# Static training methods in the traditional martial arts



## RTKDCMB (Feb 16, 2013)

With all these reality based defence systems out there many people have begun to question the training methods of traditional martial arts. They see many of the static methods of training such as patterns, one step sparring and certain self defence techniques as unrealistic. That is because they are taking what they see at face value. They use statements like that wont work in a real situation, your opponent is not going to just stand there after the first strike and wait for you to counter-attack, your training is dead training, you need to do alive training on fully resisting opponents to be able to use it in a real situation and you fight like you train as justification for saying that traditional martial arts are ineffective. They use this as a way to come up with their own special system of self-protection that does not involve martial arts yet they use martial arts techniques. So what are some of the training methods that receive criticism?

*Bringing the hand back to the hip whilst punching with the other one;*

Why is this done in traditional martial arts training? Bringing the hand back to the hip when punching instead of returning to the guarding position is not something you would do in free sparring or a real self-defence situation, if this is so then why is it done in the patterns or during basics line drills (walking up and down in a straight line in a stance practicing basics)? The answer is that this is done to learn the technique and so you can practice them without having to worry about protecting from attacks. It is a way of isolating the individual movement to concentrate on perfecting them. When you use the same technique during sparring, where you do have to worry about protecting yourself from attacks, you perform the punch from the guarding position. Punching whilst bringing the hand back to the hip is the purest most powerful form of the straight punch with 1 arm going forward and 1 arm going backwards at the same time driving the other one forward like 2 kids on a seesaw, this teaches you to twist the hips properly when performing the punch. If you watch carefully when a traditional martial artist punches from a guarding position this action of moving 1 arm backwards still occurs but to a lesser extent but the hip movement is the same. This is because of all of the practice of twisting the hips that was gained performing the punch in its raw state.

*Static movements  one step sparring and self-defence techniques*

What is the purpose of training to defend yourself from a single attack by your opponent just standing there while you counter attack? Again it is just a way of practicing and concentrating on the individual techniques. When some people see one step sparring or knife defences they think that this is how a traditional martial artist would actually perform the techniques in a real life self-defence situation. Why is it so difficult to understand that they are just practicing the techniques and not always training for realism on resisting opponents? If a white belt student trained on fully resisting opponents all the time then how are they supposed to learn the techniques properly and become good at them? They cant so they must learn the techniques first and then at a later time practice them on opponents that provide a bit more resistance. When practicing certain self-defence techniques the person grabbing must grab firm but not tight, this is to allow the defender to practice the techniques without injuring his training partner An example would be a defence against a bear hug from behind where the defending student kicks back to break the knee or use a knife hand strike to chop the groin and then perform a release after the attacker has been softened up. If the person grabbing holds with full resistance then to perform the release the defending student would have to actually break the knee or really strike the groin to use the release and that would be impractical for teaching purposes. When practicing any particular release from a hold the person grabbing must not fight against the movement the person defending is making them do (this is to prevent injury to the attacking student) but must not move for them either, (this would be no resistance at all) and will not help the defender learn anything. An example would be a defence against a shoulder grab that involves the defender putting the attacker into a wrist lock. The defender must initiate the movement not the attacker and the attacker must not resist too much. The more the attacker resists the more force the defender must use to perform the technique successfully and this can lead to serious injury. It does not take much effort to break someones wrist and care must be taken to ensure both students can continue practicing safely. They practice this way so that they can perfect the techniques so that they become second nature so if they need to do them in a real situation they can use the techniques effectively and efficiently.

*Patterns  hyung, kata, forms and whatever*

Some people criticize martial arts that use patterns as a training tool, they say that patterns are useless and unrealistic and even suggest that traditional martial artist believe that patterns are supposed to represent free sparring. The main purpose of patterns is so you can practice the basics in 2 dimensions instead of just 1 (during line work). The patterns contain many of the most important techniques of the art, put into a logical order, to ensure they are practiced regularly even if they are not the students favourite techniques. There also some very important concepts that the patterns introduce to the student such as footwork, combinations and simultaneous block and counter-attacks. The patterns do not necessarily represent a single entire sequence but rather represent a few separate smaller sequences, one after the other, strung together for convenient practice. Patterns are also an excellent fitness exercise, performing 10 or more patterns at full speed and power one after the other will certainly get your heart pumping.

*Belts*

Martial artists trained for centuries without using a belt system so why do we need them now? The answer  back in the days before belts masters teaching their art would typically have only one student to hand down the art or sometimes a small group so back then it was easy for them to keep track of the students progress and also back then martial arts were almost always a lifelong commitment. When you have a school that has over 500 branches with an average of 10-30 students per class keeping track of every students progress becomes a lot more difficult, therefore a belt system becomes a bit more necessary. Also with the modern age students come and go, they start a martial art, stop for whatever reason (work or family commitments etc.) and restart sometimes years later so having a belt is a way for the instructors to gauge a students level of understanding and they also serve to group together students with similar knowledge and skills. Todays modern world is a lot more goal orientated so having a belt system gives the students some short term goals and a target to aim for.

*Basics always the same position for the hands*

Some people may argue that having your hands end up in the same position, for example an outer forearm block that always has the fist in line with the shoulder and the front toes, does not represent reality in that attackers will not punch exactly at the same height every time. The techniques are practiced that way so that they are all the same, like a template, so that there is a basis where technique can be improved upon. When the techniques are utilized in free sparring or in a self defence situation they are modified for blocking and striking at different heights. Learning the blocks in the basics at every conceivable height would be a lot more difficult so you learn then at a specified height and then adjust according to the situation.


Please note; when reading this post that this is a training  philosophy  and not in any way meant to suggest that this is a statement of absolute  truth and everybody who disagrees is wrong or that this is the only way  of thinking. If you have different views then feel free to disagree (or  rhyme), no offense is intended.


----------



## Never_A_Reflection (Feb 16, 2013)

While I agree that traditional martial arts are effective, I can't say that I agree with your reasoning for a few of the things you listed. I don't want you to feel like I am attacking you, and this is just my opinion, but I believe that your explanations are really attempts to justify unrealistic training more than anything.

*Bringing the hand back to the hip whilst punching with the other one

*Pulling the hand back to chamber when punching does not provide a "seesaw" affect and doesn't really do anything to help you use your hips while punching, nor does it help you focus on a "pure" punch. To teach punching in this way without ever explaining and drilling the purpose of pulling the hand to chamber (which is to pull something you have grabbed a hold of on your opponent) is really just effective at teaching a bad habit. People who train in other arts can teach effective power generation and punching form without utilizing a chambered position, so obviously the chambering has little to do with the punch beyond enhancing its impact by pulling your opponent into the punch. I feel that far too many people maintain an obsession with the chambering as a method of perfecting form without actually putting any thought into function. Basically, I agree with you that chambering while punching is an effective technique, but I disagree with your reasoning because it neglects realistic utilization of that technique.

*Static movements  one step sparring and self-defence techniques

*I believe that most of the one-step sparring drills that are in use today are mostly useless, because they generally use the most basic traditional applications of every technique--a block is a block, a strike is a strike, the stance means nothing, and the hand pulling to chamber does nothing. This is completely unrealistic. You could argue that it helps students become accustomed to responding to attacks from another person, but the drills could be reworked to be MUCH more effective by utilizing practical applications against realistic attacks.

Your explanation of why self defense techniques should not be drilled on a fully resisting opponent is something I partially agree with--no one is going to be able to successfully perform the techniques on a fully resisting opponent on their first try, and so when a new technique is learned it should always be worked with very little resistance at first. From there, however, I believe that the resistance needs to be gradually increased over time until the opponent is fully resisting so that the student develops the proper form, speed, power and timing required to execute the technique effectively when they need it. It should be noted that when I say "fully resisting opponent," I do not mean that they resist everything to the point where you have to perform the technique as you would in real life, because that would result in far too many injuries, as you mentioned. In my view, the opponent should be as resistant as possible, but they are also acting out a role, and should try to react realistically to the techniques being used on them. This means that they should not let go of a grab or freeze after punching you just because you started to do a technique, but the should also not ignore the strike to the eyes or kick to the knee that you so kindly stopped before seriously injuring them with it. This helps strike a balance between realism and safety, but nothing is going to be perfect.

*Patterns  hyung, kata, forms and whatever

*I somewhat disagree with the first half your explanation of this, which is saying that the patterns are intended to make you practice basics "in 2 dimensions instead of 1." The reason I disagree with this is because a pattern isn't necessary to practice that--you can just change how you do your kihon practice. From there, you outline the fact that the patterns contain important techniques that have been put into a logical order, and include things like footwork, combinations and simultaneous block-and-counters. I agree with this, as long as all those things aren't the same ineffective, unrealistic basic-level applications I described in reference to one-step sparring drills.


----------



## K-man (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> With all these reality based defence systems out there many people have begun to question the training methods of traditional martial arts. They see many of the static methods of training such as patterns, one step sparring and certain self defence techniques as unrealistic. That is because they are taking what they see at face value.
> 
> Is it possible that 'traditional' is actually a style that has moved away from traditional?  The static methods you describe are not traditional but additional training introduced to sharpen students' sparring skills. One step sparring has nothing to do with self defence.
> 
> ...


No offence intended with my reply.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 17, 2013)

I havent got much to add to what the others have said.



RTKDCMB said:


> With all these reality based defence systems out there many people have begun to question the training methods of traditional martial arts.



Theres a pretty good reason for that.



> They see many of the static methods of training such as patterns, one step sparring and certain self defence techniques as unrealistic. That is because they are taking what they see at face value. They use statements like &#8220;that won&#8217;t work in a real situation&#8221;, &#8220;your opponent is not going to just stand there after the first strike and wait for you to counter-attack&#8221;, &#8220;your training is &#8216;dead training&#8217;, you need to do &#8216;alive training&#8217; on fully resisting opponents to be able to use it in a real situation&#8221; and &#8220;you fight like you train&#8221; as justification for saying that traditional martial arts are ineffective. They use this as a way to come up with their own special system of self-protection that &#8216;does not involve martial arts&#8221; yet they use martial arts techniques. So what are some of the training methods that receive criticism?



So far, all of those criticisms are valid. I suspect youre listing off issues youve encountered or seen encountered, because alot of TMA places teach their techniques with aliveness. Also, not being a martial art doesnt become void when you use MA techniques. Not being a MA is a way of disassociating yourself with the term. I stopped considering myself a martial artist as soon as i found out that alot of people, even other martial artists, see some kind of value in the 'art' part of it that i just dont. And i do not want myself associated with that side of it. If i codified my own system, i wouldnt call it a martial art. Even if it was one.



> *Bringing the hand back to the hip whilst punching with the other one;*
> 
> Why is this done in traditional martial arts training? Bringing the hand back to the hip when punching instead of returning to the guarding position is not something you would do in free sparring or a real self-defence situation, if this is so then why is it done in the patterns or during basics line drills (walking up and down in a straight line in a stance practicing basics)? The answer is that this is done to learn the technique and so you can practice them without having to worry about protecting from attacks. It is a way of isolating the individual movement to concentrate on perfecting them. When you use the same technique during sparring, where you do have to worry about protecting yourself from attacks, you perform the punch from the guarding position. Punching whilst bringing the hand back to the hip is the purest most powerful form of the straight punch with 1 arm going forward and 1 arm going backwards at the same time driving the other one forward like 2 kids on a seesaw, this teaches you to twist the hips properly when performing the punch. If you watch carefully when a traditional martial artist punches from a guarding position this action of moving 1 arm backwards still occurs but to a lesser extent but the hip movement is the same. This is because of all of the practice of twisting the hips that was gained performing the punch in its raw state.



I disagree. Others have explained why. That being said, you should look into Hikeru, i think its spelt. The traditional punch is the fine art of grabbing someone by the shoulder or lapel or arm and so forth, and pulling them forward whilst you punch them in their head. In Bunkai or some equivalent  it can be an assortment of other things. Punching like this (Hands to hips - The following does not relate to grabbing on first) does not add power, or purity. Any punch that engages body rotation or linear movement or your mass will generate power. What you do with your free hand means little to nothing. It can dangle by your side for all it matters. Your punching hand is just the point of contact for your bodies movement. Also, if you consider it a raw state, explain why the same hip twisting is found in other methods of punching that take less time to learn to do 'correctly'.



> *Static movements &#8211; one step sparring and self-defence techniques*
> 
> What is the purpose of training to defend yourself from a single attack by your opponent just standing there while you counter attack? Again it is just a way of practicing and concentrating on the individual techniques. When some people see one step sparring or knife defences they think that this is how a traditional martial artist would actually perform the techniques in a real life self-defence situation. Why is it so difficult to understand that they are just practicing the techniques and not always training for realism on resisting opponents? If a white belt student trained on fully resisting opponents all the time then how are they supposed to learn the techniques properly and become good at them? They can&#8217;t so they must learn the techniques first and then at a later time practice them on opponents that provide a bit more resistance. When practicing certain self-defence techniques the person grabbing must grab firm but not tight, this is to allow the defender to practice the techniques without injuring his training partner An example would be a defence against a bear hug from behind where the defending student kicks back to break the knee or use a knife hand strike to chop the groin and then perform a release after the attacker has been softened up. If the person grabbing holds with full resistance then to perform the release the defending student would have to actually break the knee or really strike the groin to use the release and that would be impractical for teaching purposes. When practicing any particular release from a hold the person grabbing must not fight against the movement the person defending is making them do (this is to prevent injury to the attacking student) but must not move for them either, (this would be no resistance at all) and will not help the defender learn anything. An example would be a defence against a shoulder grab that involves the defender putting the attacker into a wrist lock. The defender must initiate the movement not the attacker and the attacker must not resist too much. The more the attacker resists the more force the defender must use to perform the technique successfully and this can lead to serious injury. It does not take much effort to break someone&#8217;s wrist and care must be taken to ensure both students can continue practicing safely. They practice this way so that they can perfect the techniques so that they become second nature so if they need to do them in a real situation they can use the techniques effectively and efficiently.



Fights are a bit more dynamic than that. If you need to practice an individual technique, you dont need a fancy drill to do it. You can just do it, anywere, anytime. Also, "The more the attacker resists the more force the defender must use to perform the technique successfully and this can lead to serious injury" leads me to wonder if someones been telling you that striking is deadly and unsafe to practice full out, or some other nonsense like that. Protective gear is used nowadays to prevent cumulative injury over time. In not actually making contact, youre just drilling in a bad habit (overestimating, as well as ranging, though mostly overestimating), even if it improves your 'technique'. The only way striking is deadly is if the other person cant take a hit (for psychological or medical reasons), or by way of sheer volume.



> *Patterns &#8211; hyung, kata, forms and whatever*
> 
> Some people criticize martial arts that use patterns as a training tool, they say that patterns are useless and unrealistic and even suggest that traditional martial artist believe that patterns are supposed to represent free sparring. The main purpose of patterns is so you can practice the basics in 2 dimensions instead of just 1 (during line work). The patterns contain many of the most important techniques of the art, put into a logical order, to ensure they are practiced regularly even if they are not the student&#8217;s favourite techniques. There also some very important concepts that the patterns introduce to the student such as footwork, combinations and simultaneous block and counter-attacks. The patterns do not necessarily represent a single entire sequence but rather represent a few separate smaller sequences, one after the other, strung together for convenient practice. Patterns are also an excellent fitness exercise, performing 10 or more patterns at full speed and power one after the other will certainly get your heart pumping.



Sparring is not fighting. Patterns are not sparring. Fighting is not patterns. Patterns are valuable if well taught and interpreted. If you want fitness out of them, youre wasting time you could be spending wildly hitting the air until you cant lift your limbs any more. Though id recommend a bag - Your joints dont tend to like bashing air too much.



> *Belts*
> 
> Martial artists trained for centuries without using a belt system so why do we need them now? The answer &#8211; back in the days before belts masters teaching their art would typically have only one student to hand down the art or sometimes a small group so back then it was easy for them to keep track of the students&#8217; progress and also back then martial arts were almost always a lifelong commitment. When you have a school that has over 500 branches with an average of 10-30 students per class keeping track of every student&#8217;s progress becomes a lot more difficult, therefore a belt system becomes a bit more necessary. Also with the modern age students come and go, they start a martial art, stop for whatever reason (work or family commitments etc.) and restart sometimes years later so having a belt is a way for the instructors to gauge a student&#8217;s level of understanding and they also serve to group together students with similar knowledge and skills. Today&#8217;s modern world is a lot more goal orientated so having a belt system gives the students some short term goals and a target to aim for.



Belts are as valuable as you consider them to be.



> *Basics always the same position for the hands*
> 
> Some people may argue that having your hands end up in the same position, for example an outer forearm block that always has the fist in line with the shoulder and the front toes, does not represent reality in that attackers will not punch exactly at the same height every time. The techniques are practiced that way so that they are all the same, like a template, so that there is a basis where technique can be improved upon. When the techniques are utilized in free sparring or in a self defence situation they are modified for blocking and striking at different heights. Learning the blocks in the basics at every conceivable height would be a lot more difficult so you learn then at a specified height and then adjust according to the situation.
> 
> ...



Thats pretty standard. But i dont see how it would be hard to practice blocking at different angles and heights if you had someone, you know, trying to hit you whilst you practiced blocking. Against air i guess that makes sense.

Also, for your note at the end, there is no absolute truth. I agree with that. That doesnt mean that a philosophy has the right to be rooted in false information, and that it can be justified by being 'different', or 'itself'. Falsehood is falsehood however you spin it. Within the confines of accurate information, theres a huge, huge variety of totally different and unique systems. They can justify their viewpoints by being rooted into fact. 

But from what im reading here and in other threads, without any offense intended, i suspect youre getting some questionable instruction to say the least. Really now, if youd rather not pursue that discussion, thats fine. If you disagree, you dont need to make a point about that and explain why im wrong, its fine. You can just ignore this part of the reply. But if the thought ever crosses your mind that the only reason your training works is because YOU are MAKING it work, just take a second to really think about what youre actually learning, how you are being taught, how others are being taught around you, and what part of their training actually makes them successful in learning. Because its easy to confuse a method of punching being good for people being able to throw decent punches of their own accord. Dont confuse ingrained habits for refined skills.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 17, 2013)

Never_A_Reflection said:


> While I agree that traditional martial arts are effective, I can't say that I agree with your reasoning for a few of the things you listed. I don't want you to feel like I am attacking you, and this is just my opinion, but I believe that your explanations are really attempts to justify unrealistic training more than anything.
> 
> *Bringing the hand back to the hip whilst punching with the other one
> 
> ...



Thank you for your honest reply, just a few things in reply, There is nothing unrealistic about perfecting your technique, if your techniques is bad then when it comes to having to use it in self defence then you will not be accurate or have the speed and power necessary to efficiently dispatch your attacker. If your techniques is good then you may only need 1 punch, kick or strike to finish them off.

The hand back to the hip is not designed as a grab, there are techniques where you do that though. If you extend your left arm and have your right arm at your hip and punch but leave your left arm out stretched and repeat bringing your left arm back to your hip you will notice the difference. You can turn a T-shaped handle much easier if you turn, push-pull from both sides than you can from just one side.

In my school the one-step sparring techniques mainly involve things like; kick before he punches you, avoid and strike/kick or simultaneous block and strike rather than the basic block the punch and then counter.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Thank you for your honest reply, just a few things in reply, There is nothing unrealistic about perfecting your technique, if your techniques is bad then when it comes to having to use it in self defence then you will not be accurate or have the speed and power necessary to efficiently dispatch your attacker. If your techniques is good then you may only need 1 punch, kick or strike to finish them off.



Technique does not work that way. Technique that requires that much refinement is something you will never use under pressure, and if one strike is enough, the other guy was never a real threat to you in the first place. This just leads me to believe even more that someones telling you that striking is more effective than it actually is.



> The hand back to the hip is not designed as a grab, there are techniques where you do that though. If you extend your left arm and have your right arm at your hip and punch but leave your left arm out stretched and repeat bringing your left arm back to your hip you will notice the difference. You can turn a T-shaped handle much easier if you turn, push-pull from both sides than you can from just one side.



A punch is not a T shaped handle. It it were a handle with only one bar, youd grab the bar with both hands and pull both in the same direction at the same time. If it only had a handhold for one hand, the best you could do with your other hand is grab your own wrist. Taekwondo comes from Karate, and in Karate, it is most assuredly a grab. Its also a grab in most Bunkai for blocks. In all of my examples above, theres another thing. You dont turn a handle with your arms. Your arms hold it, and you rotate or pull it with your body.



> In my school the one-step sparring techniques mainly involve things like; kick before he punches you, avoid and strike/kick or simultaneous block and strike rather than the basic block the punch and then counter.


If youre able to kick him before he punches you, he isnt close enough to be a danger in the first place. This is why 'RBSD people' can have a low opinion of some TMAs. When you punch a heavy bag, how close to it do you stand? When you punch someone in the head, how close to them do you stand? When you practice kicking someone who tries to punch you, how close to you do they stand?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 17, 2013)

K-man said:


> No offence intended with my reply.




If this is what you have been taught it really is time to change your instructor. 

If that was the case then most martial artists would have to change their instructors so why would I want to change to an instructor who does not teach the basics properly.

You should be training the way you would in the  real situation. You can train slowly but the intent should still be  there. Without realism you might as well stop training altogether.

Training for realism is good practice but doing it without concentrating on the individual techniques as well is like trying to write a story in a foreign language and just picking up their alphabet along the way.

With my guys in a bear hug, I am holding as hard  as I can. If you think you can break my knee, go for it. That is not  reality based. You might get to stomp on my foot but normally you will  be on the ground before that happens. I doubt that you'll get a knife  hand anywhere near my groin either. 

Been done in a real life attack so your point is moot.

Who told you that would work?  If someone is  holding your shoulder you will be smacked in the mouth before you can  even think of using a wrist lock. 

That's what blocking is for.

Two classic reasons for the belts ... To hold the pants up and keep your jacket closed.

Pants and jackets have ties to do that.

This is Kihon or basic form. Nothing else.

That's basically what I just said.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 17, 2013)

I was looking online for examples of Hikite (the pulling hand) apart from the normal Iain Abernethy ones, most describe it just as I was taught.....it's a grab.

K-man and Cyriacus have said everything I would have said!

People do need to research kata and Bunkai before dismissing it.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> If that was the case then most martial artists would have to change their instructors so why would I want to change to an instructor who does not teach the basics properly.



It really isnt most. If this is what you consider to be proper basics, that reinforces KMans point.



> Training for realism is good practice but doing it without concentrating on the individual techniques as well is like trying to write a story in a foreign language and just picking up their alphabet along the way.



No, its not. Focusing on individual techniques is a good way to get really good at a highly technical motion that youre never going to use in that manner. Technique is overrated.



> Been done in a real life attack so your point is moot.



A real life attack? Oh really? So a person or people blitzed you in an ambush you didnt anticipate or see coming for no discernable reason at all? Or by attack do you mean fight or physical altercation that turned violent? And furthermore, if you can kick the knee from a bearhug, or hit anything with your hands, it aint a bear hug. Sorry to tell you. Its probably some crappy hold being done from too far away. Bear hugs are done body to body. You would not have that range of motion, no matter how you try to spin it. Your point is moot. Furthermore, people do practice groin striking full contact. It can be done with protective gear.



> That's what blocking is for.



And this is the problem. You have probably been lead to believe that having good blocking technique means youre less likely to be struck when someone grabs you with one hand to hit you with the other. Reality doesnt agree, mate.




> That's basically what I just said.



Thats also the problem, all over again. And the whole sorry cycle repeats itself.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> *Bringing the hand back to the hip whilst punching with the other one;*
> 
> Why is this done in traditional martial arts training? Bringing the hand back to the hip when punching instead of returning to the guarding position is not something you would do in free sparring or a real self-defence situation, if this is so then why is it done in the patterns or during basics line drills (walking up and down in a straight line in a stance practicing basics)? The answer is that this is done to learn the technique and so you can practice them without having to worry about protecting from attacks.



With the greatest respect, this is incorrect.  This is why most, and I do mean most, martial artists really don't understand the art they train in fully.  It is why kata has become a cookie-cutter mechanism for the next colored belt rather than the diagram of useful bunkai it is suppose to be.  

Why do we chamber our hand back to the hip?

Look at the movement in a mirror.  Start with the hand outstretched in whatever punching/blocking motion you'd like.  Now, closely examine what this hand is going to do as you rechamber it to the hip.  As you bring it back the hand is closed.  Why?  Because there is something in the hand.  What?  The bad guy you are pulling towards your center of gravity, off of his center of balance in order to set up the the counter-strike.  Notice the closed hand goes from palm down to palm up as it nears your hip.  This activates stonger flexor muscles in your arm for the purpose of pulling.  Again, what are we pulling?  The bad guy's shirt/arm/hand/ear/eye socket or whatever it is you grasped initially.  Notice your probably in a horse stance.  Why?  Are we going to fight that way?  Nope.  But from a grapple, we are going to grasp the bad guy, drop our center of gravity, pull them off balance and into our center of gravity thereby facilitating our next movement, whatever movement is appropriate to the situation.  

I do it all the time to bad guys.  It works well.  And when you look at a 'simple' static line drill and the associated movements of that line drill, and when you understand what these movements actually mean in combat....it takes on a whole new dynamic.  You'll never look at these 'simple' line drills the same way again.

Think of it this way, is walking around in a horse stance with our hands chambered on our hips during a fight a sound tactic?  Nope.  So either the Okinawan founders of Karate were really stupid and had no concept of fighting or those movements they taught don't mean what most martial artists think they mean.  Since many of them had reputations of being very tough opponents (see Itosu Sensei as an example) and they in turn taught people who turned out to be very tough opponents I'd suggest that somewhere along the line something was lost in translation.  

All I can say is I fight bad guys all the time.  I teach people that fight bad guys all the time.  I teach what some call 'deeper/hidden/secret' meanings in the movements.  I call them common sense


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 17, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> It really isnt most. If this is what you consider to be proper basics, that reinforces KMans point.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I will not waste time trying to convince anyone who does not believe in basics or patterns why it is done how it's done.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> That's what people with poor technique usually say, those who have to hit someone 20 times in the same spot to finish them off. Search Karate vs pimp on YouTube and see how overrated his technique is.



This isn't an accurate statement either.  The amount of times someone has to be struck depends upon the location of the strike as well as the mential/emotional state of the individual, compounded by the influence of drugs.  As I've stated before, I once rescued a fellow Deputy that was being attacked by and EDP.  I struck him a half-dozen times in the back with a downward elbow to an area that should have temporarily disabled his ability to continue the attack (it was not yet at a deadly force level so a strike to the spin or neck would not have been appropriate or justifiable at that point).  The EDP didn't even know I was there.  I am not a small man and I alternate between body buiding and power lifting.  My partner later told me he could feel every strike through the attacker's body and into his own as they were pressed up against each other in a grapple.  Yet the strikes did nothing.  I had to resolve that situaiton with a joint lock.  So striking is very situational and locational.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 17, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Technique does not work that way. Technique that requires that much refinement is something you will never use under pressure, and if one strike is enough, the other guy was never a real threat to you in the first place. This just leads me to believe even more that someones telling you that striking is more effective than it actually is.
> 
> *Technique does not require that much refinement to work it just works better with it, that's why its called refinement. Technique is drummed into you day in day out so that you can use it under pressure. My low section block is one such technique that I have used under pressure successfully every single time someone has tried to kick me in the groin.*
> 
> ...



*Do people in your experience only try to punch you when they are in punching distance? From everything I have seen people do all sorts of things such as; try to punch by overextending themselves, come at you from a distance to punch you, have longer arms than you. You can side step or move back slightly and kick and most people don't just stand there and punch they are usually moving, you are oversimplifying things.*


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I will not waste time trying to convince anyone who does not believe in basics or patterns why it is done how it's done.



Mate, i believe in basics and patterns. I dont believe the way youre doing them makes sense.

*"*_*That's what people with poor technique usually say, those who have to hit someone 20 times in the same spot to finish them off. Search Karate vs pimp on YouTube and see how overrated his technique is."*

_ Thats a forearm strike to the neck, after grabbing his arm and pulling him in. Its what you might know as a raising block. It isnt a technically difficult skill. You can learn it by seeing it done. Welcome to scratching the surface. Technique is overrated. Thanks for proving my point about that, as well as the point about the grabbing arm and Bunkai. Incidentally, forearm strikes as a pre-emptive strike, as found in various patterns (i dont know about yours, but its in Taegeuk Il Jang and Taegeuk Yi Jang, and probably some others), only work from an almost body to body range. At that range, the game is totally different. Do you think the pimp could have blocked that strike if he were intensively trained to do so? Could he have done a wrist release? Or could he have used a kick! Because kicks are totally useful at close range. Additionally, there are plenty of people who can take 20 highly trained blows, ignore them, and take it as a chance to finally mundanely fight someone who'll actually pose some kind of resistance unlike the usual weak twits they go through. Or they might just keep doing whatever it is theyre doing before. Striking is neither reliable nor deadly, and technique doesnt change that. Ill let other people back that up. Ill ask again: Has someone been telling you that striking is deadly and too dangerous to be practiced with contact?


_*"Saying that something doesn't or wouldn't work or that it must have been a crappy hold does not change the fact that something happened and neither does sticking your fingers in your and humming real loud. Oh and if your are using protective gear then it's not really full contact."*

_Yes, it does make a difference if the hold is poor. It isnt defending against a bearhug if a bearhug never took place to begin with. If i swing a throw a hook from medium range at your head and you block it, does that demonstrate your proficiency in blocking a headbutt at close range? And full contact through protective gear is still not holding back and hitting as hard as you can. Its better than getting really good at not hitting the other person. Thats a great skill to become good at - Not hurting the other person. Fabulous.

*"*_*I'm not sure what reality you are living in but in this one, unless you're really terrible at them, blocks can and certainly do work and pretty damn well. If you can't stop a simple punch from hitting you, especially after years of practice, then your training is a waste of time."*

_I never said blocking doesnt work - But blocking most certainly cant be relied upon to simple-as-that stop you from being hit by simple attacks. But by the sounds of it, if you have that much faith in blocking, and you think that just having really refined technique on a block is going to stop someone from grab>punching you, youre reality is the one that needs fixing whether you like it or not. I can list off a denizen times when blocking is useful if you like, but that isnt one of them. Unless of course youre training from a range with favorable circumstances which facilitate it working. Im sure in your Dojang, someone throws a punch and you block it. Therefore, you might be lead to believe that that means you can now block a punch.

With that said, i for one wont waste time offering suggestions. Youre not exactly an audience thats willing to learn. I can understand why - If youve spent 25 years on something, you might not like hearing bad things about that 25 years of cumulative knowledge. But, youre on a discussion board making threads about your conclusions. I hope youre enjoying these discussions.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 17, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> *Do people in your experience only try to punch you when they are in punching distance? From everything I have seen people do all sorts of things such as; try to punch by overextending themselves, come at you from a distance to punch you, have longer arms than you. You can side step or move back slightly and kick and most people don't just stand there and punch they are usually moving, you are oversimplifying things.*



The people who overextend themselves from too far away? Those are the guys you dont need training to deal with, and the situations in which you encounter them are totally avoidable. Im not oversimplifying things - Im looking at things in context. If someones attacking you from too far away, literally anything will work. And youre right. Most people dont stand there and punch. The people you have to worry about are the ones who do get up close. Which is pretty much anyone whos ever had any decent training, or whos been in a few fights and figured it out on their own, or anyone whos ever used a heavy bag, or anyone whos under the effects of rage, or anyone whos just naturally inclined to getting in close, or even some people whove just sat down and thought about it (which people do). Ive made this analogy before: How close do you stand to a heavy bag when you hit it? How close do you stand to a person when you hit them? How close are you to your partner in training?

*Technique does not require that much refinement to work it just works better with it, that's why its called refinement. Technique is drummed into you day in day out so that you can use it under pressure. My low section block is one such technique that I have used under pressure successfully every single time someone has tried to kick me in the groin.

*Thats because its one of the times when blocking is really useful. Blocking is fantastic for stopping any way shape or form of kick.
Drumming in technique, or rather, practicing what youre learning, is sensible. Of course it is. But your low block would have worked just fine if you saw it on TV one time and tried it against a kick to the groin. Its the block itself that works, not your years of practice with it making it work. Practicing it is just that: A codified means of practice. Technique is overrated. I understood what you were saying.

*I think I will stop using analogies. The body is the T-shaped handle that is used for turning, it is easier to turn it by using push-pull from either side than by turning from 1 side only (double the movement arm - a physics thing).

* I understood what you were saying. This isnt a matter of me not agreeing because i dont understand. In Boxing, when you throw a punch, the non punching shoulder moves back and the striking shoulder moves forward. Its called a T-Frame movement. Theres nothing wrong with that - But that doesnt mean that the practice of pulling your hand back to your hip is just that alone. Otherwise, why dont Taekwondo, Karate, and othersuch people hold records for punching power? Punching power is weight transfer and proximity. Thats it, really. There are countless ways of doing that, and one way isnt better than the other however you spin it. Adding in a car crash effect does, however, add a whole new layer of power into the mix. Like in the 'Karate VS Pimp' video, where he pulls his wrist into the forearm strike.


----------



## K-man (Feb 17, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Punching power is weight transfer and proximity. Thats it, really..


Right on!    :asian:


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Feb 17, 2013)

> Originally Posted by *Cyriacus*
> 
> 
> Punching power is weight transfer and proximity. Thats it, really..





K-man said:


> Right on!    :asian:



As the ole saying goes, "*He who gets there first with the most...wins*." :bangahead:


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 18, 2013)

I know I'm arriving late to this conversation.. .  I really have nothing to add other than stating that I am a Traditional Taekwondo practitioner, and I totally agree with what K-man, Kong Soo Do, Tez3, and mostly Cyriacus (I do see value in the "art") have stated.  I strongly recommend that you empty your proverbial cup, open your mind, and explore the aspects that these people are suggesting.  You may very well realize that you have been merely skimming the surface of the totality of breadth and depth of your own martial art.

I say this with all due respect, as I have found many TMA practitioners who have not been taught these things, and furthermore had been taught to put emphasis on the "technique" without its full understanding.  I would think that your many years of practice on the "basics" should only make the journey deeper into your art an easier one.. .


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 18, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Like in the 'Karate VS Pimp' video, where he pulls his wrist into the forearm strike.



I just had a close look at the video and at no point does the Karate guy grab the pimp's wrist, he kept it at his side whilst at the same time the pimp's arm was above his shoulder and it was a knifehand strike that struck with about the wrist area, it's a bit hard to see from the poor video quality.

Not every martial artist wants to take the time to set records for punching power, there are no world records for punching power and no study so far has any legitimate, verifiable or conclusive data on the subject (including Fight Science). Boxing is a punching only art as far as striking goes so of course their punches will be powerful. Punches are not the only strikes that are powerful, another question along the same lines as yours would be why don't boxers hold any records for kicking or elbowing power?

*Punching power is weight transfer and proximity.*

That is true, although you forgot speed, selecting the appropriate strike and having good technique will only enhance these so why would it be overrated?


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 18, 2013)

Skip to 0:41, then start rapidly clicking play and pause. His right hand clearly goes on the pimps left arm prior to the strike.

Your second question doesnt make much sense. Youre the one who said that punching from the hip had a seesaw effect, and that it was pure and all that. I stand by my retort. And you dont seem to like being told about grabbing and pulling, no matter who tells you to read into it.

Last paragraph: Slight correction: Acceleration. Not speed. Similar, not the same. Thats not you being wrong, mind. Its just that most people hear acceleration, and think speed.
Selecting the appropriate technique is giving your thought process way too much credit (defense wise), and you dont need good technique to hit hard and fast. You can do that without ever learning a thing. Obviously im going to have to explain the statement of 'Technique Is Overrated' in more depth. Ive actually been meaning to make a blog about this, but thisll do for now.

Technique is overrated!
Technique refers both to specific movements, and to the technical side of those movements.
'I hit him with my forearm strike technique!' and 'I hit him with a technically good forearm strike!' respectively.
The first one is fine. The second one is overrated. I cant remember who said it, but martial artists too often get obsessed with moving 'right', with 'proper form', which they try and emulate into reality. Round peg, square hole. But students practice it, because if it isnt working for them, well, they need to practice more, says the teacher. Good technique does not amplify power, or speed. Body mechanics can amplify speed in every sense of the word, and power comes from weight transfer and proximity. With those principles, you can pretty much slam any of your hard things into someone elses soft things (and in some cases, hard things) and get a good effect. You dont need an exact method with which to do that, but the exact method you end up using will be a _technique_. That part is not overrated, since by definition, any movement you do is a technique (of that archetype). The technique i consider to be overrated is the 'technically good or bad' sort of technique. I direct anyone here who has never done a forearm strike to grab a pillow, put it on a bed, then slam your forearm down on it whilst lowering your weight (transferring your weight in the direction of the movement). Voila! A functional forearm strike! Without any technical skill at all because youve never done it before! The part thats overrated is then proceeding to practice a technical (second definition) way of doing it over and over, and not really getting any improvement you wouldnt by just bashing stuff with it over and over again until youre comfortable with the technique (first definition) itself. Whats even more overrated is when you take something that doesnt work without the second definition of technique, and then 'refining' the bajesus out of that.



RTKDCMB said:


> I just had a close look at the video and at no point does the Karate guy grab the pimp's wrist, he kept it at his side whilst at the same time the pimp's arm was above his shoulder and it was a knifehand strike that struck with about the wrist area, it's a bit hard to see from the poor video quality.
> 
> Not every martial artist wants to take the time to set records for punching power, there are no world records for punching power and no study so far has any legitimate, verifiable or conclusive data on the subject (including Fight Science). Boxing is a punching only art as far as striking goes so of course their punches will be powerful. Punches are not the only strikes that are powerful, another question along the same lines as yours would be why don't boxers hold any records for kicking or elbowing power?
> 
> ...


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 18, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Technique is overrated!
> Technique refers both to specific movements, and to the technical side of those movements.
> 'I hit him with my forearm strike technique!' and 'I hit him with a technically good forearm strike!' respectively.
> The first one is fine. The second one is overrated.



I agree with what you are saying.  However, IMHO, it is more important/correct to put the focus on efficiency/efficacy than "technically" good.  Technical standards vary quite a bit, but if it is effective and efficient, who cares?  Each art/style/organization has technical standards, which are necessary.  Hopefully you (generalization, not *you* specifically) belong to a school/art/style/org/etc. whose technical standards haven't wandered so far off the beaten path to be ineffective/inefficient.. .

Let's take the rising block/strike used in the video as an example.  How many times have you seen a rising block/strike taught to their respective "technical" standard, that would be utterly useless or even dangerous to the practitioner if used on the street?  I see it frequently in hyungs/kata competitions.. .


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 18, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> I agree with what you are saying.  However, IMHO, it is more important/correct to put the focus on efficiency/efficacy than "technically" good.  Technical standards vary quite a bit, but if it is effective and efficient, who cares?  Each art/style/organization has technical standards, which are necessary.  Hopefully you (generalization, not *you* specifically) belong to a school/art/style/org/etc. whose technical standards haven't wandered so far off the beaten path to be ineffective/inefficient.. .
> 
> Let's take the rising block/strike used in the video as an example.  How many times have you seen a rising block/strike taught to their respective "technical" standard, that would be utterly useless or even dangerous to the practitioner if used on the street?  I see it frequently in hyungs/kata competitions.. .



You delved into what i very offhandly called body mechanics. Efficiency improves speed and acceleration by not wasting movement, which is yet again a principle and not a technique  And forearm strikes inherently have alot of incidental redundancy going for them.

In answer to your question, come to think of it, i dont see rising blocks being taught often at all in some of the Dojang/Dojos ive been in. So i guess by default, yeah, i absolutely agree. 
I do know i learnt it as a forearm strike first, because the instructor loved (and still loves) the things in every way shape or form.


----------



## Brian King (Feb 18, 2013)

FYI and for what it is worth, to no-one in particular. Not meaning to step in-between a bunch of Karate folks doing one steps and knowing little about Kata and other dances (just poking with a blunt stick, sorry) I had trouble following the thread so thought I would post a helpful tool to make it easier for late comers to the thread to follow along.

Communication should be clear and as least confusing as possible. If a topic, post or reply is worth replying to it should be worth replying well to. Long replies with different colored text is confusing, long replies with bold parts is also needlessly confusing. Needless confusion clouds the issues and weakens the discussion in my opinion. 

There is a quote function built into the tool bar of the reply window. It is easy to use. It looks like a text balloon from the old time comics. A person can copy and paste some dialogue that they wish to quote into the reply window and then highlight the text they wish quoted and click on the tool bar button to put the quote into formatted quotes. You will see  [/QUOTE] before and after the text. To clarify multiple conversations and also as good habit above the text write out the persons user name to signify that they are the ones being quoted and replied to. This can be bolded by highlighting their name and clicking the B in the tool bar 

*Brian King wrote:*


> There is a quote function built into the tool bar of the reply window. It is easy to use. It looks like a text balloon from the old time comics. A person can copy and paste some dialogue that they wish to quote into the reply window and then highlight the text they wish quoted and click on the tool bar button to put the quote into formatted quotes



Doing this will help others (me) follow the conversation with out having to search for who said what to whom up thread. It is easy to do once it is pointed out and learned. It is a good and useful function. 

Regards
Brian King


----------



## K-man (Feb 18, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> How many times have you seen a rising block/strike taught to their respective "technical" standard, that would be utterly useless or even dangerous to the practitioner if used on the street?


All the time, unfortunately. And even more frightening, the practitioner actually believes it will work in the way they have practised it.  :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 19, 2013)

Can not seem to edit this post to add in things I forgot so I will do it here. Bringing the hand back to the hip - The main source of power (not the only one) is twisting of the hips. Since the twisting motion of the hips produces the largest portion of the power generated in a punch having the hand starting from the hip starting hard up against the body produces more power than punching from the hand away from the body. This is because you are reducing your moment of inertia allowing you to rotate faster due to the conservation of angular momentum. When you perform a punch from the hip the other hand goes back to the hip because that is where the next punch starts from. The hand coming back to the hip can also represent a simultaneous backward elbow strike or a grab and pull from the opponent. Pulling in the opponent whist you strike increases the total mass in motion (like a head on collision) but also reduces the punching speed.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 19, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> I strongly recommend that you empty your proverbial cup, open your mind, and explore the aspects that these people are suggesting.  You may very well realize that you have been merely skimming the surface of the totality of breadth and depth of your own martial art.
> .



I could say the same thing to them and you. The cup is never full, if it gets full then just get a bigger cup.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 19, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I could say the same thing to them and you. The cup is never full, if it gets full then just get a bigger cup.



I'm not sure what instance you are referring to, as I haven't voiced any opposition to anything that you've said; Outside of your denial of the pulling hand.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 19, 2013)

I was merely suggesting that, rather than "digging in" to defend your position, you take an honest and open look at what they are saying.  You may find a good deal of merit in what they are saying.


----------



## Chris Parker (Feb 19, 2013)

All I'd ask is.... "What is meant by "traditional martial arts" here?" I mean, the arts I train in are some of the most "traditional" you could find, and are almost entirely kata-based... and nothing in the OP is even relevant, let alone true for the arts I study.... hmm.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 19, 2013)

Since we have mainly been discussing the pulling hand, here is a reference that encompasses both sides of the topic.  http://www.theshotokanway.com/hikite.html

Here is another article that may reiterate what many are saying here.. . http://blogcritics.org/sports/article/hikite-pulling-a-hand-back-to/


----------



## Never_A_Reflection (Feb 19, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Can not seem to edit this post to add in things I forgot so I will do it here. Bringing the hand back to the hip - The main source of power (not the only one) is twisting of the hips. Since the twisting motion of the hips produces the largest portion of the power generated in a punch having the hand starting from the hip starting hard up against the body produces more power than punching from the hand away from the body. This is because you are reducing your moment of inertia allowing you to rotate faster due to the conservation of angular momentum. When you perform a punch from the hip the other hand goes back to the hip because that is where the next punch starts from. The hand coming back to the hip can also represent a simultaneous backward elbow strike or a grab and pull from the opponent. Pulling in the opponent whist you strike increases the total mass in motion (like a head on collision) but also reduces the punching speed.



Now you have added the concept of actually pulling something with the pulling hand, as most (if not all) of us have mentioned, and I won't argue the elbow strike possibility (although it isn't the most practical or effective application) but you still insist on including the idea that punching from a chambered position while pulling the other hand to chamber is the most powerful way to punch.

I maintain that the entire purpose of hikite/pulling-hand/chamber is to control/pull/brace/off-balance your attacker, with a caveat of it being a somewhat decent position to pull back to when throwing punches to the body at close range. Again, I find that pulling the hand back to chamber when punching does not generate more power--in fact, it actually causes you to rotate your upper body less than you would if you kept your guard up. The movement of the hips only indicates that you are generating power with your legs (the hips cannot move unless the legs make them) but in order for that power to be used it has to be transferred through your upper body. The only way to make that transfer of energy happen is to rotate the upper body with the hips, but if you focus on pulling to chamber with perfect form that body rotation is cut short and you stop all of your momentum sooner than is ideal. Many people also tend to let their upper body rotation lag behind their hip rotation when they punch this way, which generates a whipping action that also causes a loss of structure and power. Furthermore, stating that "the other hand goes back to the hip because that is where the next punch starts from" is a terrible reason (it's not even really a reason, at all--it just says to do something because that's how you do it) to pull the hand back unless you are at close range and planning to strike the body, because it's farther from the target than it would be if held in a guard position, not to mention the fact that it leaves an entire side of your head completely open to being struck.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 19, 2013)

I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but here is link, which clearly shows as the first movement the reverse punch with the pulling hand.  The picture shown here 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 is from the Bubishi, the Classical Okinawan translation of the Chinese Wubei Zhi, "Account of Military Arts and Science."  The first publication of this text is in 1621 AD.   I would suggest that this is strong supporting evidence that the pulling hand/chambered fist is more practical than merely generating power.  

http://www.karateblogger.com/stari/articles/48 techniques part 1.htm


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 19, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but here is link, which clearly shows as the first movement the reverse punch with the pulling hand.  The picture shown here
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There are some good techniques in the link showing both the pulling hand and the block and strike. The palm smash, eye gouge and knifehand strikes are not grabs though, they are simultaneous block and strike techniques. The above picture does not contain any grab but shows the hand on the hip of the blocker which shows that the hand being returned to the hip is not always a grab which is what I have been saying since I started the thread and explains why you rarely see the grabbing action of opening and closing the hand when basics or patterns are being performed by traditional martial artists.


----------



## chinto (Feb 19, 2013)

Kata works, It would not have lasted and be used by systems that have lasted for century's if it did not! on the hand back to the waist, there is a reason why the palm goes facing up. its often a grab and the twisting motion locks the attackers limb to allow you to strike again and again to disable, brake the limb, or kill him/her.  

huge amounts of Effort, Time, and yes even blood and lost lives went into the older systems development. They did not fight for point in places like Okinawa in 1918, but for their LIVES!  winner of a street fight on Okinawa was usually decided by who was still breathing at the end!  some things that modern medicine can cure and so are not particularly life threatening with that DIFINITIVE MEDICAL CARE  delivered in a very TIMELY MANNER were a death sentence a century ago.  even today a tension hemo/pnemo thorax is very much a deadly thing with out that definitive medical care!  Real fights are over in seconds and kata teaches you to move with out even thought.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 19, 2013)

I think it's a reasonable interpretation to say that the hand returning to the hip is a grab. Or an elbow to the rear. Sure, those are legitimate ways to look at it.

In my opinion, as a kung fu guy, it was intended to serve a different primary purpose, and all other interpretations, while perhaps "correct" (or at least not Incorrect) are secondary.

The purpose is to help engage the rotation of the trunk in delivering a powerful punch. The pull-back, when done as a connection to the body and not as an isolated arm-effort-movement, helps with torso rotation and helps one learn to engage the full body when delivering a technique such as a punch. As has been mentioned before, this is really being driven with the legs, to cause rotation in the torso. Yes, I agree completely. But pulling back with the non-punching arm, done with a firm connection to the rotation of the torso as it is being driven by the legs, helps augment that rotation. If the effort is done with the arm alone and not as a connection to the torso, then no, it fails in that purpose.

The reason I say this is because the particular method that I train uses a much exaggerated pull-back with the non-punching arm. It is done to the point of being fully extended to the rear, with the torso completely rotated so that the shoulders and hips form a line between 12:00 and 6:00 (front to rear). And the pull-back, in my system, is understood to be intended to aid in that rotation, which drives the punching arm forward. Oh, and yes, you can also interpret other applications of the movement in the pullback as well.

So in my opinion, pulling the hand to the hip, when done correctly, is a shortened version of the same concept. Less exaggerated than the method that I practice, but the same idea put into action nonetheless. But again, that's when it's correctly linked to the rotation of the torso as driven by the legs. If it's just an arm pull, disconnected from the torso and the legs, well then maybe it's just a grab and nothing more. But as such, it has only the power of the arm and shoulder driving it, and misses the much greater power of the legs and torso. 

that's how I see it, anyway.

edit to add another thought:  as one develops skill with that rotation, the need for the exaggerated movement (the full rearward extension in the case of my system, or the hip chamber in other systems) becomes less.  One learns to harness that full body connection and rotation, without the need for that formal shape of the technique.  But the formal technique is a way of drilling the concept until sufficient skill develops that it is no longer needed when delivering the technique.


----------



## K-man (Feb 19, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> Since we have mainly been discussing the pulling hand, here is a reference that encompasses both sides of the topic.  http://www.theshotokanway.com/hikite.html
> 
> Here is another article that may reiterate what many are saying here.. . http://blogcritics.org/sports/article/hikite-pulling-a-hand-back-to/


Thank you for those links. If I could take the liberty of posting a few paras. from them.

From the first ....



> The pulling hand or hikite as it's called in the dojo contributes much to the effectiveness of a technique, and *the more advanced in karate you become, the more you will appreciate its significance. *



And from the second ....



> Hikite is often derided by many people from other fighting systems who feel that these traditional Oriental arts are stylistic and not very practical. They ask why we leave such a big hole in our guard by pulling the hikite hand back to the hip, rather than leaving it up as a guard like a boxer does. *Many traditionalists answer that it is to gain maximum power from the technique. This is never a convincing answer,* especially when so many other fighting forms (boxing, kickboxing, Krav Maga etc) can generate a lot of power without pulling back to the hip. Unfortunately, most people miss the point that boxers, kickboxers; or surprisingly, the same traditional martial artists, do actually practice hikite.



and ....



> Many Chinese styles include sensitively training with what they call "push hands" or "sticky hands." Imagine that you have to feel for an opponent in the dark. _*As soon as you contact an arm, you grab it, twist it and pull back to your hip, pulling your opponent off balance (hikite). At the same time, you strike with the other hand*_, as now you know exactly where he is, even if you cant see him properly.


(I don't believe for a minute that it is only for fighting in the dark. It is a huge part of close contact fighting full stop.)

and ....



> So why do so many people have so much trouble recognizing hikites grappling applications in traditional Oriental martial arts?
> 
> Its because *we usually look through the lens of sport martial arts.* In most traditional systems, we are actually banned from grabbing in competition, so we look at our arts mainly from a striking, punching, and kicking point of view. Most traditionalists are not used to looking for grappling applications. However, for night fighting when you really cannot see your opponent very well, grappling would be the cornerstone of self defence!



Which all goes to explain why the following  is totally wrong.



> From *RTKDCMB
> 
> **Bringing the hand back to the hip whilst punching with the other one;*
> 
> ...


:asian:


----------



## K-man (Feb 19, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> There are some good techniques in the link showing both the pulling hand and the block and strike. The palm smash, eye gouge and knifehand strikes are not grabs though, they are simultaneous block and strike techniques.
> 
> I can't get the Bubishi drawing to copy!    :tantrum:   Please refer back to the previous posts.
> 
> The above picture does not contain any grab but shows the hand on the hip of the blocker which shows that the hand being returned to the hip is not always a grab which is what I have been saying since I started the thread and explains why you rarely see the grabbing action of opening and closing the hand when basics or patterns are being performed by traditional martial artists.


The picture shows the attacker's left arm being captured and the right fist is ready for the strike. In this instance (in this picture) the punch will be launched from the carriage position but it doesn't mean it was pulled back there to prepare for the punch. If the retracted hand had been open, in that same position, it would have been protecting the ribs, sternum and solar plexus (Mizoochi).

And, for what is's worth, you should *never* see the grabbing action when basics or patterns are being performed because what you are describing is 'kihon' training. Practising grabbing is the next level of training where you are training the application of the basic movement.   :asian:


----------



## K-man (Feb 19, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> The purpose is to help engage the rotation of the trunk in delivering a powerful punch. The pull-back, when done as a connection to the body and not as an isolated arm-effort-movement, helps with torso rotation and helps one learn to engage the full body when delivering a technique such as a punch. As has been mentioned before, this is really being driven with the legs, to cause rotation in the torso. Yes, I agree completely. But pulling back with the non-punching arm, done with a firm connection to the rotation of the torso as it is being driven by the legs, helps augment that rotation. If the effort is done with the arm alone and not as a connection to the torso, then no, it fails in that purpose.
> 
> The reason I say this is because the particular method that I train uses a much exaggerated pull-back with the non-punching arm. It is done to the point of being fully extended to the rear, with the torso completely rotated so that the shoulders and hips form a line between 12:00 and 6:00 (front to rear). And the pull-back, in my system, is understood to be intended to aid in that rotation, which drives the punching arm forward. Oh, and yes, you can also interpret other applications of the movement in the pullback as well.
> 
> So in my opinion, pulling the hand to the hip, when done correctly, is a shortened version of the same concept. Less exaggerated than the method that I practice, but the same idea put into action nonetheless. But again, that's when it's correctly linked to the rotation of the torso as driven by the legs. If it's just an arm pull, disconnected from the torso and the legs, well then maybe it's just a grab and nothing more. But as such, it has only the power of the arm and shoulder driving it, and misses the much greater power of the legs and torso.


Michael, you can achieve the same rotation of the torso with both hands in front in a normal fighting stance. There is IMO no additional benefit in pulling the hand back to carriage. In fact, as has been previously pointed out, by pulling the hand back to carriage for the reasons you are giving, that is additional rotation, you are leaving a huge gap in your defence. You will possibly get away with that in conventional sparring but you would very quickly be smacked in the head if you tried it in a close fighting situation. 

The rotation I teach, and this is what is taught at the Jundokan, is the hips begin the rotation. The torso moves next but with slight delay because the body is not locked. Next to move are the shoulders, again with that fraction of delay. (By this time the hips have actually completed their work and they are back centred.). The shoulders now provide acceleration to the arms which is the culmination of the power generation for the strike. Certainly while this is happening the other hand will withdraw but it will only return fully to carriage if I am pulling something in. 

The exaggerated movement you have described is also found in a couple of karate styles but certainly not Goju which is very square.

 :asian:


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 19, 2013)

While I don't disagree that the basic instruction does aid in teaching body mechanics of waist torque, one can develop a similar amount of power from a 3 inch punch compared to a reverse punch when proper mechanics and timing are developed.  However, I do not discount the benefits of the mechanics training as a beginner.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 19, 2013)

K-man said:


> Michael, you can achieve the same rotation of the torso with both hands in front in a normal fighting stance. There is IMO no additional benefit in pulling the hand back to carriage. In fact, as has been previously pointed out, by pulling the hand back to carriage for the reasons you are giving, that is additional rotation, you are leaving a huge gap in your defence. You will possibly get away with that in conventional sparring but you would very quickly be smacked in the head if you tried it in a close fighting situation.



I disagree.  The issue is, the exaggerated movement is a training drill, but is not how you would actually fight.  You would fight with shorter movements, the exaggerated movement is a tool used to develop a specific skill.  In the Chinese arts, we often say, you start big to become small.  The big movements help the skill become second-nature, but how it is used is a with a smaller (not exaggerated) movement.  Because you used the big movement to train the skill, once you command that skill you can tap the same power using the smaller movements.  But if you never train with the big (exaggerated) movements, it is much more difficult, if not impossible, to develop the full potential in that particular skill with only smaller movements.  This is based on an approach that says, everything we do should be driven with full-body engagement.  That's how we see it, anyway.



> The rotation I teach, and this is what is taught at the Jundokan, is the hips begin the rotation. The torso moves next but with slight delay because the body is not locked. Next to move are the shoulders, again with that fraction of delay. (By this time the hips have actually completed their work and they are back centred.). The shoulders now provide acceleration to the arms which is the culmination of the power generation for the strike. Certainly while this is happening the other hand will withdraw but it will only return fully to carriage if I am pulling something in.



we would suggest you begin the rotation by driving the rear foot into the ground, which actually drives the hip thru the rotation.  That brings the entire torso into the rotation.  This, as you say, drives the shoulder forward and powers the punch.  However, you are missing the other side of the rotation.  Pulling the other hand back, with connection to the torso, helps power that rotation.  When something pivots around a point, both sides of the pivot aid in that action.  If you only push the punch out, you are only paying attention to one side of the rotation.  When you pull back on the other hand (with proper connection to the torso), you are then working both sides of the pivot.

an analogy would be like a spigot that has two spokes that you grip to turn.  If you only push on one spoke, yes you can turn the spigot but it's not so efficient.  But if you grasp both spokes and push on one and pull on the other, the spigot turns more efficiently and with more authority.  That is what is happening when you properly pull back the other hand when driving a punch forward.  Again in the Chinese arts, we say, you go left to go right, you go forward to go back.  This is an example of that concept.  You go back to go forward.  When you properly pull back the other hand, it drives the punching fist forward with more power.



> The exaggerated movement you have described is also found in a couple of karate styles but certainly not Goju which is very square.
> 
> :asian:



Different systems manifest these ideas in different ways, and may use completely different approach.  But in this discussion, people have referenced the Bubishi, which i I recall is a Chinese document?  Well, i'm giving some perspective from one particular Chinese method, for what it's worth.  I'm not trying to say, you need to do what I do or train in the method I train.  But I'm giving perspective based on our approach to training, which simply makes a tremendous amount of sense to me.  

again, for what it's worth.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 19, 2013)

K-man said:


> Which all goes to explain why the following  is totally wrong.
> 
> :asian:



*Punching whilst bringing the hand back to the hip is the purest most powerful form of the straight punch
*Not  meant as a blanket statement for all punches from all systems just for  the particular system that uses them. Someone like a boxer may have a  more powerful straight punch than someone from a system that uses the  hip chamber but that does not mean that the hand coming back to the hip  is not for the purpose of enhancing hip rotation. My poor choice of  words did not make it very clearwhat I wanted to say.  The punch performed in this manner is the simple basic form of the punch  like a car straight off the assembly line. Having the non-punching hand  stay in the guard position is a modification of the punch to protect  from attacks, which is not so vital when you are practicing the basics  on your own where no one is trying to punch you, (like sticking a  spoiler and mag wheels on the new car and changing the color of the  paint job). Also there are at least 3 techniques where the opposite hand  grabbing and pulling the opponent back to the hip does not make sense.  1) the turning punch (hook), grabbing your opponent with one hand and  pulling him to your hip would  and you would be pulling him away from  your punch. 2) Over the shoulder punch as in Yoo Sin hyung and 3) The  rear knife hand cop to the groin. In both these last 2 cases the  opponent would be behind you and you would not be able to grab end pull  them back to your hip from the front in the way you would practice them  in the basics and patterns. If bringing the hand back to the hip for a  straight punch is only ever a grab and pull then why do you not see a  Karate or Taekwondo practitioner grab and pull during free sparring with  every punch? Is the grab and pull used only in the basics and patterns  and only rarely used in free sparring and almost never used when the  guard remains up during the punch?


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 19, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> While I don't disagree that the basic instruction does aid in teaching body mechanics of waist torque, one can develop a similar amount of power from a 3 inch punch compared to a reverse punch when proper mechanics and timing are developed.  However, I do not discount the benefits of the mechanics training as a beginner.



well, in our system we see the rotation as so fundamentally important that we simply never stop practicing, developing, and refining it, no matter what level one reaches.  It is literally the foundation upon which our system is built.  It is the first thing a new student is taught, and it simply never goes away.  We practice the rotation by itself.  As we practice our techniques we focus on rotation to drive them.  As we practice our forms, every movement within the form is driven by rotation.  

Given that the Okinawan methods were influenced by various Chinese methods, it is my suspicion that this may have been the original intention in the hand to hip issue, in the development of the Okinawan methods under Chinese influence.  I suspect that on some level, this concept may have been lost, forgotten, or misunderstood by a lot of people.  That is simply my opinion.

That doesn't mean that the grabbing and pulling applications are not valid.  Of course they are.  But when you grab and pull, doing so with full-body engagement will be much more powerful than pulling with the arm and shoulder alone.  In fact, I often use the visualization of pulling on a rope when describing this method.  Whether you are looking at the punch going forward, the grab and pull coming back, or the elbow driving rearward, they are all more powerful and effective when done with a full-body rotation, when that rotation is understood properly and engaged properly.

Personally, I believe that a lot of people do not understand how to engage the rotation properly.  They believe they are doing so, but in fact there is a disconnection between the various body parts in the rotation.  When it's disconnected, it severely undermines the potential that the rotational power has.  So everyone swears up and down that they are doing it, but in fact in my opinion, many many people are not doing it properly and are not realizing the true potential that the method holds.  But hey, again that's my personal opinion.

as for the inch-punching, I'll say that I don't really understand the method and that is really an important issue.  One needs to train in a method that one can really connect to, that makes sense to him.  It's impossible to qualitatively state that "this" or "that" method is THE best.  What is best for the individual is what makes the most sense to him.  That might be a reflection of the quality of instruction he has received, or it might be a reflection of how his brain works.  But regardless, that matters more than anything else: pursuing a method that simply makes sense to one's concept of training and what works.

The rotational method makes sense to me, so I advocate it.  And what I say here is meant to offer perspective to the discussion based on experience with this particular method.  It is up to the individual to decide what makes sense to him, and what training route he wishes to follow.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 19, 2013)

K-man said:


> The picture shows the attacker's left arm being captured and the right fist is ready for the strike. In this instance (in this picture) the punch will be launched from the carriage position but it doesn't mean it was pulled back there to prepare for the punch. If the retracted hand had been open, in that same position, it would have been protecting the ribs, sternum and solar plexus (Mizoochi).



Take a close look at he picture, you will see that the figure on the left is performing an inner forearm block. Unless he has fingers growing out of his wrist he is not capturing (grabbing) the other guy's hand unless he is about to open his hand and grab the arm, but there's no way to tell what he is going to do from the picture by itself. So either one of us could be right or wrong.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> *Punching whilst bringing the hand back to the hip is the purest most powerful form of the straight punch
> *Not  meant as a blanket statement for all punches from all systems just for  the particular system that uses them. Someone like a boxer may have a  more powerful straight punch than someone from a system that uses the  hip chamber but that does not mean that the hand coming back to the hip  is not for the purpose of enhancing hip rotation. My poor choice of  words did not make it very clearwhat I wanted to say.  The punch performed in this manner is the simple basic form of the punch  like a car straight off the assembly line. Having the non-punching hand  stay in the guard position is a modification of the punch to protect  from attacks, which is not so vital when you are practicing the basics  on your own where no one is trying to punch you, (like sticking a  spoiler and mag wheels on the new car and changing the color of the  paint job). Also there are at least 3 techniques where the opposite hand  grabbing and pulling the opponent back to the hip does not make sense.  1) the turning punch (hook), grabbing your opponent with one hand and  pulling him to your hip would  and you would be pulling him away from  your punch. 2) Over the shoulder punch as in Yoo Sin hyung and 3) The  rear knife hand cop to the groin. In both these last 2 cases the  opponent would be behind you and you would not be able to grab end pull  them back to your hip from the front in the way you would practice them  in the basics and patterns. If bringing the hand back to the hip for a  straight punch is only ever a grab and pull then why do you not see a  Karate or Taekwondo practitioner grab and pull during free sparring with  every punch? Is the grab and pull used only in the basics and patterns  and only rarely used in free sparring and almost never used when the  guard remains up during the punch?



Mate, you can enhance hip rotation by way of just throwing yourself forward. Heres Lyoto Machida doing it.
http://cdn0.sbnation.com/imported_assets/592622/round3machidapunch.gif Behold, the tremendous amount of hip action. Also, ive read what he does there as being a bunkai of the lunge punch found in various systems. Grab the arm > Throw yourself forward > Punch > Then the leg catches up. It gets alot of weight transfer, as well as rotation in.

As for hook punches, you can grab and hook. It works quite well if you grab the opposite shoulder and punch over their arm. As for the rear knife hand to the groin, you can grab for that as well. Grab them by their lapel and do it. What do you mean by over the shoulder punch? I dont doubt i know the punch, though not by that name.

Also, i see plenty of grabbing in various forms of Karate, including sparring. Look at the JKA, or Kyokushin. Lots of grabbing happens if it isnt against the rules. As for TKD, i dont know what youve been seeing or doing, but we grab folks all the time. Also, the fact its in basics and forms should be proof of that. If its so basic, why isnt your Dojang doing it? Its pretty common, you know. Also, if you grab someone, your arm serves as a barrier, similar to if you had it up in a guard.


----------



## mook jong man (Feb 20, 2013)

Seems to be mostly about Karate this thread.
But since the topic of rotation has cropped up I might just dip my oar in if its ok.
Bil Tze the third empty hand form of Wing Chun is primarily concerned with generating power through high speed rotation , similar to a whirlpool.

To generate the maximum speed and power and maintain stability in the form the circular force must be even , one elbow pulling back and the other elbow going forward.
If the forces are uneven the body becomes like a high speed spinning cylinder in a machine where the axle is not properly situated in the center , speed and efficiency is lost resulting in less power and stability.

In Wing Chun when circumstances arise where we will pull someone into a strike   , it is done with a 45 degree pivot of the body.
This not only pulls them in and down , it also pulls them slightly out to the side , this serves to off balance them and also to negate any chance of them trying to hit with the other hand as they are coming in .
Its a bit like being sucked into a whirlpool except instead of water you are being dragged into elbow strikes , palm strikes etc.

In the clip of the Bil Tze form below you can see the rotation in action with the elbow strike sequences.

[video=youtube_share;cwG8xLTKkUs]http://youtu.be/cwG8xLTKkUs[/video]


----------



## K-man (Feb 20, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> we would suggest you begin the rotation by driving the rear foot into the ground, which actually drives the hip thru the rotation.  That brings the entire torso into the rotation.  This, as you say, drives the shoulder forward and powers the punch.  However, you are missing the other side of the rotation.  Pulling the other hand back, with connection to the torso, helps power that rotation.  When something pivots around a point, both sides of the pivot aid in that action.  If you only push the punch out, you are only paying attention to one side of the rotation.  When you pull back on the other hand (with proper connection to the torso), you are then working both sides of the pivot.


Not in this case. In the extreme the back foot is not even on the ground an your weight moving forward is far more effective in enhancing the strike. Normally the back foot is purely for a balanced stance, nothing to do with driving. Just a different way of striking which is far more relaxed and far more penetrating. It is very similar to the WC one inch punch but I might deliver it from slightly further away depending on circumstance.   The other hand coming back is the opposite effect of the shoulder acceleration forward, just that on the opposite side the hand comes back instead. The only time that would be different is if I was holding something, then I may pull it back. Even then, the chances are I would not pull back but my body would come up to that hand as I was moving in.     :asian:


----------



## K-man (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Having the non-punching hand  stay in the guard position is a modification of the punch to protect  from attacks, which is not so vital when you are practicing the basics  on your own where no one is trying to punch you, (like sticking a  spoiler and mag wheels on the new car and changing the color of the  paint job).
> 
> Your fighting in the real world is how you train.
> 
> ...





> If bringing the hand back to the hip for a straight punch is only ever a grab and pull then why do you not see a Karate or Taekwondo practitioner grab and pull during free sparring with every punch? Is the grab and pull used only in the basics and patterns and only rarely used in free sparring and almost never used when the guard remains up during the punch?


The answer to the first part is simple. Most sparring in TKD and karate is sport based and you are always out of range of grabbing or being grabbed. In most sparring competition you aren't even allowed to grab.

If you were sparring in our dojo, we start from  distance where both forearms are in contact similar to Chi Sau in WC. I will be grabbing or trapping at every opportunity.    :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 20, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Mate, you can enhance hip rotation by way of just throwing yourself forward. Heres Lyoto Machida doing it.
> http://cdn0.sbnation.com/imported_assets/592622/round3machidapunch.gif Behold, the tremendous amount of hip action. Also, ive read what he does there as being a bunkai of the lunge punch found in various systems. Grab the arm > Throw yourself forward > Punch > Then the leg catches up. It gets alot of weight transfer, as well as rotation in.
> 
> As for hook punches, you can grab and hook. It works quite well if you grab the opposite shoulder and punch over their arm. As for the rear knife hand to the groin, you can grab for that as well. Grab them by their lapel and do it. What do you mean by over the shoulder punch? I dont doubt i know the punch, though not by that name.
> ...



Here is a video of the over the shoulder punch it is the 2nd and 3rd movement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUKs9e91jmM&feature=related

My Dojang does use the grab and strike just not with every strike as grabbing with one hand also ties up that hand. AS for the Machida video that was a standard amount of hip rotation and it was hardly a the most powerful punch ever. So where did his non-punching arm end up? At his hip. Did he pull his opponent into him with the non-punching hand? No, thank you for proving my point. The lapel grab for the knife hand strike to the groin is not possible if they are standing behind you when you do it, simple test -have someone stand behind you and try to grab his lapel without turning around or reaching behind your back iy you can do that then you are not human.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Here is a video of the over the shoulder punch it is the 2nd and 3rd movement
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUKs9e91jmM&feature=related
> 
> My Dojang does use the grab and strike just not with every strike as grabbing with one hand also ties up that hand. AS for the Machida video that was a standard amount of hip rotation and it was hardly a the most powerful punch ever. So where did his non-punching arm end up? At his hip. Did he pull his opponent into him with the non-punching hand? No, thank you for proving my point. The lapel grab for the knife hand strike to the groin is not possible if they are standing behind you when you do it, simple test -have someone stand behind you and try to grab his lapel without turning around or reaching behind your back iy you can do that then you are not human.



So you use grab and strike work? So, why dont you see it in free sparring? That was your question, not mine.

Standard amount of rotation? Yes. But its also more than youre capable of generating with both feet rooted into the ground. His arm was pulled back - This is something i *think* i mentioned earlier. Was his palm upright? No. Was his hand touching his hip? No. It was pulled back. Thats how just about everyone punches*, regardless of the level of their arm and regardless of if theyve ever taken a martial arts lesson in their entire life. That wasnt the most powerful punch ever, nor was it meant to be. He did grab his opponent - Thats how he got past his guard. I didnt prove your point - I didnt prove anything. I just showed you a gif of hip rotation and weight transfer being used in a punch along with a pulling of the arm. The punch he used was a lunge punch, and the arm check is the same non-punching-arm movement done prior to the punch by the KKW standard. Im fairly sure ive seen it in some karate as well, but what he did is a lunge punch, with the only difference being the rear leg catching up, instead of stepping first. The lead hand was used to hold the other persons arm to pull it downward. There was more power than you might think their was - What were you basing the perceived amount of power off of? That video was never about proving Hikite, it was about power generation. Hikite isnt something that needs proving. 

Youre welcome, one and all, to try that same lunging punch at home with your free hand scratching the back of your head if you like. You get the same hip rotation from the forward movement itself. Just move your body forward, turn and punch, then let your rear leg naturally catch up and go in front of you to land.

As for knifehands: If theyre standing behind you, youre using a different technique to if theyre in front of you. To me a knife hand to the groin is a strike done in front of you - I thought thats what you were referring to.

As for over the over shoulder punches, bunkai wise id call it a headlock. Thats just me, though.

*Even if your guard is up, you pull your arm back.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 20, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> He did grab his opponent - Thats how he got past his guard. I didnt prove your point - I didnt prove anything. I just showed you a gif of hip rotation and weight transfer being used in a punch along with a pulling of the arm.



I believe that was more a case of him brushing the hand away as he did not close his fingers or pull the other guy's hand back and the contact was very brief.

I would be interested in your view of twisting the wrist near the end of a strike for increasing power generation for punches and strikes.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

I really don't disagree with anything you are stating Michael, and I would like to point out that the concept of rotation, specifically hip rotation is the key emphasis in power generation in my art.  For example a stepping reverse punch: Ground reactive force (driving into the ground)> hip/waist rotation> up the torso> out the relaxed arm> rotation (pronation) of the heavy fist, while maintaining proper breathing, staying soft/relaxed until the point of impact, and keeping equal and opposite power (i.e. body rotation of equal speed and power), and exact timing (front foot touching the ground at the exact moment that the punch is delivered AND the chambered fist is stopped).  

The technique NEVER changes.  However, as we advance in rank/skill/experience, it is put into a deeper context than just power generation.  The stance, rotation, chamber, etc.  all have meaning in a SD situation, that is not relevant in a sparring situation, and this is the deeper context that we begin to practice (i.e. the grabbing/drawing hand).  

I really appreciate your input and perspective on this, as CMA is something I am interested in, but have very limited knowledge about.  Thank you.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Here is a video of the over the shoulder punch it is the 2nd and 3rd movement
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUKs9e91jmM&feature=related



I am asking this, because we do not practice this form or have a technique like this in any of our forms, but what is the intended target of the over the shoulder punch?


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I believe that was more a case of him brushing the hand away as he did not close his fingers or pull the other guy's hand back and the contact was very brief.
> 
> I would be interested in your view of twisting the wrist near the end of a strike for increasing power generation for punches and strikes.



He pushes the arm down. The contact was long enough to do the job. Its more important that it PERFECTLY mimics the lunge punch in KKW TKD.

The twist of the wrist? Yeah, it can add power in a way. Force on contact is the result of the knuckles being hard, and hard things being bashed into stuff creates force. The wrist twisting action can aid in penetration, for lack of a better word. Theres nothing wrong with that. Bunkai wise, it can facilitate a shove if youre holding someones arm with that hand. Rotating your arm engages more muscles within the arm. Its quite useful.

I feel like i should point something out: The hand back on the hip thing. None of us think its a bad thing. Its a good thing. Its your reasoning as to why its good thats in question. The same goes for alot of these things.


----------



## clfsean (Feb 20, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> well, in our system we see the rotation as so fundamentally important that we simply never stop practicing, developing, and refining it, no matter what level one reaches.  It is literally the foundation upon which our system is built.  It is the first thing a new student is taught, and it simply never goes away.  We practice the rotation by itself.  As we practice our techniques we focus on rotation to drive them.  As we practice our forms, every movement within the form is driven by rotation.



Ditto. Rotate from the bottom up & out. Delivery isn't properly achieved unless it rotates & moves out. 



Flying Crane said:


> Given that the Okinawan methods were influenced by various Chinese methods, it is my suspicion that this may have been the original intention in the hand to hip issue, in the development of the Okinawan methods under Chinese influence.  I suspect that on some level, this concept may have been lost, forgotten, or misunderstood by a lot of people.  That is simply my opinion.



Also... OMA's were more directly influenced by the shorthands from Fujian. I feel one of the biggest influences was Ngor Chor Kuen or the foundations of it at least... Sam Chien. Depending on who you see perform Sam Chien, you will or won't see chambering at the hip. Most of the other Fujianese stuff I've seen keeps the hands out in font & chambering just before a "long strike" from there as opposed to short strike from up front.



Flying Crane said:


> That doesn't mean that the grabbing and pulling applications are not valid.  Of course they are.  But when you grab and pull, doing so with full-body engagement will be much more powerful than pulling with the arm and shoulder alone.  In fact, I often use the visualization of pulling on a rope when describing this method.  Whether you are looking at the punch going forward, the grab and pull coming back, or the elbow driving rearward, they are all more powerful and effective when done with a full-body rotation, when that rotation is understood properly and engaged properly.



Yes... most definitely with the body. 99% of the techniques when fully engaging the waist (rotation) is body, not limbs or isolated segments. Can't chyuhn choi properly without it! 



Flying Crane said:


> Personally, I believe that a lot of people do not understand how to engage the rotation properly.  They believe they are doing so, but in fact there is a disconnection between the various body parts in the rotation.  When it's disconnected, it severely undermines the potential that the rotational power has.  So everyone swears up and down that they are doing it, but in fact in my opinion, many many people are not doing it properly and are not realizing the true potential that the method holds.  But hey, again that's my personal opinion.



Actually this can be seen quite often when people claim to "twisting their waist" but the body is broken into 3 segments... upper, waist, lower. But no connectivity between the three. More often than not, it's only 2 connecting which will "feel" like everything is connected, but isn't.



Flying Crane said:


> as for the inch-punching, I'll say that I don't really understand the method and that is really an important issue.  One needs to train in a method that one can really connect to, that makes sense to him.  It's impossible to qualitatively state that "this" or "that" method is THE best.  What is best for the individual is what makes the most sense to him.  That might be a reflection of the quality of instruction he has received, or it might be a reflection of how his brain works.  But regardless, that matters more than anything else: pursuing a method that simply makes sense to one's concept of training and what works.



Yep!!



Flying Crane said:


> The rotational method makes sense to me, so I advocate it.  And what I say here is meant to offer perspective to the discussion based on experience with this particular method.  It is up to the individual to decide what makes sense to him, and what training route he wishes to follow.



Yep!!


----------



## clfsean (Feb 20, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> I am asking this, because we do not practice this form or have a technique like this in any of our forms, but what is the intended target of the over the shoulder punch?



We used to do it in Pyungahn 3. The notion was an elbow strike back with a kick punch over the shoulder to an opponent to the rear. Now... I'm leaning more toward an elbow across the front & back... more than anything, a large rotation motion in the front with multiple options & possibilities.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 20, 2013)

My take on the twist of the wrist, not being a doctor or a biologist, I believe it adds power because you are engaging more muscle groups towards the end of the punch, like when you are doing a bicep curl with a dumbbell, if you do it with the palm facing up you are working the bicep but if you do it with your palm facing down you are working the forearm. Muscle groups work in pairs to produce movement, for example the bicep and triceps, one increases tension whilst  the other one decreases tension. When the arm is completely straight the bicep has the minimum amount of tension and the triceps the maximum which is why the punching arm should always be slightly bent at the end of the punch so that the elbow is not damaged (I heard somewhere that the elbow joint can separate up to 2cm during a straight punch). For techniques like the back fist, reverse knife hand (ridge hand) or knife hand strike the increase in power by twisting the wrist is more direct. Twisting the wrist at the last moment adds a large burst of acceleration at the end as the knuckles, reverse knife edge or knife edge rotates into position towards the target. Twisting the wrist at the last second also gives you a convenient reference point to tension the arm at the right time and control where the hand stops.


----------



## seasoned (Feb 20, 2013)

IMHO
If you want self defense that you can use in a short amount of time, take an 8 week SD course. Ears, eyes, nose, throat, solar plexus, groin, knee and related technique for each.

IMHO contunued,
Martial arts have their roots in China. The Chinese concept was not to open a dojo on every block, but, to pass the arts down to their family off spring at a very young age. By the time the little protagees reached adulthood they had 20 years of focused instruction.
In Okinawa after many visits back to China, the Okinawans took what they had learned and added it to their own form of fighting and the inception of Okinawan GoJu was formulated. To preserve this information a few kata were invented, namely, Sanchin and Tensho. 
Goju meaning hard/soft, related to the hard Sanchin kata, the first kata learned. On the other end of the spectrum was Tensho with it's outward apearance of fluidity and flowing open hand techniques. I fear I am digressing so I will move on.

When the arts moved to Japan from Okinawa, it was seen as a exceliant means of transferring a sense of discipline to the education systen there, but needed a little toning down. This toning down consisted of diluting the kata to a punch, kick and block system, which was very conducive to competition (tournaments).

I know I condenced a lot of the happenings over many years. My hope here is that we can realilize IMHO that a lot of the issues brought up throughout this thread, "static training/chambering hand/twisting hips, are just a glimps of what lies just below the surface of the base of all Martial Arts, and that is KATA.

I will condense it even more by leaving you with this conclusion.

Hard becomes "fluid", big moves used for training "become small" for self defense, while striving to mantain that feeling of the big moves. Static training is only a means and by product of tournament endeavors.

All the above of course IMHO  :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 20, 2013)

Never_A_Reflection said:


> Pulling the hand back to chamber when punching does not provide a "seesaw" affect



The seesaw remark is not actually referring to a seesaw effect just a way of describing the motion, one kid goes up, one kid goes down, one arm goes forward, one arm goes back.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> My take on the twist of the wrist, not being a doctor or a biologist, I believe it adds power because you are engaging more muscle groups towards the end of the punch, like when you are doing a bicep curl with a dumbbell, if you do it with the palm facing up you are working the bicep but if you do it with your palm facing down you are working the forearm. Muscle groups work in pairs to produce movement, for example the bicep and triceps, one increases tension whilst  the other one decreases tension. When the arm is completely straight the bicep has the minimum amount of tension and the triceps the maximum which is why the punching arm should always be slightly bent at the end of the punch so that the elbow is not damaged (I heard somewhere that the elbow joint can separate up to 2cm during a straight punch). For techniques like the back fist, reverse knife hand (ridge hand) or knife hand strike the increase in power by twisting the wrist is more direct. Twisting the wrist at the last moment adds a large burst of acceleration at the end as the knuckles, reverse knife edge or knife edge rotates into position towards the target. Twisting the wrist at the last second also gives you a convenient reference point to tension the arm at the right time and control where the hand stops.



I dont disagree with any of that.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

clfsean said:


> We used to do it in Pyungahn 3. The notion was an elbow strike back with a kick punch over the shoulder to an opponent to the rear. Now... I'm leaning more toward an elbow across the front & back... more than anything, a large rotation motion in the front with multiple options & possibilities.



We practice Pyungahn Samdan, but I don't teach it as a punch over the shoulder, well at least not in application.  The elbow strike is a strike, but I teach the "punch" as a grab.  

Look at the video at 6:36.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

The punching aspect we teach is more in line with what is found at 7:18 in the video.  I have not, personally, found the punch over the shoulder for an attacker coming from behind you to be effective.  I am not flexible enough to get my fist behind my shoulder far enough with any amount of power.. .


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

seasoned said:


> IMHO
> If you want self defense that you can use in a short amount of time, take an 8 week SD course. Ears, eyes, nose, throat, solar plexus, groin, knee and related technique for each.
> 
> IMHO contunued,
> ...



Judging by the history as I understand it, you did quite an excellent job distilling over a millennium of martial history into the essence of why so many martial arts have so much difficulty connecting Kata/Hyung/Poomsae with their art beyond aesthetics, static training, and fitness.  

Thank you.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

"Punch" over the shoulder:


----------



## K-man (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> My take on the twist of the wrist, not being a doctor or a biologist, I believe it adds power because you are engaging more muscle groups towards the end of the punch, like when you are doing a bicep curl with a dumbbell, if you do it with the palm facing up you are working the bicep but if you do it with your palm facing down you are working the forearm. Muscle groups work in pairs to produce movement, for example the bicep and triceps, one increases tension whilst  the other one decreases tension. When the arm is completely straight the bicep has the minimum amount of tension and the triceps the maximum which is why the punching arm should always be slightly bent at the end of the punch so that the elbow is not damaged (I heard somewhere that the elbow joint can separate up to 2cm during a straight punch). For techniques like the back fist, reverse knife hand (ridge hand) or knife hand strike the increase in power by twisting the wrist is more direct. Twisting the wrist at the last moment adds a large burst of acceleration at the end as the knuckles, reverse knife edge or knife edge rotates into position towards the target. Twisting the wrist at the last second also gives you a convenient reference point to tension the arm at the right time and control where the hand stops.


Karate started with a neutral fist, not palm down. The strongest alignment is about 45 degrees. The idea that the twist delivers more power is more of a myth than anything else. There is an article titled "Punching" by Chris Thomas, which says it well.  

http://www.usadojo.com/pdf-files/articles/chris-thomas/punching-power.pdf

:asian:


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 20, 2013)

K-man said:


> Not in this case. In the extreme the back foot is not even on the ground an your weight moving forward is far more effective in enhancing the strike. Normally the back foot is purely for a balanced stance, nothing to do with driving. Just a different way of striking which is far more relaxed and far more penetrating. It is very similar to the WC one inch punch but I might deliver it from slightly further away depending on circumstance. The other hand coming back is the opposite effect of the shoulder acceleration forward, just that on the opposite side the hand comes back instead. The only time that would be different is if I was holding something, then I may pull it back. Even then, the chances are I would not pull back but my body would come up to that hand as I was moving in. :asian:



if this works for you and you are happy with it, then I won't argue the issue as far as your own training goes.

but fundamentally, I personally disagree.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 20, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> I really don't disagree with anything you are stating Michael, and I would like to point out that the concept of rotation, specifically hip rotation is the key emphasis in power generation in my art. For example a stepping reverse punch: Ground reactive force (driving into the ground)> hip/waist rotation> up the torso> out the relaxed arm> rotation (pronation) of the heavy fist, while maintaining proper breathing, staying soft/relaxed until the point of impact, and keeping equal and opposite power (i.e. body rotation of equal speed and power), and exact timing (front foot touching the ground at the exact moment that the punch is delivered AND the chambered fist is stopped).
> 
> The technique NEVER changes. However, as we advance in rank/skill/experience, it is put into a deeper context than just power generation. The stance, rotation, chamber, etc. all have meaning in a SD situation, that is not relevant in a sparring situation, and this is the deeper context that we begin to practice (i.e. the grabbing/drawing hand).
> 
> I really appreciate your input and perspective on this, as CMA is something I am interested in, but have very limited knowledge about. Thank you.



thanks for the clarification, I think we are mostly on the same page here.  In your earlier post it was the comment of for a beginner, that kinda stuck out to me, and sparked my additional comments.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 20, 2013)

clfsean said:


> Also... OMA's were more directly influenced by the shorthands from Fujian. I feel one of the biggest influences was Ngor Chor Kuen or the foundations of it at least... Sam Chien. Depending on who you see perform Sam Chien, you will or won't see chambering at the hip. Most of the other Fujianese stuff I've seen keeps the hands out in font & chambering just before a "long strike" from there as opposed to short strike from up front.



aye, and to be completely honest I don't know much about these methods and won't try to comment on any specifics because I simply lack the background.  My gut tells me that the Fujianese stuff also harnesses rotational power, but they go about training it in a different manner.  That's my gut speaking to me, but I cannot back it up with evidence because I simply lack the experience and knowledge.


----------



## seasoned (Feb 20, 2013)

SahBumNimRush said:


> I am asking this, because we do not practice this form or have a technique like this in any of our forms, but *what is the intended target of the over the shoulder punch*?



I noticed there was no response to the above so I am chiming in here.

There is a similar move such as this in a GoJu kata. What appears to be a forward upper elbow strike, was later explaned as a rear over the shoulder punch to the unexpecting person doing a rear under the arms bear hug. It seems foolish that semeone would expose their face in this manner, but, not everyone we may encounter will be a trained opponent.


----------



## K-man (Feb 20, 2013)

seasoned said:


> I noticed there was no response to the above so I am chiming in here.
> 
> There is a similar move such as this in a GoJu kata. What appears to be a forward upper elbow strike, was later explaned as a rear over the shoulder punch to the unexpecting person doing a rear under the arms bear hug. It seems foolish that semeone would expose their face in this manner, but, not everyone we may encounter will be a trained opponent.


This is the one I thought was referred to earlier. If it is Shisochin you are thinking of, that is the one where my bunkai takes it as a downward elbow strike to the spine. (The previous move has the attacker bent forward.)  In actual fact, from a bear hug it is possible their face will come forward as a result of the rear hip thrust but I agree that it would not be the easiest strike to pull off.    :asian:


----------



## seasoned (Feb 20, 2013)

I don't want to sound corny here, but, this thread has gone very well with much input from all, as we all bring together out thoughts and teachings from our own respective arts. 

Just an observation.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 20, 2013)

I like the one at ~7.25, We do a similar one during one step sparring but without the punch, just a choke hold and/or throw.


----------



## chinto (Feb 20, 2013)

seasoned said:


> IMHO
> If you want self defense that you can use in a short amount of time, take an 8 week SD course. Ears, eyes, nose, throat, solar plexus, groin, knee and related technique for each.
> 
> IMHO contunued,
> ...



I think you have covered a lot well, I would say rather that Chinese martial arts combined with those from India, as in Varji mushti that Bardidarma was trained in.  but either way, Kata was used to transfer the systems in China and later Okinawa and then Japan.  

The tournement thing seems to have mainly come from Japan initially. The Okinawans have kept the combat usage very well from what I can see, and have never had any problem with an instructor in the Okinawan styles teaching for Self Defense and not for sport.  

In Japan it became much more a block kick punch thing partly to differentiate it from Jujitsu. So most of the Japanese Karate Systems do not teach as much trapping, locking and throwing as the Okinawan systems


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 20, 2013)

seasoned said:


> I don't want to sound corny here, but, this thread has gone very well with much input from all, as we all bring together out thoughts and teachings from our own perspective arts.
> 
> Just an observation from the peanut gallery.



I could not agree more, THIS is why I love MT!


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 20, 2013)

seasoned said:


> I don't want to sound corny here, but, this thread has gone very well with much input from all, as we all bring together out thoughts and teachings from our own perspective arts.
> 
> Just an observation from the peanut gallery.



That's why I started it.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 20, 2013)

K-man said:


> Karate started with a neutral fist, not palm down. The strongest alignment is about 45 degrees. The idea that the twist delivers more power is more of a myth than anything else. There is an article titled "Punching" by Chris Thomas, which says it well.
> 
> http://www.usadojo.com/pdf-files/articles/chris-thomas/punching-power.pdf
> 
> :asian:



I stand corrected


----------



## K-man (Feb 20, 2013)

*Victor Smith,* who is a member of MT writes articles for numerous martial art magazines. In light of the discussion of the 'hikite' hand and chambering, I would like to post this link to his article in 'Fighting Arts' on the subject.



> *Chambering*
> 
> 
> *By Victor Smith and Christopher Caile*
> ...


 
   :asian:


----------



## geezer (Feb 20, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> My take on the twist of the wrist, not being a doctor or a biologist, I believe it adds power because you are engaging more muscle groups towards the end of the punch...



I really doubt whether the full twist adds power. Boxers hit awfully hard and the don't twist their fists to the same degree as in many karate systems. And of course some "traditional" systems do not use the twisting, horizontal fist at all. For example, Isshin Ryu and the traditional Chinese system I practice, Ving Tsun. Nor does "engaging more muscle groups" necessarily help. Using muscles unnecessarily can create unwanted tension and actually slow down a punch and restrict power.   



RTKDCMB said:


> *When the arm is completely straight the bicep has the minimum amount of tension *and the triceps the maximum which is why the punching arm should always be slightly bent at the end of the punch so that the elbow is not damaged...



Actually, this is precisely why _we do straighten the arm completely_ when punching in Ving Tsun. There's no tension on the biceps to act as a "brake" and slow down the punch. We extend fully, with a very relaxed snapping punch, letting all our energy exit through a relaxed vertical fist. Significantly, the elbow is pointing down.  I would not recommend extending the arm fully like this with the elbow held out to the side as in many other methods of punching.

I guess my point is that it is very easy to generalize about "traditional martial arts" when, in fact there is tremendous diversity. And a lot of widely held beliefs, like "the correct way to punch" really only represent one point of view. Another reason I like to hang out on this forum. I learn new stuff all the time.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 21, 2013)

seasoned said:


> I noticed there was no response to the above so I am chiming in here.
> 
> There is a similar move such as this in a GoJu kata. What appears to be a forward upper elbow strike, was later explaned as a rear over the shoulder punch to the unexpecting person doing a rear under the arms bear hug. It seems foolish that semeone would expose their face in this manner, but, not everyone we may encounter will be a trained opponent.



I am not sure exactly what the application is for the over the shoulder punch but it could be used if someone is standing behind you in a threatening manner but not necessarily grabbing you such as when someone in front of you is posturing for a fight and you are backing away and you bump into his friend so you take him out with a simultaneous punch and elbow. It could also be against someone who has grabbed your elbow or neck from the rear. It would not be on the top of my list of techniques to use but it could come in handy, after all it is better to have something and not need it than to need something and not have it.


----------



## harlan (Feb 21, 2013)

Regarding the comparison between the Goju technique and the original video, I'd say it's apples vs oranges. There is a 'drop' in Shisochen, and while there are two main interpretations they are from a rear attack/bear hug (punch over the shoulder to the rear attackers face...which is obviously bogus...and the other application being a rear elbow to the ribs while pushing/striking forward with the forearm to break the hold). I'd say the drop in body would signify something other than a rear punch.

Personally, I'm currently argueing this with my teacher (yes...full of myself, LOL!), that this technique is actually a finish to a prior technique. But definitely not an over the shoulder punch.


----------



## Xixon (Feb 21, 2013)

K-man said:


> ...The idea that the twist delivers more power is more of a myth than anything else. ..



I've experienced a compression punch where the well conditioned knuckles twisted on impact.  The twist felt like it was tearing my skin, pretty painful.


----------



## clfsean (Feb 21, 2013)

There's a punch we use in CLF called "yum chaap choi". I've been on the receiving end of it before. It's not a good feeling... for days.

But the gist of it is, the arm rotates to thumb down after contact. The punch doesn't originate that way, but finishes that way. It's a selective use punch, with selective targeting & timing. 

Me, my teachers, my training brothers... none of have injured ourselves with it to date, and date stretches back for some of into the early 90's & before. My sigung... the 60's & before. 

It's all about how you train the technique from day one. If it's done properly (from nose to toes of the punch), you shouldn't encounter any issues. I say shouldn't since this is reality, not a movie. Murphy rules here just alike for the best of us & the worst of us.


----------



## chinto (Feb 21, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> I stand corrected



I was taught from about 4th Kyu in shobayashi and kept also with the Matsumura Seito to go to that 45degree possition where the whole thing has maximum strength, and less chance of injury, though also to use the vertical fist for some things.  Once again the older styles at least of the Okinawan arts developed for combat, and have kept the attributes.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 21, 2013)

geezer said:


> I really doubt whether the full twist adds power. Boxers hit awfully hard and the don't twist their fists to the same degree as in many karate systems. And of course some "traditional" systems do not use the twisting, horizontal fist at all. For example, Isshin Ryu and the traditional Chinese system I practice, Ving Tsun. Nor does "engaging more muscle groups" necessarily help. Using muscles unnecessarily can create unwanted tension and actually slow down a punch and restrict power.
> 
> Actually, this is precisely why _we do straighten the arm completely_  when punching in Ving Tsun. There's no tension on the biceps to act as a  "brake" and slow down the punch. We extend fully, with a very relaxed  snapping punch, letting all our energy exit through a relaxed vertical  fist. Significantly, the elbow is pointing down.  I would not recommend  extending the arm fully like this with the elbow held out to the side as  in many other methods of punching.
> 
> ...



The tension in the punch is only at the moment of impact, the arm is  relaxed all the way through the punch for maximum acceleration and  velocity until then. The arm is always straight (slightly bent but not  locked) during the punch. Locking the arm out fully will damage the  elbow joint. For a technique like the reverse knife hand having the arm  completely straight and hitting a solid target hurts like hell. My  system also uses a vertical punch but the arm is bent more than with a  horizontal fist type punch. Boxers hit awfully hard because that is the main focus of their art. Maybe they could punch even harder if they added the twist as well.


----------



## SahBumNimRush (Feb 21, 2013)

chinto said:


> I was taught from about 4th Kyu in shobayashi and kept also with the Matsumura Seito to go to that 45degree possition where the whole thing has maximum strength, and less chance of injury, though also to use the vertical fist for some things.  Once again the older styles at least of the Okinawan arts developed for combat, and have kept the attributes.


In my style we use the vertical and horizontal fist, but I've never heard of a 45 degree fist, I'm going to have to try that one out!


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 22, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Boxers hit awfully hard because that is the main focus of their art. Maybe they could punch even harder if they added the twist as well.


You realise they do, right? If you hold a guard with your hands turned in so that the soft backs of the gloves work like a shield, your hand twists in order to punch. Though, you still seem to think twisting the punch adds power.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 22, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> You realise they do, right? If you hold a guard with your hands turned in so that the soft backs of the gloves work like a shield, your hand twists in order to punch. Though, you still seem to think twisting the punch adds power.



Why do seem to think the twist does nothing?


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 22, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Why do seem to think the twist does nothing?



Well, i thought it did. Then i stood corrected, being a person who is willing to learn new things. That happened on the previous page.


----------



## geezer (Feb 22, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> The tension in *the punch *is only at the moment of impact, the arm is  relaxed all the way through the punch for maximum acceleration and  velocity until then. The arm is always straight (slightly bent but not  locked) during the punch. Locking the arm out fully will damage the  elbow joint.



When you say "the punch" you should specify _which punch_ you mean. What is true for the punching _you_ know is not true for all methods. When you learn how to use the particular kind of relaxed, elastic force favored in the various "WT" branches of Ip Man lineage Wing Chun you can train punches allowing the elbow to straighten. Of course you don't hit that way since at full extension you don't have any range left for your punch to penetrate and transfer energy into the target. 

Now if you want to talk about possible injuries, take a _look at the horizontal fist_ striking with the first two knuckles! --leaving the wrist inherently unstable. If you favor such a punch you'd better tighten up your wrist on impact, and better build up those wrist muscles with a lot of bag/makiwara work. _Not so_ with the Wing Chun punch. You can hit hard with a relaxed fist. Just watch this guy. His elbow locks out straight and he can hurt you with a soft fist. I know, because I've been hit by him. At a _fraction_ of his potential power that is, or I doubt if I'd be sitting here typing this. (Incidentally, I'm not in any way associated with this man, we just shared the same teacher about twenty years back).


----------



## K-man (Feb 23, 2013)

geezer said:


> When you say "the punch" you should specify _which punch_ you mean. What is true for the punching _you_ know is not true for all methods. When you learn how to use the particular kind of relaxed, elastic force favored in the various "WT" branches of Ip Man lineage Wing Chun you can train punches allowing the elbow to straighten. Of course you don't hit that way since at full extension you don't have any range left for your punch to penetrate and transfer energy into the target.


Interesting. I think of this as a 'tricep' punch.  I teach it as an alternative to our conventional karate strikes, that you can perform if you have an injury to your thumb or index finger.   :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 23, 2013)

geezer said:


> When you say "the punch" you should specify _which punch_ you mean. What is true for the punching _you_ know is not true for all methods. When you learn how to use the particular kind of relaxed, elastic force favored in the various "WT" branches of Ip Man lineage Wing Chun you can train punches allowing the elbow to straighten. Of course you don't hit that way since at full extension you don't have any range left for your punch to penetrate and transfer energy into the target.
> 
> Now if you want to talk about possible injuries, take a _look at the horizontal fist_ striking with the first two knuckles! --leaving the wrist inherently unstable. If you favor such a punch you'd better tighten up your wrist on impact, and better build up those wrist muscles with a lot of bag/makiwara work. _Not so_ with the Wing Chun punch. You can hit hard with a relaxed fist. Just watch this guy. His elbow locks out straight and he can hurt you with a soft fist. I know, because I've been hit by him. At a _fraction_ of his potential power that is, or I doubt if I'd be sitting here typing this. (Incidentally, I'm not in any way associated with this man, we just shared the same teacher about twenty years back).



I was referring to the basic horizontal fist punch such as a reverse punch form a forward stance in Karate or Taekwondo it also applies to such techniques such as the knife hand strike and backfist and especially the reverse knife hand (ridgehand). I can see how the wrist can be more stable in the Wing Chun punch, if you line up the 2 smallest knuckles with the ulnar bone then the fist can only move in 3 directions but if you line up the 2 largest knuckles with the radius bone the fist can move in all 4 directions so is less stable. As far as I know Wing Chun punches hit with the 3 knuckles from the pinky to the middle finger, which I thought was weird, it's just a different style of punching (life would be rather boring if we all did things the same way). Many martial arts punch with the first 2 knuckles because they are much larger than the other 2 and the striking surface has a smaller area. The bones and muscles in the hand are stronger on the thumb side than on the pinky side and thus less likely to fracture. These punches require strengthening of the bones and muscles, a martial artists body is a weapon and weapons must be forged so strengthening and conditioning exercises are performed and technique is improved upon so that you can strike effectively and  reduce injuries.


----------

