your opponent determines what you use. 
But there are several factors in any altercation that determine what you use. One also being what you are trained with.
If you don't know how to kick head and it is the only target then it's worse for you.

The main disagreement was someone touting as "FACT" that high section kicks do not work.

This persone simply does not know what they are talking about.

The myth this person was trying to perpetuate has already been disproven with simple examples by Kacey and thousands of others who have defended themselves daily with high section kicks.

Then the issue was clouded by questions posed here that do not partain to this myth but to the relative lack of understanding of how a classification of techniques works.  These questions could be asked of any techniques from any style where you don't understand how they work.  High section kicks are simply techniques no different than any other: punches, elbows... The questions posed have been based on any number of reasons:
- they don't train in a style that uses high kicks
- they don't have an experienced instructor
- their physical deminor is limiting
- they choose to belive someone selling something (this is the way you should do it because I have, And even though I don't know how others do it, well... it doesn't work and that's a fact!)
- they read a book that said they don't work....
- or whatever the reason

Any of these questions can easly be answered by training under a qualified instructor in an art that uses this tool.

No one stated that high kicks are the silver bulled of SD or that they should always be used, or that they always work. Anyone stating something like this would also be perpetuating a myth
This would be as foolish as stating this about any technique.

As for high section kicking the basics are simple and similar to any other tool. If you train with them and understand them they work, the same as any other tool you train with. How good you are with any technique depends on how much you train. 

Touting "high kicks do not work as a fact" IMHO tends to impune the integrity of the person saying this as they are presenting themself as an expert on something that has been proved works. Integrity would dictate that they would say something like, "they do not work for me because... or I have not trained with them so I am not an expert..."

Just replace the word high kicks above with any other technique that a person has defended themselves with and you get the point.

The personal question really boild down to: Are you limited by physical capabilities (you have hip problems...), or mental limitations (you choose to accept something that can be disproved) 

Some here would have you limit yourself based on their lack of knowledge.
I would find that the most dangerious of all!

Now on to a more important myth.
Living in Colorado we do not all ride horses, we have running water, indoor toilits... LOL

Yes it does snow here a lot, but that is up in the mountains.

*We have more sun here in Denver than Florida or California which most people don't know*. My first year hear (I think 80) I was out in shorts and a t-shirt playing football, on Christmas, in the CU stadum. It's not half as cold as the east coast. On a cold year we get probably 3 to 4 snowstorms that usually last 2 to 4 days. That's usually it. I grew up in Michigan and would not move back there for the world as it is way too cold on the east coast


----------



## kaizasosei (Jul 19, 2007)

the strangest thing about high kicks that i found out early on when goofing off with friends or even some types of sparing,  is that many people are really spooked out by high kicks.  maybe it's the stereotypical martial arts movement that does it,,,maybe it is peoples insecurity and inexperience.
i do think that all striking is more difficult that it may seem and although im am aware of the possibility of opening oneself or falling down, i still see highkicks as a very powerful technique that should not be past up, if not for realistic battle then for pure art and aesthetics not to mention health and general flexibility.  and for fighting also if not kicking high one still had better know how to defend against the many kickers that are out there.  after all, the highkicks wont always miss or slide off but must be defended with knowledge of correct martial principles. likewise should one be able to place ones kicks with accuracy and focus and balance wherever that may be.  


j


----------



## Marginal (Jul 19, 2007)

kaizasosei said:


> the strangest thing about high kicks that i found out early on when goofing off with friends or even some types of sparing, is that many people are really spooked out by high kicks. maybe it's the stereotypical martial arts movement that does it,,,maybe it is peoples insecurity and inexperience.


Reminds me of when I first started. We were training step sparring, and I was partnered with this girl who was just checking out the class. She had been training in a WTF gym, so she'd always cap her sequence off with a high kick. Made me really nervous at the time. It was like having a log rocketing at your head. That was compounded by the fact every time she got her foot up at head level, it blocked one of the lights. So her foot'd be there and things would be going dimmer at the same time etc.


----------

