# Practical Application of the Double-Knife-Hand Block



## skribs (Jun 26, 2018)

I am specifically referring to the double-knife-hand block that typically shows up in Taekwondo forms, such as Palgwe Il Jang or Taegeuk Sa Jang.  Where the blocking hand is a knife-hand block with the palm out, and the other hand is held around your solar plexus, palm up.

I want to start looking at a lot of the motions in the poomsae, and this is where I want to start.  In particular, I am looking for the *best-fitting practical application* of why you would train this technique.  The rules I am trying to follow when I look at techniques are:

The application must match the motion in the form.  Otherwise, the motion in the form should be different to match the application.
Unless I have good reason to believe otherwise, I am going to believe that the name of the technique is accurate.  For example, this is the double-knife-hand block, which I take to mean it is NOT a strike and it is NOT a grappling application, but is in fact a blocking technique.
I am going to try to keep each thread specific to a technique.
My question is this - what is the purpose of covering your solar plexus with the other hand in the manner depicted in the double knife-hand block?  Here is why I ask:


Typically if a hand isn't busy, it's either protecting our chin, or tight at our side.

We typically don't block with our hand right next to our body, as we don't want the force of a blow to go through our hand into our body

Similar to the previous point, I don't want to pull a punch into me, which is what would happen if the off-hand is used as a block.

We do not have any techniques that chamber at our solar plexus, for the other hand to be used in the next technique.  Even in forms, we move our hand from the solar plexus to chamber the next motion.  

In hapkido, our guard is similar to this position, but our other hand is held a little in front of our body instead of tight to our solar plexus, and it is held palm-down
Similar to above, if this is a guard position, it's not typically used as a guard position in any other context, outside of the forms.  We don't use it in our defense drills and we don't use it in our sparring
Now, it does look good in forms, and there are a few forms where it kind of works with the next move, where it makes it quicker to chamber the next motion.  It also makes a nice pose for photographs.  But I'm struggling to find a good reason for the hand placement of the off-hand in this block.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jun 27, 2018)

As with other things you've said, this mostly shows that you're still stuck in the 'techniques' stage, and haven't progressed to the principles yet.
This movement is a block. It's also a strike. It's also a grapple. It's also a release.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> As with other things you've said, this mostly shows that you're still stuck in the 'techniques' stage, and haven't progressed to the principles yet.
> This movement is a block. It's also a strike. It's also a grapple. It's also a release.



Maybe instead of making a long post describing my thought process, I should have asked my question.  What is the purpose of doing a double-knife-hand block instead of a single knife-hand block?

Put another way: what is the purpose of putting your other hand next to your solar plexus instead of putting your other hand tight at your side?

---

I specifically said in my post that I understand there are different applications, but I specifically want to focus on the application of it as a block.  Knowing abstractly that a motion can be used for a number of different things doesn't help me if I don't know how to actually apply the motion in any of those ways.  I figure a good place to start is where the technique is named.

(edit)

Barring that, I have some follow-up questions to expand on it:

Why would you put your hand against your solar plexus in a grappling situation?
Why would you put your hand against your solar plexus in an escape situation?

Why would you put your hand against your solar plexus in a striking situation?
Since you say the motion can apply in multiple scenarios, how does it apply?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jun 27, 2018)

As I have said before, you need to get beyond the idea that movements in forms are exact representations of applications. They're not. They're ONE example of a stylized version of the movement. That's all.
 In actual use, the movement will be modified to fit the circumstances and the need.
The lead hand may be blocking, striking, grabbing or twisting. The rear hand may also be doing any of those things.
And they don't need to both be doing the same thing. One can be blocking while the other is striking, for example.


----------



## MI_martialist (Jun 27, 2018)

Let's look at this...what is "double knife hand block"?  Is it the motion or is it the posture?  I also agree that if one looks at techniques, there can be no depth of understanding.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 27, 2018)

Something to ad to your process. Each "Move" has 3 parts. 1. How it starts (Some times referred to as the Chamber).  2. Where it finishes, and 3 How it travels  (Straight line, arc, across body, fro in close to further away) not just how it moves from the star to the finish but also how it moves to the "Start"   
Now lets consider why open hand vs. closed.    I am not a KK TKD person, but General Choi mentions for some of the open hand variations that the a grabbing motion follows, so   from that and one's own intuitive process we can see how the open hand can facilitate a grab as "Part of" a block, or as a goal in itself. 
Now also consider how the motion to the chamber might also be used.


----------



## wab25 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> Unless I have good reason to believe otherwise, I am going to believe that the name of the technique is accurate. For example, this is the double-knife-hand block, which I take to mean it is NOT a strike and it is NOT a grappling application, but is in fact a blocking technique.



The name of the technique is accurate, for two reasons. The first is, that it is a teaching tool. You can tell a beginner to wave your hand like this, with power, because it is a block. As they improve their block, adding in speed and power, it causes their body operate in a new way. They are learning to generate power, maintain balance, coordinate different sets of muscles, use their core, use their weight, use their hips... 

In order to understand what you are doing, you have to get past the hand wave. Once you get to a level where you can generate power and speed in your hand wave, now its time to figure out what you are doing. What is your body doing to produce the speed, power and control? At this point, what the hand is doing is irrelevant. What is important is that you have learned how to use your body to create a specific kind of power, speed and control. Yes, to apply this power, your hand must be in a specific place... but that depends on what you are applying. Once you can use your body to do these things, you can simply alter your hand as the situation dictates.

The second reason the name is accurate, is that one of the things this technique is, is a block. (actually, a few blocks, some of them even using the outstretched hand to block with...) But its also a lot of other things.

Earl Weiss has some great thoughts. I will reiterate what he said. A technique is the sum of all the parts, beginning, middle and end. It is not just the end pose. The end pose is just that, the end of the technique. 

If you want to explore these techniques, first identify the whole technique, start, middle and end. Try out the named application... try it as a block... against a lot of different punches and kicks. Then change your distance, get closer, get real close, get far away. Free your mind from have to make contact with a specific point on your hand. Instead, do the technique, with power, as if the other guy attacking were not there. The idea is that by changing distance, you will be using other parts of your body. See how they effect your partner. Then change your angle to your partner. Then have him grab you in different ways. Each time, doing the technique as you would teach a beginner. Now, to make these things you find effective, you may have to alter your hands or arms slightly... thats good. Try grabbing the other guy at different points, while doing the technique.

The technique you asked about, I can see as a throw, a choke, in the other thread I told you how that was the set up for an armbar, its a block, its a strike, its an elbow, its a counter to a throw....

Look at what doing that block, causes your body to do. Then look at how those body mechanics can be applied.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> As I have said before, you need to get beyond the idea that movements in forms are exact representations of applications. They're not. They're ONE example of a stylized version of the movement. That's all.
> In actual use, the movement will be modified to fit the circumstances and the need.
> The lead hand may be blocking, striking, grabbing or twisting. The rear hand may also be doing any of those things.
> And they don't need to both be doing the same thing. One can be blocking while the other is striking, for example.





MI_martialist said:


> Let's look at this...what is "double knife hand block"?  Is it the motion or is it the posture?  I also agree that if one looks at techniques, there can be no depth of understanding.





wab25 said:


> The name of the technique is accurate, for two reasons. The first is, that it is a teaching tool. You can tell a beginner to wave your hand like this, with power, because it is a block. As they improve their block, adding in speed and power, it causes their body operate in a new way. They are learning to generate power, maintain balance, coordinate different sets of muscles, use their core, use their weight, use their hips...
> 
> In order to understand what you are doing, you have to get past the hand wave. Once you get to a level where you can generate power and speed in your hand wave, now its time to figure out what you are doing. What is your body doing to produce the speed, power and control? At this point, what the hand is doing is irrelevant. What is important is that you have learned how to use your body to create a specific kind of power, speed and control. Yes, to apply this power, your hand must be in a specific place... but that depends on what you are applying. Once you can use your body to do these things, you can simply alter your hand as the situation dictates.
> 
> ...



I am asking a specific question about a specific detail of the technique, and you guys are going all meta on me. 



> If you want to explore these techniques, first identify the whole technique, start, middle and end. Try out the named application... try it as a block... against a lot of different punches and kicks. Then change your distance, get closer, get real close, get far away. Free your mind from have to make contact with a specific point on your hand. Instead, do the technique, with power, as if the other guy attacking were not there. The idea is that by changing distance, you will be using other parts of your body. See how they effect your partner. Then change your angle to your partner. Then have him grab you in different ways. Each time, doing the technique as you would teach a beginner. Now, to make these things you find effective, you may have to alter your hands or arms slightly... thats good. Try grabbing the other guy at different points, while doing the technique.





> Something to ad to your process. Each "Move" has 3 parts. 1. How it starts (Some times referred to as the Chamber). 2. Where it finishes, and 3 How it travels (Straight line, arc, across body, fro in close to further away) not just how it moves from the star to the finish but also how it moves to the "Start"
> Now lets consider why open hand vs. closed. I am not a KK TKD person, but General Choi mentions for some of the open hand variations that the a grabbing motion follows, so from that and one's own intuitive process we can see how the open hand can facilitate a grab as "Part of" a block, or as a goal in itself.
> Now also consider how the motion to the chamber might also be used.



I understand that all techniques have a chamber, a motion, and a finishing posture.  In fact, that's why I consider the knife-hand block and knife-hand strike to be two completely different techniques, because just about everything is different between them - as I've discussed in the other thread.  Everything from the direction of power from my legs and core, the chamber, the motion of my arm, and the finishing position of my arm are all different.  All 3 phases of the technique are different.  This is stuff I already know.

If you think that the motion is the same for the strike and the block, then either you're doing one of them incorrectly, or you're purposefully ignoring the differences between them for the sake of professing some meta-knowledge.

---

To both sections of quotes:  I am asking a specific question regarding the technique:  why do you have your other hand in the position it is for this technique?

Whether it is a block, strike, or throw is irrelevant to the question.  That it is the last phase of the technique is already included in the question. 

I was merely expressing my thought process in the original post, that I want to look at specific details, because without understanding specific details, you can't really understand the technique or the application.  For example, in a knife-hand block, should my fingers be loose and my wrist limp?  Or should I have a strong blade for my knife-hand?  These are specific details of the technique, and they are important details whether you're just beginning or advanced.  I'm looking at details I don't fully understand and trying to understand them.

And instead of helping me work on these details, you guys are going all meta on me.


----------



## Danny T (Jun 27, 2018)

First it isn't a block. It is a movement. What is important is what can be performed within the movements.
Here are just a few.
What is happening just prior to that movement into the double knife hand position?
Parry, Thrust, Attack.
Parry, grab & pull while attacking.
Countering a lapel grab, You grab the sleeve, pull, and attack.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

Danny T said:


> What is happening just prior to that movement into the double knife hand position?
> Parry, Thrust, Attack.
> Parry, grab & pull while attacking.
> Countering a lapel grab, You grab the sleeve, pull, and attack.



I don't know which hand is doing what, and that's making it hard to visualize what you're talking about.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

Can everyone please forget about the blocking hand?  I'm specifically trying to ask about the OTHER hand.  As to why it goes to your solarplexus instead of a typical guard position (i.e. in front of you instead of next to you) or a typical chamber position) i.e. held at your hip or at your neck to prepare for the next technique).


----------



## DaveB (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> I am specifically referring to the double-knife-hand block that typically shows up in Taekwondo forms, such as Palgwe Il Jang or Taegeuk Sa Jang.  Where the blocking hand is a knife-hand block with the palm out, and the other hand is held around your solar plexus, palm up.
> 
> I want to start looking at a lot of the motions in the poomsae, and this is where I want to start.  In particular, I am looking for the *best-fitting practical application* of why you would train this technique.  The rules I am trying to follow when I look at techniques are:
> 
> ...



First, try and avoid Taekwondo techniques. They were created to be different to karate despite being based on karate. Their applications come from a time when application wasn't studied.

To your specific question, it's not doing anything except covering the solar plexus.
It can be a pull as well but I'll get to that.

First thing to note is if you are studying a form, the stance is as much an element of the technique as the hand movements.

Basically what you are looking at with the knife hand in back stance is a close quarter fighting stance akin to the classic wing chun fighting pose.

Your rear hand is central so it can get low as quickly as it gets high, but is there on the premise that the lead hand will take care of defence.

If it protects the chin then it sacrifices the stomach, which was as frequent a target in old southern Kung-fu as the face. If you try to protect your stomach by covering with your elbows like a boxer, the inevitable hunching you need to do compromises your structure and balance which invites a kick (which boxers don't have to worry about).

So instead you stay upright with your weight back to create space and your hands open to enable formation of whatever hand shape best exploits the small openings and maximises impact.

As for the pull, its more of a short yank to clear a path and then you release it so you can strike through the gap.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

DaveB said:


> First, try and avoid Taekwondo techniques. They were created to be different to karate despite being based on karate. Their applications come from a time when application wasn't studied.
> 
> To your specific question, it's not doing anything except covering the solar plexus.
> It can be a pull as well but I'll get to that.
> ...



I appreciate the response.  As a follow-up - is there a reason the hand is held tight against your solar plexus instead of out from your body a small amount?  Both the wing chun and hapkido guards put the other hand by your elbow instead of tight against your body.

And is there a reason why the hand is oriented palm-up instead if inward (like wing chun) or down (like hapkido)?


----------



## DaveB (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> I appreciate the response.  As a follow-up - is there a reason the hand is held tight against your solar plexus instead of out from your body a small amount?



Fussy teachers.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> ...
> 
> And is there a reason why the hand is oriented palm-up instead if inward (like wing chun) or down (like hapkido)?



Strike rotation going out, limb rotation going back.

Just a side note: there are a lot of details to be understood to translate this kind of stuff to real life.

Things like stance length, the fact that unlike wing chun you're not meant to do a whole fight like that, use of pivoting and the effect of the guard on distancing etc.

Find the Shotokan kata Hiean Nidan if you want a good study guide for this aspect of karate/TKD.


----------



## Danny T (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> I don't know which hand is doing what, and that's making it hard to visualize what you're talking about.


Here is a video describing some potentials as above.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Fussy teachers.



That's what it looks like in every kata video I've seen and every manual I've seen.  Which suggests it's innate to the art and not "fussy teachers".


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

Danny T said:


> Here is a video describing some potentials as above.



I've seen that video before and I completely disagree with many of his points, to include:

"There is no such thing as a chambering motion" - I find this to be absolute rubbish, as my understanding is EVERY technique has a chamber.  He also shows several chambering motions in the rest of the video
At 0:45 he shows a strike which has very little power as it's twisting across your body
At 1:15 he shows the motion of the off-hand as going from the rear forwards, and then his application of that motion goes from the front backwards (which means the application is of a different motion)
At 2:15 he makes the claim that no technique ends in a block, which is just absurd to me.  It's possible you may need to block multiple attacks in a row.  It's possible after blocking an attack your opponent moves out of range.  It might be something that is a bit of a school mantra (i.e. always strike after a block) or something like that, but it comes across as a universal claim that doesn't ring true to me.
At 2:30 he shows that the punch will go right through the block, which means he's doing the block wrong.  He also does straight-on blocks later in the video.
At 2:55 he does the exact opposite motion, but ends in the same spot, and calls it an application of the motion.  Which is like using an inward hook punch to explain the motion of an outward block.  The technique he's trying to explain has a clockwise motion, he moves counter-clockwise and ends in a similar position, and thus calls it an application of the technique.
This guy contradicts himself plenty of times in the video, makes tons of generalizations that aren't true or aren't well explained in the video, and he will show Movement 1, and then in explaining why you practice that movement, he'll do something completely different.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> That's what it looks like in every kata video I've seen and every manual I've seen.  Which suggests it's innate to the art and not "fussy teachers".



Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you are asking about keeping a hand pressed to your solar plexus as opposed to letting it float an inch or two away. 

That is just aesthetics. There's no functional difference between the two. The principle being demonstrated is the same. Details are important but not every detail. Over focusing on minutiae diminishes you.

As the other poster's pointed out techniques are just a top layer to understanding forms.


----------



## wab25 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> "*There is no such thing as a chambering motion*" - I find this to be absolute rubbish, as my understanding is EVERY technique has a chamber. He also shows several chambering motions in the rest of the video


Ok, lets be fair... he never said what you quoted in the video shown. (I watched it 3 times, listening for that phrase... if I missed it, please give the time when he says it) What he did say was that the chambering motion was the block. So of course he will continue to show the chambering motion, thats the blocking part of the technique, for the purpose of his discussion.



skribs said:


> I've seen that video before and I completely disagree with many of his points


Well, what are you expecting us to do for you?

Apparently, you were taught:

A chamber is only a chamber, and is only used to load a strike. - It cannot be anything else.
A knife hand block is a block, to a specific target on the forearm, with a specific shape of your hand, impacting with 2 inch blade of your hand. - Therefore it can be nothing else, if it hits a bicep or neck, you are doing it wrong.
Your other hand in this art is a second knife hand block. - Therefore, it must be a block, where your 2 inch blade on your hand, is impacting that same specific target on the forearm of the attacker.
So, at this point, I am not sure how to answer your question.


skribs said:


> My question is this - what is the purpose of covering your solar plexus with the other hand in the manner depicted in the double knife-hand block?


The answer is: it is a block, with your knife hand, that covers the solar plexus. It must be that, since you disagree with any interpretation that does not involve a knife hand block, blocking with the knife edge of the hand, to the attackers forearm. Since that is the only answer you will accept, why ask the question, when you know the answer?

Alright, I admit, I am just some lazy keyboard martial artist, meta pontificating about stuff that I apparently know nothing about, so that I will look good... And while you have a way better understanding of martial arts than I do... there are people on this site, this thread even, who have forgotten more about martial arts than you and I combined will ever learn to begin with. I try to take their advice and suggestions. But, thats me.


----------



## Danny T (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> I've seen that video before and I completely disagree with many of his points, to include:
> 
> "There is no such thing as a chambering motion" - I find this to be absolute rubbish, as my understanding is EVERY technique has a chamber.  He also shows several chambering motions in the rest of the video
> At 0:45 he shows a strike which has very little power as it's twisting across your body
> ...


You disagree...Okay with me.
I don't agree with everything he shows or states in the whole video.
I first stated it is a movement. What is important is what can be performed within the movements. Then made reference to some potentials. The video is an example of some of the potentials I referenced as well as some others. 
Have a nice day.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you are asking about keeping a hand pressed to your solar plexus as opposed to letting it float an inch or two away.
> 
> That is just aesthetics. There's no functional difference between the two. The principle being demonstrated is the same. Details are important but not every detail. Over focusing on minutiae diminishes you.
> 
> As the other poster's pointed out techniques are just a top layer to understanding forms.



Well that's the layer I'm working on right now.



wab25 said:


> Ok, lets be fair... he never said what you quoted in the video shown. (I watched it 3 times, listening for that phrase... if I missed it, please give the time when he says it) What he did say was that the chambering motion was the block. So of course he will continue to show the chambering motion, thats the blocking part of the technique, for the purpose of his discussion.



Hmmm...you're right.  I'm sure I heard it the first time I watched it, although that may have been another video I found on the subject around that time.  Still, the way he states it adamantly that the chamber is a block, then later on he uses that motion as a chamber for a knife-hand block.  It would have been more accurate if he said "it can be a palm block followed by a knife-hand strike" instead of definitively stating that the chamber is not a chamber. 



wab25 said:


> Well, what are you expecting us to do for you?
> 
> Apparently, you were taught:
> 
> ...




Where did I say a chamber is only a chamber?  I'm specifically discussing his position that the chamber IS a block and the block IS a strike.  He was the one stating it definitively.
Actually a knife-hand block should use the blade of your hand or the forearm.  That's the reason the motion is the way it is (a push outward with your forearm).  If it's used as a strike, it's less effective than if you were to do a knife-hand strike motion.  It's just like if I do a front pushing kick instead of a front snap kick.  The push serves a purpose of getting the opponent away from you, but it's not as effective as a strike at penetrating into soft tissue or snapping back joints.  A pushing kick to the head isn't likely to knock an opponent out, but send him off-balance.  Similar motions, but different.  Different techniques and different applications.  By the way - this isn't specifically what I was taught.  This is what I've seen.  People who have the same motion for a knife-hand block and a knife-hand strike typically have weaker knife-hand strikes.  Those who have the motions specific to the block and strike tend to have sharper versions of both techniques.
Um...I have never said that, nor have I said anything remotely like that.  Your other hand is held at your solar plexus in the double-knife-hand technique as I described.  I am not saying that hand is blocking.  I am saying that, if the double-knife-hand block is being used as a block (as the name applies) what is the other hand doing?  That is my question.
I am specifically trying to understand the motion as it pertains to a block.



wab25 said:


> The answer is: it is a block, with your knife hand, that covers the solar plexus. It must be that, since you disagree with any interpretation that does not involve a knife hand block, blocking with the knife edge of the hand, to the attackers forearm. Since that is the only answer you will accept, why ask the question, when you know the answer?
> 
> Alright, I admit, I am just some lazy keyboard martial artist, meta pontificating about stuff that I apparently know nothing about, so that I will look good... And while you have a way better understanding of martial arts than I do... there are people on this site, this thread even, who have forgotten more about martial arts than you and I combined will ever learn to begin with. I try to take their advice and suggestions. But, thats me.



In the scenario that:

You are doing a double-knife-hand block with the left hand blocking and the right hand at your solar plexus
And you are using this motion to block a punch
What is the reason why your right hand is at your solar plexus?

That is the question.  It is a block...with the left hand.  So what is the right hand doing?

I'm not denying that a lot of people on this forum know a lot about martial arts.  What I do wonder is:

Do you understand the question that is being asked?  Because everyone's focused on meta knowledge and details that have nothing to do with the question of single knife-hand block vs. double-knife-hand block.
Do you know the answer to the specific question I am asking?  If you know millions of answers, but not the one I am asking, then those millions of other answers are not helpful in helping me answer this question.
As to meta-knowledge...if I am trying to block a punch, does it matter if I know that I can also use a knife-hand for a strike or a similar motion for a grappling move?  Or does it matter that I know how to block a punch?



Danny T said:


> You disagree...Okay with me.
> I don't agree with everything he shows or states in the whole video.
> I first stated it is a movement. What is important is what can be performed within the movements. Then made reference to some potentials. The video is an example of some of the potentials I referenced as well as some others.
> Have a nice day.



The video is an example if you take a motion with an end position, ignore the motion itself but find several other ways to get to that end position, and call it good.  If I do a roundhouse kick or a hook kick, my foot will recoil back to roughly the same position before I reset my stance.  So if someone asked how a hook kick is practical, could I show them a roundhouse kick and say "see, look, my leg's basically in the same spot at this point in time, so that's the application of a hook kick."

It's absolutely ridiculous when you think of it like that.  That's why I consider it ridiculous to take a motion flowing outside, and take another motion flowing inside, and call the second motion an application of the first.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

To be clear, what I am trying to do is analyze this specific technique, in this specific application, as to why you position your off-hand the way it is positioned.

All other applications, all other similar motions, are irrelevant to the question of why your other hand is held at your solar plexus in a knife-hand *block* instead of in a guard position in front of you (i.e. next to your other hand's elbow) or tight at your side (like the single knife-hand block).

Everything else is irrelevant to why I asked this question.  I am not saying it can only be a block.  I am saying, for the purpose of this question, I am only focusing on the technique as it is named - the block.  This is my problem with all of the meta-discussion.  It's extra information that is irrelevant to what I am specifically seeking to learn.  I am not saying that this cannot be used for grappling.  I am saying I specifically want to look at it as a block, for now, for this very question, so I can understand it's application as a block, as it is described in the forms and manuals.

I am not saying it can't be used for grappling.  I am saying, it is named as a block, it is described as a block, so how does it work as a block?

And in particular, the double knife-hand as opposed to the single knife-hand, what is the reason for that position in a block?


----------



## wab25 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> In the scenario that:
> 
> You are doing a double-knife-hand block with the left hand blocking and the right hand at your solar plexus
> And you are using this motion to block a punch
> ...



In this specific scenario, what is the right hand doing? *Nothing.*

You could put it into guard, put it into chamber, put it in your pocket or drape it by your side. Its doing nothing.

So, why is it there? Well... it has to go somewhere. As long as it has to go somewhere, it may as well go someplace that will eventually be useful. When we get to other scenarios and other situations... it being there will have a purpose and a reason. But, for this situation, where we are blocking a punch with the left forearm and knife edge... the right hand is doing nothing.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

wab25 said:


> In this specific scenario, what is the right hand doing? *Nothing.*
> 
> You could put it into guard, put it into chamber, put it in your pocket or drape it by your side. Its doing nothing.
> 
> So, why is it there? Well... it has to go somewhere. As long as it has to go somewhere, it may as well go someplace that will eventually be useful. When we get to other scenarios and other situations... it being there will have a purpose and a reason. But, for this situation, where we are blocking a punch with the left forearm and knife edge... the right hand is doing nothing.



Thanks for your reply.

Since you have to put your hand somewhere, why doesn't it go tight at your side (as with most other techniques), into a guard, or into a chamber?  What is the advantage of it being here, instead of one of those three other locations (guard, tight, chamber).  In a pros-and-cons sort of way, what are the pros of doing this instead of the others?

If it is to set up something else, after blocking a strike with your blocking hand, what techniques would follow in which it is beneficial to have your hand at your solarplexus instead of in a guard or tight at your side?


----------



## wab25 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> Since you have to put your hand somewhere, why doesn't it go tight at your side (as with most other techniques), into a guard, or into a chamber?


Since we are talking about this situation, where the left is blocking a punch as the name indicates... there is no reason why it goes there. It will only mean anything at all, in that position, once we can consider other applications of this movement. Until then, there can be no reason for it to be anywhere, as the other hand is doing the block.



skribs said:


> What is the advantage of it being here, instead of one of those three other locations (guard, tight, chamber).


 In this situation, there is no advantage, no pros and no cons.



skribs said:


> If it is to set up something else, after blocking a strike with your blocking hand, what techniques would follow in which it is beneficial to have your hand at your solarplexus instead of in a guard or tight at your side?


Its not beneficial. Thats why, when you are sparring, and you use a knife hand block, you do not put your other hand here. Hopefully, you keep it in guard and / or counter with the other one.

The only reason for this part of the movement, is for other applications of the movement, besides knife hand blocking with the left.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Since we are talking about this situation, where the left is blocking a punch as the name indicates... there is no reason why it goes there. It will only mean anything at all, in that position, once we can consider other applications of this movement. Until then, there can be no reason for it to be anywhere, as the other hand is doing the block.
> 
> In this situation, there is no advantage, no pros and no cons.
> 
> ...



This is the problem I have, and the reason for the question.  It exists in both the Karate and Taekwondo katas/poomsae.  Both call it a block, so the block must be at least one application for the technique.  But I'm struggling to find why this is a preferred position for your off-hand in a blocking application.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Jun 27, 2018)

In Taegeuk 4, the double knifehand blocks are followed by a spearhand, a sidekick, and a turn in another direction. In these cases, it could be argued that the hand positioned in front of the solar plexus minimizes excess movement in the transition to the following technique. 

In Taegeuk 6, double knifehand block is followed by double knifehand block and a palm block. The same argument could be made here. 

In Taegeuk 7, double knifehand block (low) is followed by double knifehand block and then a supported palm block. I think it’s the same here. 

In Taegeuk 8, it’s followed by a front kick. The difference here is that while it’s done from back stance previously, it’s done here from tiger/cat stance. It makes since that the offhand is at the solar plexus since cat stance is more forward facing than back stance. 

Single knifehand blocks occur in Taegeuk 3 (followed by a change to front stance and reverse punch), Taegeuk 5 (followed by a step forward into front stance and elbow strike), and Taegeuk 8 (followed by a change to front stance and an elbow strike). I’d say that in these instances the follow-up technique is better suited having the hand further back (at the hip in these cases). 

Of course, there are other occurrences where the follow-up is the same regardless of the initial block being single or double. In Taegeuk 8, the follow-up of the first double block (closed fist in this case) is a switch to front stance and a reverse punch, just like the single knifehand block in Taegeuk 3. 

Anyway, that’s one possible explanation. Maybe someone else can analyze follow-up techniques in the Chang Hon Hyeongs or Palgwe poomsae. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> What is the purpose of doing a double-knife-hand block instead of a single knife-hand block?


You use one hand to control your opponent's elbow joint while use another hand to control your opponent's wrist joint.


----------



## Gnarlie (Jun 27, 2018)

Investigate the meaning of 막기 skribs. It does not only mean block.

That said, it is there in this technique as a block IMO to show you early on in your learning that two handed techniques exist. Later in your learning you will see why it makes sense to have the hand ready at the solar plexus when performing a motion with the front hand, for a number of reasons.

If double hand motions were not included in the early forms, you'd never know that it is OK not to pull back to the hip. 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## Gnarlie (Jun 27, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You use one hand to control your opponent's elbow joint while use another hand to control your opponent's wrist joint.


Or one hand for the head and one for the elbow. Or one for the foot and one for the knee. And so on. 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## wab25 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> This is the problem I have, and the reason for the question. It exists in both the Karate and Taekwondo katas/poomsae. Both call it a block, so the block must be at least one application for the technique. But I'm struggling to find why this is a preferred position for your off-hand in a blocking application.


The reason for the preferred position for your off-hand in this movement, is for the other applications. The reason this movement is called a block is as a teaching aid for beginners. By looking at it as a block, beginners can learn the mechanics of it, the speed, power and control. Once the mechanics are learned, the application of those mechanics opens up to a wide variety of things. Other arts, put the off hand in other places. The knife hand blocking application, is just as effective. But, the other applications that that art looks at the most, will determine where the off hand goes.

Calling movements "punch," "block," "kick," "throw," "joint lock," "chamber..." is a great teaching aid. What is being taught is body mechanics. These aids help teach the body mechanics fairly quickly. These aids can become blinders though, when we limit the movement to the name. Once we limit the movement to just the name, many parts of the movement are no longer necessary or effective. However, removing the unnecessary and ineffective pieces, limits the deeper application of the movement. Once you learn the movement, throw the name away and play with the movement.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You use one hand to control your opponent's elbow joint while use another hand to control your opponent's wrist joint.



If it's going as I imagine, then we are thinking of two completely different techniques.



Gnarlie said:


> Investigate the meaning of 막기 skribs. It does not only mean block.
> 
> That said, it is there in this technique as a block IMO to show you early on in your learning that two handed techniques exist. Later in your learning you will see why it makes sense to have the hand ready at the solar plexus when performing a motion with the front hand, for a number of reasons.
> 
> ...



There are other two-handed techniques we have that make more sense, such as a block with one hand and strike with another, or two-handed blocks that make use of both hands in the blocking motion (i.e. a cross block).  Why not use one of these techniques instead?



wab25 said:


> The reason for the preferred position for your off-hand in this movement, is for the other applications. The reason this movement is called a block is as a teaching aid for beginners. By looking at it as a block, beginners can learn the mechanics of it, the speed, power and control. Once the mechanics are learned, the application of those mechanics opens up to a wide variety of things. Other arts, put the off hand in other places. The knife hand blocking application, is just as effective. But, the other applications that that art looks at the most, will determine where the off hand goes.
> 
> Calling movements "punch," "block," "kick," "throw," "joint lock," "chamber..." is a great teaching aid. What is being taught is body mechanics. These aids help teach the body mechanics fairly quickly. These aids can become blinders though, when we limit the movement to the name. Once we limit the movement to just the name, many parts of the movement are no longer necessary or effective. However, removing the unnecessary and ineffective pieces, limits the deeper application of the movement. Once you learn the movement, throw the name away and play with the movement.



If that's the case, why not teach the application that uses the entire motion as the application for the technique?  

I can somewhat see that in the way we teach certain techniques, we only teach part of the technique at first.  For example, when we teach kids punches, we teach them to keep their feet still (so they're not running around while they punch), and the first ax kick we teach is straight up and down (instead of later when we do more practical versions of the ax kick).  However, the double-knife-hand block we teach pretty much the same from when it is learned, so it's still a bit of a different principle.  Especially since the motion continues to show up in black belt forms like Koryo and Taebaek.


----------



## Gnarlie (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> If it's going as I imagine, then we are thinking of two completely different techniques.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Because those techniques don't afford the same result in the same circumstances. 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## WaterGal (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> I am specifically referring to the double-knife-hand block that typically shows up in Taekwondo forms, such as Palgwe Il Jang or Taegeuk Sa Jang.  Where the blocking hand is a knife-hand block with the palm out, and the other hand is held around your solar plexus, palm up..



If we're looking specifically at Taegeuk Sah-jang (I don't know Palgwe forms, so I can't speak to them), the hand at the solar plexus is about to be used for a spearhand technique. The hand needs to be open and lined up with the target before you do that strike, right? So the double-knifehand block does that.

When we see it again in Yuk-jang, the hand that's open at the solar plexus then does a palm block at the chest level.Then in Chil-jang (low block version), the open hand at the solar plexus turns into a grab across the body. I suppose you could do these techniques while starting with a closed fist at the hip, but having the hand open and at the solar plexus cuts down on the time needed to the do the technique.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

WaterGal said:


> If we're looking specifically at Taegeuk Sah-jang (I don't know Palgwe forms, so I can't speak to them), the hand at the solar plexus is about to be used for a spearhand technique. The hand needs to be open and lined up with the target before you do that strike, right? So the double-knifehand block does that.
> 
> When we see it again in Yuk-jang, the hand that's open at the solar plexus then does a palm block at the chest level.Then in Chil-jang (low block version), the open hand at the solar plexus turns into a grab across the body. I suppose you could do these techniques while starting with a closed fist at the hip, but having the hand open and at the solar plexus cuts down on the time needed to the do the technique.



Oh ok.  We mainly do the Palgwe forms at my school (and different versions from most of the Palgwe forms I've seen online). 

In our Palgwe #1, after the double-knife-hand, the next technique is an inside block, so you move from your solar plexus to your ear to chamber the inside block.
In Palgwe #2, we do low double-knife-hand, then mid, and then a single high block, and I guess I can see how the flow is better there.
In Palgwe #3, same thing with transitions from double-knife hand to double-knife hand.
In Palgwe #4, we do something similar to Taegeuk #4, except with an added step.  Double-knife-hand (left hand blocking), then a palm block with the left hand, and then a spearhand with the right.  With the palm block, the right hand comes tight at your waist.  It does give the palm block a bit of that torsion (similar to any technique where the other hand comes to your waist).
In Palgwe #6, there is a grab after the double-knife-hand block, which I could see being faster from the solarplexus.

So I guess it doesn't make sense to me in all of the forms over other options available, but it is starting to make sense to me if I look at specific forms.  I think the problem is I was always looking at the forms in which it makes less sense to me and trying to apply it.  Where if I look at how it's used in Form 2 it makes a lot of sense.

Thanks!


----------



## wab25 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> If that's the case, why not teach the application that uses the entire motion as the application for the technique?


Which application? You would still have to choose. However, I believe the different arts already chose.

What is the important part of the technique? It's not the block. The important part of the technique, is the body mechanics. (for this discussion, body mechanics includes balance, power generation, speed, control...) All applications of this technique, must contain all the important parts of the technique... that is the body mechanics. The different applications may change the unimportant parts (where the arms and hands go, and what shape they hold), all they want, so long as the body mechanics remain the same.

In TKD and Karate, this technique is taught as a block. In Aikido, this technique is taught as an off balancing or structure break (many times followed up with an armbar). In Judo, this technique would be taught as a throw. In jujitsu, as a choke. I have done this technique (same body mechanics) in these arts, for these different applications (most of the time with the hands in the same places). This is one of the things that I appreciate about the Traditional MA, many times they have found ways to practice many applications, in a single set movements.

Many have posted with TKD specific things that follow in forms, as reasons for holding the hand there. Thats what the forms / kata hold... not just a list of individual techniques, but also the transitions and flows between them. The different arts do different forms / katas with different combos, because their founders were different people who found things in different ways and organized things differently when trying to teach. WaterGal mentioned this would be followed with a spearhand, as in block, then strike. Nothing wrong with that at all. Another way, would be to do the same knife hand block and spearhand after the other guy grabbed your left wrist with his left hand. This would break his structure, off balance him and the spearhand would effect an armbar. They are both great, both effective. But, there are a ton of additional applications, and other places to flow to. This would explain why this technique keeps showing up again and again in different forms... to show different movement flows, for different applications. Consider not only what follows, but also what precedes.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Which application? You would still have to choose. However, I believe the different arts already chose.
> 
> What is the important part of the technique? It's not the block. The important part of the technique, is the body mechanics. (for this discussion, body mechanics includes balance, power generation, speed, control...) All applications of this technique, must contain all the important parts of the technique... that is the body mechanics. The different applications may change the unimportant parts (where the arms and hands go, and what shape they hold), all they want, so long as the body mechanics remain the same.
> 
> ...



Like you said - pick one.  Pick whichever one makes full use of the motion and makes the most sense based on either it's position in the kata or on it's frequency in your curriculum.  

To use another motion, let's take a knife-hand block to block a punch, a palm strike to counter, and then turning around while pressing up and back on the chin, and pulling down and twisting the wrist to effect a take-down.  I could do a similar motion after doing a knife-hand block and palm strike, to turn around and do a downward palm block.  It would make some sense in the form, so you could do that.  But if the actual application of the motion is to enact a throw, then that could be taught instead.  

This is why I wanted to isolate one aspect of the technique, and in particular, the aspect of the technique it is named after.  The motion I train is "block" in my brain, and I want to reconcile the motion and the application together, which I was having trouble with.  I have similar issues with other  blocking techniques (such as augmented blocks, or with some of the double blocks you see in Keumgang).  I see plenty of applications for some of those techniques if you assume they are not blocks.  For example, an augmented block as a grappling break and armbar, or a scissor block as a down block and backfist, or outside block and hammer fist.  I see the potential other applications of the movement or similar motions, but I don't see how the technique as named is practical.  (And those can be left for another thread).

This is the reason I have been so adamant on coming down to this specific application.  In a lot of cases, I understand other applications for a similar motion.  But I want to understand this particular application better.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> Can everyone please forget about the blocking hand?  I'm specifically trying to ask about the OTHER hand.  As to why it goes to your solarplexus instead of a typical guard position (i.e. in front of you instead of next to you) or a typical chamber position) i.e. held at your hip or at your neck to prepare for the next technique).


How does it get there?  What does it do while it is traveling to that position?  I don't do TKD; I don't know this particular form or technique... but that's where I'd start in analyzing an unusual movement during any form or technique.  Answer those questions, and we just might discover why it is going there.  And, if we don't -- the next question is what does it do afterwards?  How does it move from that solar plexus position to whatever it does next?


----------



## Danny T (Jun 27, 2018)

skribs said:


> To be clear, what I am trying to do is analyze this specific technique, in this specific application, as to why you position your off-hand the way it is positioned.
> 
> All other applications, all other similar motions, are irrelevant to the question of why your other hand is held at your solar plexus in a knife-hand *block* instead of in a guard position in front of you (i.e. next to your other hand's elbow) or tight at your side (like the single knife-hand block).
> 
> ...


You need to do some research into the actual terminology then.
It is actually call uke and the total of the uke techniques are known as uke waza. Uke actually is a receiving action but it's closest translation to English is to stop hence Block. 

Uke waza certainly can be used to block punches, kicks and strikes but they are, in fact, much more versatile techniques. To receive denotes one clear a limb, to off-balance, to set up for a strike or throw, or to lock a joint once a limb has been seized. In short, uke waza are not just for blocking and the uke waze movements are to be used in a multitude of applications.

Also movement and position in Kata is working to a precise position where in down and dirty action of fighting getting to a particular position precisely as in Kata may never happen.


----------



## skribs (Jun 27, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> How does it get there? What does it do while it is traveling to that position? I don't do TKD; I don't know this particular form or technique... but that's where I'd start in analyzing an unusual movement during any form or technique. Answer those questions, and we just might discover why it is going there. And, if we don't -- the next question is what does it do afterwards? How does it move from that solar plexus position to whatever it does next?



From a back stance, your rear hand (the one we're focusing on right now) is held straight behind you, palm down, and it circles away from your body and back in to your solar plexus, twisting to be held palm-up. 






At 1:42 this is the technique.



Danny T said:


> You need to do some research into the actual terminology then.
> It is actually call uke and the total of the uke techniques are known as uke waza. Uke actually is a receiving action but it's closest translation to English is to stop hence Block.
> 
> Uke waza certainly can be used to block punches, kicks and strikes but they are, in fact, much more versatile techniques. To receive denotes one clear a limb, to off-balance, to set up for a strike or throw, or to lock a joint once a limb has been seized. In short, uke waza are not just for blocking and the uke waze movements are to be used in a multitude of applications.
> ...



Is the same terminology lesson true of the Korean word for Makki?

My experience with kata is that they are exaggerated or precise versions of techniques that tend to get a little messy in a fight, but that there should be an understanding of what it is that you are doing.


----------



## MI_martialist (Jun 27, 2018)

There is a lot written, and I scanned most of it.  The issues are, if Kata were created without martial application in mind, it is hard to find true martial application unless you know how, when, and where to look.  As for the "meta" argument, and focusing on the "block" what if I told you that a "block" is a mindset and not a "technique"?  When I "block" do I not strike what is striking?  I am literally attacking the attack, so I never block, I always attack...so, what is a knife hand block?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> if Kata were created without martial application in mind, it is hard to find true martial application unless you know how, when, and where to look.  ...


A: Dear master, When you did that form, there was a move that you moved your left hand in front of your face. What was the application that you intend to teach us?
B: Application? There was a bee that tried to sting me. I just move my hand to get ride of it.
A: ...


----------



## MI_martialist (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> A: Dear master, When you did that form, there was a move that you moved your left hand in front of your face. What was the application that you intend to teach us?
> B: Application? There was a bee that tried to sting me. I just move my hand to get ride of it.
> A: ...



So, is it by happenstance?  Is it that there is none intended?  I am confused...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> So, is it by happenstance?  Is it that there is none intended?  I am confused...


Old saying said, "If you always believe in book, it's better that there exist no book."

Instead of trying to figure out the form creator's intention, you should look at what you need. You then decide whether the information in a form can meet your need or not.

There are so many books out there. Read the books that you like. Don't waste time on those books that you don't like.


----------



## MI_martialist (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Old saying said, "If you always believe in book, it's better that there exist no book."
> 
> Instead of trying to figure out the form creator's intention, you should look at what you need. You then decide whether the information in a form can meet your need or not.


----------



## MI_martialist (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Old saying said, "If you always believe in book, it's better that there exist no book."
> 
> Instead of trying to figure out the form creator's intention, you should look at what you need. You then decide whether the information in a form can meet your need or not.
> 
> There are so many books out there. Read the books that you like. Don't waste time on those books that you don't like.



Umm...ok...I may be a bit too binary to really get your reference, but that's ok.  If forms were put together for form sake, then if you train forms with the same approach, then finding true martial application is very difficult.  I go back to, what is the "double knife hand block"?  Is it the shoulder movement, the base, the hand position, the trajectory, both, one then the other, focus on one, which part of the movement, are the feet moving, or is it a static posture at the end that is being analyzed?  If it is a block, where is the attack, what kinds of attacks...that is why bunkai is so important...the analysis of movement so application is revealed.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 28, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you are asking about keeping a hand pressed to your solar plexus as opposed to letting it float an inch or two away.
> 
> That is just aesthetics. There's no functional difference between the two. .



Opinions vary. If your hand is  against your body and there is impact to that hand the force is transferred t the body to a much greater extent than if your hand is a few inches away  and can absorb some force before it contacts your body.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> I've seen that video before and I completely disagree with many of his points, .


I disagree with many points as well. I.E. anytime anyone says something like "it's really this, and not that" I disagree. Sometimes "A punch is just a punch....." (Bruce Lee) . 
I often tell people "I am not telling you what to think.... I am telling you to think."


----------



## Danny T (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> .
> Is the same terminology lesson true of the Korean word for Makki?
> 
> My experience with kata is that they are exaggerated or precise versions of techniques that tend to get a little messy in a fight, but that there should be an understanding of what it is that you are doing.


I'm don't know but I am of the understanding that General Choi was a second degree in Shotokan karate when he developed TKD and it greatly influenced his development of TKD in that many of the forms are quite similar yet wanting to distinguish TKD as being a different art and with a stronger emphasis on kicking. However, much is based on the Shotokan influence. But I don't know how specific it translates languistically.


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Instead of trying to figure out the form creator's intention, you should look at what you need. You then decide whether the information in a form can meet your need or not.
> 
> There are so many books out there. Read the books that you like. Don't waste time on those books that you don't like.



I'd like to understand the intention before I decide my opinion of it.  If I threw out everything I didn't instantly agree with or understand I'd barely know anything.



Earl Weiss said:


> Opinions vary. If your hand is against your body and there is impact to that hand the force is transferred t the body to a much greater extent than if your hand is a few inches away and can absorb some force before it contacts your body.



This was one of my trepidations in my OP.



Earl Weiss said:


> I disagree with many points as well. I.E. anytime anyone says something like "it's really this, and not that" I disagree. Sometimes "A punch is just a punch....." (Bruce Lee) .
> I often tell people "I am not telling you what to think.... I am telling you to think."



Yes.  Big difference between "it can be this" and "it IS this."  I get that I was doing that in this thread, but with a specific purpose in mind.

There's not a whole lot of analysis in the forms in Taekwondo, from what I can understand.  Most of what I've found online has been Karate Bunkai, and not Taekwondo analysis.  Or maybe I'm just not searching the right word.  With that said, some of the best videos I've seen have had the "popular interpretation" and the "hidden extras."  The popular interpretation is a literal translation of what the technique is.  The "hidden extras" are variations to the technique you can use, or variable applications of a similar movement.

This is the mindset I had going into this.  That there is an expected primary use of the specific movement we're training, and there are lots of variations of that movement or application that can be learned or applied, but I still want to understand it in it's primary use.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> This is the problem I have, and the reason for the question.  It exists in both the Karate and Taekwondo katas/poomsae.  Both call it a block, so the block must be at least one application for the technique.  But I'm struggling to find why this is a preferred position for your off-hand in a blocking application.



That's because you're not listening. 

If a block is only one application that means that the movement has multiple uses. 
It means that the movement was constructed to capture multiple applications.  

That's why it is where it is: in order to be useful within a certain range of applications. 

That, and the positioning advantages I laid out for close quarter application are the answer to the question you asked.

What else are you looking for?


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

DaveB said:


> That's because you're not listening.
> 
> If a block is only one application that means that the movement has multiple uses.
> It means that the movement was constructed to capture multiple applications.
> ...



Let's say I have a soup serving spoon with slots in it.  Now, this spoon can be used to serve pasta, it can be used to scoop items like vegetables or tater tots, but it doesn't exactly work as a soup spoon because it drains all the broth when you try to serve it.  If someone asks "why do you call this a soup spoon?" do I say "well, it can do a lot of other things, it's a very useful spoon."  Or do I say "you're right, I should call this a salad spoon."

I am specifically trying to understand* this application* of the technique.  *I am specifically trying to understand why the motion to reach the position of the double-knife-hand block is advantageous over that of a single knife-hand block, in this particular context*.  I don't care about the other contexts, because I already understand them (or at least, some of them).  I specifically want to address this one.  @Jaeimseu , @wab25 , and @WaterGal were working with me on Page 2 to help me understand.

Knowing that a similar motion can be used for other things doesn't help understand how the motion can be used for this thing.  Looking at this particular application, as those I mentioned helped me with on Page 2, the conclusion I have come to is that it is similar to putting your hand tight at your side, except in a more central location which opens up some combinations better - namely anything that will chamber across your body.  So a punch is going to be better for your hip, but you might flow into a backfist easier from the solar plexus.  Yesterday whenever I had a spare moment on the mat, I was playing around with different combinations and how they flow from the double-knife-hand vs. from the single-knife-hand, and I have a better understanding of this application of the technique now.

So what else was I looking for?  I was looking for the analysis that was largely conducted in Page 2 of this thread.  A discussion on this application and how the technique can work in this application.  What else am I looking for now?  Well, now I want to move on to the next piece I don't understand and tackle it.

The really funny thing is you say it's because I'm "not listening", but I was listening to answers that answered the question I was asking.  I was specifically choosing to not listen to answers that were rabbit trail discussions of related topics.


----------



## Buka (Jun 28, 2018)

I'm curious what the Instructors in your school answered when you asked them.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> If I threw out everything I didn't instantly agree with or understand I'd barely know anything.


You can always judge by your "common sense".

Instead of trying to figure out why someone had created a form in a certain way, you can modify a form into the way that you can understand and use.

If you want to protect your

- face against punch, you will put your back hand higher.
- body against kick, you will put your back hand lower.

If you want to use your back hand to

- punch, you will put your back closer to your body.
- grab, you will put your back away from your body.

Where you want to put your back hand is up to you. It's not up to the form creator.


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can always judge by your "common sense".
> 
> Instead of trying to figure out why someone had created a form in a certain way, you can modify a form into the way that you can understand and use.
> 
> ...



It would be irresponsible of me to throw out what I don't understand based on the fact I don't understand it. 

If I do understand it and see better ways of accomplishing the same goal, then that's a different story.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> *I am specifically trying to understand why the motion to reach the position of the double-knife-hand block is advantageous over that of a single knife-hand block, in this particular context*.


My simple answer can be:

- The leading arm is used to block.
- The back hand is used to "switch".

For example, the following steps is called "switching hands" in MA.

- You punch at me.
- I use my leading arm to block your punch.
- I then use my back hand to take over my blocking, free my leading arm, so my leading arm can punch back.

I like to put my back hand next to my leading arm elbow joint. This way, I can switch quickly if I need. I would not put my back hand too close to my body as your clip shows.


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My simple answer can be:
> 
> - The leading arm is used to block.
> - The back hand is used to "switch".
> ...



This makes sense to me too.  A few of our defense drills use this concept.  Thanks!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> It would be irresponsible of me to throw out what I don't understand based on the fact I don't understand it.
> 
> If I do understand it and see better ways of accomplishing the same goal, then that's a different story.


I have tried to understand the application of the following clip all my life. Now my conclusion is that move has no MA application.


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have tried to understand the application of the following clip all my life. Now my conclusion is that move has no MA application.



Well, as evidenced by this thread, I've gotten a few useful answers.  So the problem was not that the move is not applicable, but that I didn't understand the application.  That has been corrected.

As to that video, you have Enemy #1's left arm in a wristlock and armbar.  Enemy #2 is attacking from the left, so you use pain compliance to move Enemy #1 in the way of Enemy #2 and turn him into a human shield.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> As to that video, you have Enemy #1's left arm in a wristlock and armbar.  Enemy #2 is attacking from the left, so you use pain compliance to move Enemy #1 in the way of Enemy #2 and turn him into a human shield.







Now we start to get into detail. If you control your opponent's arm,

- your wrist control palm and your elbow control palm should face to each other and not face the same direction.
- also your tiger mouth (space between thumb and index finger) should open.

In that clip, both palms are facing downward. You can't control your opponent's arm this way. Also neither tiger mouth are open. No grabbing intention.

IMO, if small detail cannot map into application, the application intention is missing. No matter how many years a traffic cop may direct traffic, he will never become a MA person.


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Now we start to get into detail. If you control your opponent's arm,
> 
> - your wrist control palm and your elbow control palm should face to each other and not face the same direction.
> - also your tiger mouth (space between thumb and index finger) should open.
> ...



This is what I have been saying most of this thread (and another thread on a similar subject).  I'm glad someone else thinks like me.  If I'm locking the elbow, then that hand will probably face down instead of inward, but I do agree about the wristlock.  I was just coming up with an off-the-cuff response for the general motion.  

Although when I get too hung up on how to grab a hand or wrist in hapkido, my master will tell me I'm overthinking it and just to do it without using his thumb.  (And usually make it more painful to drive the point home).  If you're pinning the hand in with a ridge-hand, this might technically work.  But I'll admit I'm reaching for that one.

One thing that pops into my head is you just noticed there's a scorpion on you and are trying to set it down on the table next to you without startling it into stinging you, but that seems to be a bit of an odd thing to put into a martial arts form.
Or pretending to be a zombie so other zombies don't eat you, but that seems even less likely.

It kind of reminds me of the WTF Taekwondo clinch, but again - details will take that out.  And this video looks older than what I believe would be the Taekwondo clinch.

Also reminds me a bit of an arm escape and then a trip, but there would be more legwork and more muscles in the arms would be engaged.

Yeah I got nothing!


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 28, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> So, is it by happenstance?  Is it that there is none intended?  I am confused...


There is a story of a kata being taught, and the instructor reached a point where he taught three hopping steps back.  A student asked him why, and he had to answer "Well, that's how I was taught... I don't know what it's supposed to be doing..."  They experiment and experiment and nothing seems to make sense.  He has a chance not too long later to ask one of his own instructors... and they too can't explain it.  They finally get a chance to ask one of the most senior members of their system...  He thinks about it, goes through the kata -- and then suddenly remembers.  "Oh, yes... in the old dojo, we didn't have enough room unless we took those three steps back.  They're not part of the form; they just were done so that we didn't run into the wall."

I don't think that's the answer to the OP's question... but it's something to consider.  Is the movement simply because it's part of how that technique is done, and it's preserved in a basic form?  Does it set something else up? 

When I look at the form in the video linked above, the various movements are choppy and disconnected to me.  What is the basic explanation or application?  If it's a block, why is the next move another block, but no strike?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2018)

Here is the question. If an "abstract" form can be mapped into many different "application" forms, when you train, should you train the "original abstract" form, or should you train the "mapped application" form?

One day when I trained the 'diagonal strike" (SC 1st form). My teacher walked toward me and asked me what I was doing. I told him that I train the form exactly the same way that he taught me. What he had said that day open my eyes for the rest of my life. He said, "If you want to train single leg, you should train diagonal strike this way. If you want to train diagonal cut, you should train diagonal strike this way."

A principle can be mapped into many applications. IMO, each and every application should be trained separately.

diagonal strike -> punch on your opponent's shoulder
diagonal strike -> single leg
diagonal strike -> diagonal cut
diagonal strike -> ...


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> When I look at the form in the video linked above, the various movements are choppy and disconnected to me.  What is the basic explanation or application?  If it's a block, why is the next move another block, but no strike?



I'll admit that sometimes I feel there's too many blocks in the Taekwondo poomsae.  However, sometimes your opponent uses a combination instead of a single attack, and rarely in Taekwondo forms do we have a simultaneous block and strike (which is what I would opt for).

Taekwondo forms tend be slower paced and often contain individual techniques instead of combinations.  They still flow together, but they tend be timed differently than what it sounds like you're used to.  The reasons for this, as far as I can tell, are:

Palgwe Taekwondo forms and Shotokan Karate both place an emphasis on deeper stances and powerful attacks. 
Breathing is an important aspect of Taekwondo forms, to exhale sharply or kiyhap with every technique
Going faster in the forms, students tend to get sloppy.  I see this the most in kids.  Going slower allows you to do the form more accurately.
Surprisingly, the small tidbits I've learned about Tai Chi, 2 of the 3 points I mentioned above about Taekwondo forms are important to Tai Chi.



jks9199 said:


> There is a story of a kata being taught, and the instructor reached a point where he taught three hopping steps back. A student asked him why, and he had to answer "Well, that's how I was taught... I don't know what it's supposed to be doing..." They experiment and experiment and nothing seems to make sense. He has a chance not too long later to ask one of his own instructors... and they too can't explain it. They finally get a chance to ask one of the most senior members of their system... He thinks about it, goes through the kata -- and then suddenly remembers. "Oh, yes... in the old dojo, we didn't have enough room unless we took those three steps back. They're not part of the form; they just were done so that we didn't run into the wall."



There's a bit of that at my dojang in various parts.  When I practice at home in my tiny Condo, there's a lot of shallow stances, a lot of half-step-forward/half-step-backward motions (where normally it would just be a step forward), and a lot of hopping back for room.  In the dojang the person in the front right usually has to scrunch up the part of the form that takes them into the corner.  In one form, near the end, we typically stop the form and have the first row take 2 steps forward and the 2nd row take 1 step forward, so there's enough room for a jump spinning kick without kicking each other.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here is the question. If an "abstract" form can be mapped into many different "application" forms, when you train, should you train the "original abstract" form, or should you train the "mapped application" form?
> 
> One day when I trained the 'diagonal strike" (SC 1st form). My teacher walked toward me and asked me what I was doing. I told him that I train the form exactly the same way that he taught me. What he had said that day open my eyes for the rest of my life. He said, "If you want to train single leg, you should train diagonal strike this way. If you want to train diagonal cut, you should train diagonal strike this way."
> 
> ...



I can see both sides of this.  On the one hand, there is a lot of attention to detail in the Taekwondo forms.  In each technique I perform, there are probably dozens of details in each technique that I look at, including:

How are my toes aligned
Feet distance on X and Z axis
Bend in each knee
Alignment of my hips and shoulders
Position of my hand and elbow for each hand in chamber position
Timing of chamber and technique
Timing of breathing during technique
End position of each hand
Tightness of my fist or blade of hand
Concentration on where I'm looking
Posture
A lot of this becomes muscle memory the more you practice, but when I practice my forms I work on the movements to make them more exact.  In doing so, I must respect that the precise motion was selected for a reason, and understand the reason itself to be precise.

The other side of the argument is - there are so many possible techniques you can use, especially if you start looking at variations, that do you reach a point where practicing all of them becomes impossible, so you lump similar motions together to train more efficiently?  Or do you continue to train each one individually?

For example, I can think of several factors in doing a front kick:


Are you using the ball of the foot or heel to kick a vertical target, or your instep to kick a horizontal target?
Are you kicking low (i.e. knee), middle (i.e. groin or stomach) or high (i.e. solar plexus or nose)?
Are you doing a snap kick or pushing kick?
Are you doing a kick with the front leg or rear leg?
Are you adding a hop, step, skip, or jump to your kick?  (And yes, all are different)
Are you stepping forward or back after the kick?
Now, with the front kick, question 2 just changes how high you aim, but with a roundhouse kick it may change the degree to which you turn.  With a roundhouse kick, you have speed kicks and power kicks, you have repeated kicks and double kicks, you have kicks that help you set up a turning kick.

Do you practice one possible option as "front kick" and then say the motion applies to all types of front kicks?  It kinda does and it kinda doesn't.  
Do you practice 100 variations of the kick to keep current on each? Then you're not getting much repetition on any individual movement
Do you isolate factors and drill them one at a time?  i.e. if you've practiced both ball of the feet and instep, do you need to drill both versions for low and high kicks?

This may be where some of the disconnect is.  Where I want to separate similar movements into individual techniques to practice, others might want to group them together for the sake of efficiency.

This is kind of a rambling post, I think I'll stop now.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 28, 2018)

skribs said:


> Taekwondo forms tend be slower paced and often contain individual techniques instead of combinations. They still flow together, but they tend be timed differently than what it sounds like you're used to.



Our forms develop a rhythm or flow rather than being done metronomically, unless we've got a reason for doing it on a beat, like a group performance.  There may well be sequences of more than one block, but at some point, the blocks have to stop and some sort of strike or other attack happen; that's part of the "storytelling" of a form.  For example, our first form has 8 sets of 2 counts; the rhythm is one-two, one-two...  because each set is a block and punch.  The (imaginary) attacker comes from the front, throwing a punch to your face, and you step into it, blocking and counter-punching... and so on.  The flow reflects (one) application...  not necessarily the only one, and a different performer might emphasize it slightly differently.  But, with that said... I can still look at a form done differently and see common principles -- or their lack.  This particular form seems to lack a unifying story -- so I kind of guess that the "story" is really a principle of movement or positioning, rather than a set of direct applications.  In this particular instance, I would suspect perhaps that the underlying principle of the movement of both hands in the knife hand block is the movement of both hands in unison and symmetry.


----------



## skribs (Jun 28, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> Our forms develop a rhythm or flow rather than being done metronomically, unless we've got a reason for doing it on a beat, like a group performance.  There may well be sequences of more than one block, but at some point, the blocks have to stop and some sort of strike or other attack happen; that's part of the "storytelling" of a form.  For example, our first form has 8 sets of 2 counts; the rhythm is one-two, one-two...  because each set is a block and punch.  The (imaginary) attacker comes from the front, throwing a punch to your face, and you step into it, blocking and counter-punching... and so on.  The flow reflects (one) application...  not necessarily the only one, and a different performer might emphasize it slightly differently.  But, with that said... I can still look at a form done differently and see common principles -- or their lack.  This particular form seems to lack a unifying story -- so I kind of guess that the "story" is really a principle of movement or positioning, rather than a set of direct applications.  In this particular instance, I would suspect perhaps that the underlying principle of the movement of both hands in the knife hand block is the movement of both hands in unison and symmetry.



In earlier Taekwondo forms it's more metronomical, but in later forms you find there are some beats that are faster and some beats that are slower.  For the forms at our school, Palgwe 1 is pretty metronomical, Palgwe 4 has fast parts and slow parts, Palgwe 7 is mostly fast, and Palgwe 8 is mostly slow.  (Our forms are different from other school's versions of the Palgwes, so looking them up on Youtube won't help much).

Some forms, too, build up on each other.  I have limited exposure to the Taegeuks, but Taegeuk 1-3 seem to do this.  Our basic forms really build on each other.  Kibon 1 establishes a pattern with down blocks and punches.  Kibon 2 adds kicks before each punch.  Kibon 3 takes away the kicks and most of the punches but adds in several blocks to the form.  Now, Kibon 3 seems strange, because it has 14 blocks and only 6 strikes.  But Kibon 4 is basically a combination of Kibon 2 & 3, and every block in Kibon 4 is proceeded by at least one strike.  So in the context of the form itself, Kibon 3 doesn't make much sense.  In the context that Kibons 1-3 prepare you for Kibon 4, it makes more sense.

The story I feel comes in smaller beats in Taekwondo forms, and I feel the story is more often than not a story of strikes - punches, kicks, and blocks.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> I am specifically trying to understand* this application* of the technique.  *I am specifically trying to understand why the motion to reach the position of the double-knife-hand block is advantageous over that of a single knife-hand block, in this particular context*.  '



But that's not the question you asked, hence it's not the question that was answered.

Someone else mentioned the hips going the other way in the double-knife-hand, ie turning into the block. Well you turn into the block when you want to hit with the other hand simultaneously with the block. 

But as I said the main reason for the method is to differentiate it from karate. 



> I don't care about the other contexts, because I already understand them (or at least, some of them).  I specifically want to address this one.  @Jaeimseu , @wab25 , and @WaterGal were working with me on Page 2 to help me understand.
> 
> Knowing that a similar motion can be used for other things doesn't help understand how the motion can be used for this thing.  Looking at this particular application, as those I mentioned helped me with on Page 2, the conclusion I have come to is that it is similar to putting your hand tight at your side, except in a more central location which opens up some combinations better - namely anything that will chamber across your body.  So a punch is going to be better for your hip, but you might flow into a backfist easier from the solar plexus.  Yesterday whenever I had a spare moment on the mat, I was playing around with different combinations and how they flow from the double-knife-hand vs. from the single-knife-hand, and I have a better understanding of this application of the technique now.'



That's great, I disagree completely especially about the hip chamber, but your own understanding is your own journey and clearly you are intent on figuring it out for yourself.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 29, 2018)

I think another issue inherent in your post is focusing too much on the name of the Block.    In your system (per your post) the English name is "Double Knifehand Block"  In the Chang Hon System it i "Knifehand Guarding Block"   So one might think the purpose is inherent in the name, i.e. "Double" means both hands somehow blocking, vs "Guarding" meaning perhaps one Blocking and one serving only to Guard.   To a large extent I think names and particularly English names were chosen in order to give a somewhat intuitive  idea as to not just purpose but perhaps positioning as well.   I will leave it to KKW people to give examples from that system but here are a couple of others. In some Chinese systems the term "Mountain" Block is used.   Not because you are blocking a mountain but because the shape is similar to the Chinese calligraphy for mountain.  In the Chang Hon system it is "W" shape block for the same reason.   Certainly the name has nothing to do with the textbook application or alternate application. I  could provide more examples, buy I think this makes the point.


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

DaveB said:


> But that's not the question you asked, hence it's not the question that was answered.
> 
> Someone else mentioned the hips going the other way in the double-knife-hand, ie turning into the block. Well you turn into the block when you want to hit with the other hand simultaneously with the block.
> 
> ...





> I want to start looking at a lot of the motions in the poomsae, and this is where I want to start. In particular, I am looking for the *best-fitting practical application* of why you would train this technique. The rules I am trying to follow when I look at techniques are:
> 
> The application must match the motion in the form. Otherwise, the motion in the form should be different to match the application.
> Unless I have good reason to believe otherwise, I am going to believe that the name of the technique is accurate. For example, this is the double-knife-hand block, which I take to mean it is NOT a strike and it is NOT a grappling application, but is in fact a blocking technique.
> ...



What I quoted is from my original post.  This IS the question I originally asked.  You may not have interpreted it that way, but that IS what I asked.

I'm not sure I follow what you mean about the hip chamber.


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

Earl Weiss said:


> I think another issue inherent in your post is focusing too much on the name of the Block.    In your system (per your post) the English name is "Double Knifehand Block"  In the Chang Hon System it i "Knifehand Guarding Block"   So one might think the purpose is inherent in the name, i.e. "Double" means both hands somehow blocking, vs "Guarding" meaning perhaps one Blocking and one serving only to Guard.   To a large extent I think names and particularly English names were chosen in order to give a somewhat intuitive  idea as to not just purpose but perhaps positioning as well.   I will leave it to KKW people to give examples from that system but here are a couple of others. In some Chinese systems the term "Mountain" Block is used.   Not because you are blocking a mountain but because the shape is similar to the Chinese calligraphy for mountain.  In the Chang Hon system it is "W" shape block for the same reason.   Certainly the name has nothing to do with the textbook application or alternate application. I  could provide more examples, buy I think this makes the point.



I didn't reject the other hand being a guard because of the  name.  I rejected the other hand being a guard because the position doesn't fit with other guards we use.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> I didn't reject the other hand being a guard because of the  name.  I rejected the other hand being a guard because the position doesn't fit with other guards we use.


How boring would life be if everything fit?


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, if small detail cannot map into application, the application intention is missing. No matter how many years a traffic cop may direct traffic, he will never become a MA person.



I used to think the same, but it's just not correct. I've seen way too much evidence that karate forms and at least a proportion of Chinese forms were just not created with such rigidity.

And the reason for this is simply that if you were going to try and exactly mirror your forms to your applications then for every variation you'd need a new sequence and the forms become too long to be useful. 

Solo training isn't the same as training application of techniques. The forms exist to be
- Exercise, because you don't need anyone else to do that.
- A library of technique and strategy

Large volumes of data need to be compressed to be portable and in forms that occurs by making the techniques you practice a middle ground between the variations.

And since fighting is too fast and too fluid to be picking from a library of techniques the middle ground movements are laid out in patterns that convey core guiding rules which crystallise in application but which are malleable to the circumstance.

Maybe this approach is unique to southern Chinese Kung-fu and bled into karate (of which TKD is a sub group). Either way you just can't apply such rigid thinking to karate/TKD without losing most of the point


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> I didn't reject the other hand being a guard because of the  name.  I rejected the other hand being a guard because the position doesn't fit with other guards we use.


So in order to accept knew information it has to be similar to old information?


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

Earl Weiss said:


> How boring would life be if everything fit?





DaveB said:


> So in order to accept knew information it has to be similar to old information?



Let me rephrase - I didn't understand it's purpose as a guard, because guards are typically held away from your body to properly buffer the force of an incoming blow.  If you look at the Wing Chun guard, for example, which is a similar position, the off-hand is held near the elbow and forearm, in front of the body, instead of tight against the body.  As I said in my original post, and others have said in replies, if the hand is touching the solarplexus and something strikes the hand, the force travels through the hand and still goes right into the solarplexus.  It's just like a Newton's Cradle or the break in pool.

So instead of making abstract notions about how "not everything has to fit" or "new information can be different from old information", address my belief that holding your hand against your body is bad for a guard position.  Why would this be a good thing in a guard?


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I used to think the same, but it's just not correct. I've seen way too much evidence that karate forms and at least a proportion of Chinese forms were just not created with such rigidity.
> 
> And the reason for this is simply that if you were going to try and exactly mirror your forms to your applications then for every variation you'd need a new sequence and the forms become too long to be useful.
> 
> ...



Trying to apply a one-size-fits-all description of what a form is, how they were created, and why they were created is going to be very difficult.  Some forms are designed just to look good, some are designed to teach, and some are designed to reinforce what was taught.  I've participated in a lot of forms threads, and some schools the forms you practice at home are essentially the drills you do in class, and in other schools the forms serve another purpose.  In some arts, forms are supposed to contain the entirety of the techniques you use.  

In Taekwondo, we do barely any kicks in the forms, there's absolutely no strategy for Olympic-style sparring (which is the sparring rules used by most schools in the organization, to my knowledge), and my school has a lot of techniques that are not contained in the forms.  Now, we have other rote-memorized things which do address these other techniques and strategies in our curriculum, so I guess you could consider those kata, even though they aren't like the other Taekwondo katas.  But the point is that these are techniques and strategies that don't show up in the forms in the KKW curriculum, even though the KKW and WTF are heavily linked.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> Let me rephrase - I didn't understand it's purpose as a guard, because guards are typically held away from your body to properly buffer the force of an incoming blow.  If you look at the Wing Chun guard, for example, which is a similar position, the off-hand is held near the elbow and forearm, in front of the body, instead of tight against the body.  As I said in my original post, and others have said in replies, if the hand is touching the solarplexus and something strikes the hand, the force travels through the hand and still goes right into the solarplexus.  It's just like a Newton's Cradle or the break in pool.
> 
> So instead of making abstract notions about how "not everything has to fit" or "new information can be different from old information", address my belief that holding your hand against your body is bad for a guard position.  Why would this be a good thing in a guard?



I did, I told you it's there because it's an aesthetic choice.


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I did, I told you it's there because it's an aesthetic choice.



Yes, and @Earl Weiss responded to that on Page 3 by saying basically what I've said here - there's no buffer for the force of an incoming blow if your hand is tight against your body.  So it's more than an aesthetics choice, it's a functional one as well.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> Trying to apply a one-size-fits-all description of what a form is, how they were created, and why they were created is going to be very difficult.  Some forms are designed just to look good, some are designed to teach, and some are designed to reinforce what was taught.  I've participated in a lot of forms threads, and some schools the forms you practice at home are essentially the drills you do in class, and in other schools the forms serve another purpose.  In some arts, forms are supposed to contain the entirety of the techniques you use.
> 
> In Taekwondo, we do barely any kicks in the forms, there's absolutely no strategy for Olympic-style sparring (which is the sparring rules used by most schools in the organization, to my knowledge), and my school has a lot of techniques that are not contained in the forms.  Now, we have other rote-memorized things which do address these other techniques and strategies in our curriculum, so I guess you could consider those kata, even though they aren't like the other Taekwondo katas.  But the point is that these are techniques and strategies that don't show up in the forms in the KKW curriculum, even though the KKW and WTF are heavily linked.



Which again returns me to what I said before, TKD forms are mangled karate forms because they were created in a period when forms weren't being studied. 

You should see some of the garbage that passed as applications of kata in old Shotokan books. The era that produced those lame ideas was the era that taught tkd's founders. 

If you want to understand a knife hand block or any other karate technique study karate kata.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> Yes, and @Earl Weiss responded to that on Page 3 by saying basically what I've said here - there's no buffer for the force of an incoming blow if your hand is tight against your body.  So it's more than an aesthetics choice, it's a functional one as well.



Except that the paradigm of fighting that uses staggered hands for a guard is not based on absorbing hits by covering. That comes from boxing and is a result of training with gloves. 

This is the problem with interpreting new ideas by old standards.


----------



## wab25 (Jun 29, 2018)

This might be a fun exercise for people to try. In order to get the most out of it, step away from your keyboard and actually do these moves as I describe them. These arts comes from Wabjitsu-do (I am a 21st dan Grand Soke Master in Wabjitsu-do  ). For reference, see the first application of the knife hand block in this video (from earlier in the thread). I want you to do 3 different techniques, but the hand motions will be exactly as shown in the first application in the video.



Danny T said:


> Here is a video describing some potentials as above.



Technique 1 - Cross Block - This technique is similar to the first application in the video. The chambering hand is the blocking hand in this case. However, it is not a parry, but a strong knife hand block. If a straight punch is coming to your face, the "chambering" hand crosses your center line, the knife edge blocks the forearm of the punch hard enough to break the forearm, or at least seriously deflect the punch. Then, as the same hand extends back, it is merely measuring distance, feeling the opponent.

Technique 2 - Under Punch - (this is shown once in the same application in the video) As the chambering hand chambers, the other hand delivers a straight punch underneath. This is a hard punch, intent on breaking the short ribs. The chambering hand can be seen as a parry, a distraction or a cover, but the technique here is the straight punch. After the punch is delivered, the chambering hand extends, measuring distance.

Technique 3 - Knife Hand Block - This is the block as normally done in Karate or TKD. The hand chambers, then fires a strong block, using the knife edge of the hand. Exactly as done in Karate and TKD.

First, do each of these techniques 20-50 times. Or at least enough that you can develop speed, power and control to deliver the block or punch as indicated in the technique. Once you can develop reasonable speed and power, focus on what your body needs to do to accomplish that. What are your shoulders, hips, legs, weight, momentum, torque, feet, ... what are they doing? In all 3 techniques, you will find that your body must move very differently in order to accomplish the intended block or strike. In order for me to accomplish #1, I use a lot of my abs, contracting... it almost feels like a crunch, the power is in rotating towards the back side. In doing #3, I don't use my abs at all to crunch, the rotation is in the opposite direction. In addition, there are a ton of other changes that need to be made to generate and apply force in these 3 areas. In each case, your arms and hands are waving the same way.

Please, do not try these in your school, do not believe that these are martial techniques... unless your check clears, then I will send you a Multi-Dan certificate that you can frame  (cash works too)

This is why techniques are named or described as what they are. If you really break down all the motions, and muscle movements required... it will take a lot of time, and be very hard to teach. By teaching this movement as a "knife hand block," people will produce the correct body movement. If you tried the exercise above, you found that you had to experiment a little, in order to put the force where it needed to be. This way, you could define the start pose, the end pose and the path between... but by specifying that it was a knife hand block, with the outstretched hand... it tells you where, when and what direction to generate the force. This causes your body to move a certain way. That is the purpose for the technique, to move your body to generate and control this specific force. Once you can do that, there are a lot of ways to apply that force or that body movement.

In this case, you can do the entire body movement with very little help at all from the other hand. We can easily find other arts, using a similar block, but with different hand placement, or even no hand placement of the other hand. They may leave it in guard even, and still develop the same power on that block. So, each art puts that other hand in a place that they like. Some favor keeping their guard up, some favor prepping for the next attack... here, depending on what they feel is the next attack, may determine where it goes. Some, may just like the way it looks in a certain place.

So, when I learn a new technique, I learn it as a beginner. "This in an upward block, that will break a baseball bat being swung down at you." Ok. I practice and learn that block, with that intent in mind. I don't really believe it will break a bat or even stop a bat... but I do it with that intent anyway. As I get more comfortable generating that intent, now I can start studying what those postures and intent are causing my body to do. What it is causing my body to do, is the whole point, thats what I need to learn. 

Think of Judo. They teach you to grab the other guys lapel, then push a little and pull hard, then  you step in and throw the guy. Where the lapel is, doesn't matter at all. You can pull it as far as you want, it doesn't matter. What does matter, is the structure and balance of the other guy. When you pull, you are effecting their structure and balance. If the other guy has a super loose gi, you might need to move his lapel much further, in order to move him. It does not matter how good you are with gripping or moving the lapel, if it never effects the other guy's body.

So, naming a movement a upward block, or straight punch can be thought of as the "gi lapel" your instructor is pulling, to put your body through the correct sequence. As you learn the body sequence, you no longer need to be pulled through it, but can now find your own ways to apply that sequence.

Now our katas and forms become more than just a dictionary of movements. They become like the rules of grammar for your language. How do different movements fit together, how do they effect one another, how does their meaning change in context? As you learn the grammar, you become an author... and authors occasionally break the rules....


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Except that the paradigm of fighting that uses staggered hands for a guard is not based on absorbing hits by covering. That comes from boxing and is a result of training with gloves.
> 
> This is the problem with interpreting new ideas by old standards.



What?


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Technique 2 - Under Punch - (this is shown once in the same application in the video) As the chambering hand chambers, the other hand delivers a straight punch underneath. This is a hard punch, intent on breaking the short ribs. The chambering hand can be seen as a parry, a distraction or a cover, but the technique here is the straight punch. After the punch is delivered, the chambering hand extends, measuring distance.



How do you get power to do a rib-breaking hard punch if you're punching across your body while twisting the other way?


----------



## wab25 (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> How do you get power to do a rib-breaking hard punch if you're punching across your body *while twisting the other way*?


You have to move your body differently. Don't twist your hips the other way, until after your used your hips to deliver the punch. Your chambering action in this one, has no power in it, just raising your hand to your ear, as you punch under, with the power of the hip. (this has to be done the karate way, I believe the TKD way is a bit different)

The whole purpose for the exercise, is to see how you can move your arms and hands in the same way, but your body has to do radically different things, depending on which wave is supposed to express the power. Even the order of the parts of your body that move, changes. Just defining a start, end and path of movement is not enough. There is too much variation possible. Naming it a knife hand block with this hand, defines how the power is generated, the order your body parts move... lots of things. 

That was the idea here, if you change your emphasis, you change the entire movement, even though the starting and ending positions are the same, and even if the hands make the same path.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

skribs said:


> What?


The idea of a guard as something that sits like a wall covering the body waiting to get hit is not from bare knuckle fighting...

...or to break it down further, you don't use the knife hand guard position like that. Your not covering your solar plexus in case it gets hit, your hand is there in preparation for action. It's an active guard, not a passive one like in boxing.

Think about it, your exposed everywhere except the little spot covered by your rear hand, which is open to make getting your fingers broken super easy.

The rear hand is not there to cover anything, so it doesn't matter if you hold it against the body or an inch away from it.

When you fight, as your attention is on the opponent the position of your hands will shift and vary anyway. That's how you know it's not the kind of detail you need to worry about.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 29, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Maybe this approach is unique to southern Chinese Kung-fu ...


In the northern CMA system such as the preying mantis, the form can directly be mapped into application. If training is the same as application, you can kill 2 birds with 1 stone.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 29, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Solo training isn't the same as training application of techniques.


When you do a form, you are using your body to tell a story. If your audience can't understand your story, there is something wrong with your body language.


----------



## skribs (Jun 29, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you do a dorm, you are using your body to tell a story. If your audience can't understand your story, there is something wrong with your body language.



Why did you quote me in that one?  That was @DaveB who said that.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In the northern CMA system such as the preying mantis, the form can directly be mapped into application. If training is the same as application, you can kill 2 birds with 1 stone.



But by the Southern method you spend much less time learning much shorter forms and practice many more applications for each movement. Your solo training becomes way more efficient.


----------



## DaveB (Jun 29, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you do a dorm, you are using your body to tell a story. If your audience can't understand your story, there is something wrong with your body language.


If they can understand the story they can steal it for themselves.


----------



## MI_martialist (Jun 30, 2018)

I have read and re-read these posts.  A few other items:  In actual combat, form follows function.  In kata / hyung / poomsae, etc., function follows form, so it is difficult to get actual application from the beauty of the form.  Combat is messy, so the "form" can and could and sometimes should be messy.  It was polished to have a standard, and that's OK, for form purposes.  As for the insistence on technique, it simply shows the immaturity of understanding by the OP.  No matter what is said, it will always come back to "that's not our style, or how we do it" type of response.  Until the OP gains a more mature understanding, this will go around in circles.

Let go of style, of technique, look at the core and see the core, look at the movement, the pose, the posture from all angles in all planes from attacks from all angles in all planes, with and without all weapons, multiple weapons, that each or one of you may have, from all angles in all planes...


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 30, 2018)

skribs said:


> , address my belief that holding your hand against your body is bad for a guard position.  Why would this be a good thing in a guard?


My address yo your belief is "I agree" . As stated in an earlier post I don't think it should be held against the body. I qualified my response to the Chang Hon system and in that system it is not.   So, if some other system chooses to do it I cannot address it.   Held away from the body and it works as you say and perhaps the name used in Chan Hon "Knife Hand Guarding" then fits.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 30, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I did, I told you it's there because it's an aesthetic choice.


I agree that to n extent many  ending positions are aesthetic, or provide a metric the student cn easily aim for and the observer can tell if it's accomplished.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jun 30, 2018)

If you have not already done so get "Bubishi, Bible of Karate" although it says bible of Karate it goes into the Chinese foundations for lots of stuff.


----------



## Danny T (Jun 30, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> I have read and re-read these posts.  A few other items:  In actual combat, form follows function.  In kata / hyung / poomsae, etc., function follows form, so it is difficult to get actual application from the beauty of the form.  Combat is messy, so the "form" can and could and sometimes should be messy.  It was polished to have a standard, and that's OK, for form purposes.  As for the insistence on technique, it simply shows the immaturity of understanding by the OP.  No matter what is said, it will always come back to "that's not our style, or how we do it" type of response.  Until the OP gains a more mature understanding, this will go around in circles.
> 
> Let go of style, of technique, look at the core and see the core, look at the movement, the pose, the posture from all angles in all planes from attacks from all angles in all planes, with and without all weapons, multiple weapons, that each or one of you may have, from all angles in all planes...


Yeah...Have had the opportunity to view old film of masters doing forms from the 20's & 30's many would be unable to compete in today's forms competitions because their forms were based on function and practicality and not looks. Most are more flowing yet very powerful and none had all the hollering seen today.


----------



## skribs (Jul 1, 2018)

DaveB said:


> If they can understand the story they can steal it for themselves.



I get the idea of encrypting your curriculum.  My Master is very concerned about the copyright for the curriculum at my school (which is why I am hesitant to post a lot of the details of it on here).  However, training in something that is designed to obfuscate the meaning will make it hard to teach the meaning.



Danny T said:


> Yeah...Have had the opportunity to view old film of masters doing forms from the 20's & 30's many would be unable to compete in today's forms competitions because their forms were based on function and practicality and not looks. Most are more flowing yet very powerful and none had all the hollering seen today.



There are several reasons to kiyhap in a fight.  I'm also curious what art you're talking about, because Taekwondo wasn't a thing in the 20s and 30s.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 2, 2018)

skribs said:


> I get the idea of encrypting your curriculum.  My Master is very concerned about the copyright for the curriculum at my school (which is why I am hesitant to post a lot of the details of it on here).  However, training in something that is designed to obfuscate the meaning will make it hard to teach the meaning.


Only if you try to teach it before you understand it.

This knowledge gap re application was deliberately imposed for various social reasons, but the information has always been available to those who wanted it.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 2, 2018)

skribs said:


> There are several reasons to kiyhap in a fight.  I'm also curious what art you're talking about, because Taekwondo wasn't a thing in the 20s and 30s.


Didn't say not to kiyap. Kiyap is not hollering. The sound is the manifestation of a kiyap which is short, deep, and explosive.

What was the most influential martial art to TKD, whom did the developer of TKD train, and when did he train?


----------



## skribs (Jul 2, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Only if you try to teach it before you understand it.
> 
> This knowledge gap re application was deliberately imposed for various social reasons, but the information has always been available to those who wanted it.



Unless it was lost along the way of getting to you.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 2, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Only if you try to teach it before you understand it.
> 
> This knowledge gap re application was deliberately imposed for various social reasons, but the information has always been available to those who wanted it.


For the most part the information is hidden in plain view. For many it is lost because they were never taught to see it, they were taught specific applications rather than principles & concepts. By understanding the principles and concepts the shown applications are but examples of application. Adherence to specific application limits the practitioner in knowledge and skill/s.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 2, 2018)

skribs said:


> Unless it was lost along the way of getting to you.


What are you talking about? 
[


----------



## DaveB (Jul 2, 2018)

Danny T said:


> For the most part the information is hidden in plain view. For many it is lost because they were never taught to see it, they were taught specific applications rather than principles & concepts. By understanding the principles and concepts the shown applications are but examples of application. Adherence to specific application limits the practitioner in knowledge and skill/s.



That's true but in fairness to skribs principles without application is meaningless to a beginner. 

The applications crystallise the example of the principle as well as build the skill to actually use them.


----------



## skribs (Jul 2, 2018)

DaveB said:


> What are you talking about?
> [



It's like the telephone game kids play, where you line up ten kids and have Kid 1 whisper a phrase to Kid 2, who whispers it to Kid 3, and somewhere along the line "I like apples and bananas" turns into "I'm in love with an alien named Brandon."  

If the techniques were first put into Kata 200 years ago, then there's been plenty of time for people along the way to:

Forget applications of the kata
Refuse to teach certain applications to certain students
Reject applications of the kata
Not properly understand applications of the kata
Start teaching the kata without having learned its applications
Watch the kata be performed without being taught it, and then obviously not learn the applications
Formulate new kata which use similar movements in a different way that the original application becomes obscured
The vast majority of the information I find when I try to research these questions is simply how to properly chamber and perform the technique, with very little (if any) information on what you are actually doing.



DaveB said:


> That's true but in fairness to skribs principles without application is meaningless to a beginner.
> 
> The applications crystallise the example of the principle as well as build the skill to actually use them.



I would argue it's a little different.  For me, it's that as you learn more about martial arts, your understanding grows.  It doesn't change.  For example, an inward knife-hand block and inward knife-hand strike will usually be pretty similar.  If you're throwing a block, then knowing that it could also be a strike is irrelevant.  You don't forget how to throw a block.  You still need to understand the motion and the technique in that application.  You just *also *know that it could be a strike.  But in knowing it's a strike, you don't forget it's a block.

If that makes sense.


----------



## MI_martialist (Jul 3, 2018)

Danny T said:


> For the most part the information is hidden in plain view. For many it is lost because they were never taught to see it, they were taught specific applications rather than principles & concepts. By understanding the principles and concepts the shown applications are but examples of application. Adherence to specific application limits the practitioner in knowledge and skill/s.



To add to this fantastic post, I would say that without extensive application training, solo kata is not to be done!!


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jul 3, 2018)

Danny T said:


> For the most part the information is hidden in plain view. For many it is lost because they were never taught to see it, they were taught specific applications rather than principles & concepts. By understanding the principles and concepts the shown applications are but examples of application. Adherence to specific application limits the practitioner in knowledge and skill/s.



When I teach beginners I find it useful to teach a single application. Too much information can be overload.  As they say, "Even a thirsty man cannot drink from a fire hose. "  

As more techniques are learned I will teach more about concepts. If they learn 100 techniques they may understand a single concept.  If   they learn  single concept they may understand 100 techniques.  

Think of Daniel San.   :Wax On - Wax off.   Mr. Miyagi taught the motions but  Daniel San had no idea what they could be used for until he was told.  I know it's a movie but it was art imitating life.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 3, 2018)

Earl Weiss said:


> When I teach beginners I find it useful to teach a single application. Too much information can be overload.  As they say, "Even a thirsty man cannot drink from a fire hose. "
> 
> As more techniques are learned I will teach more about concepts. If they learn 100 techniques they may understand a single concept.  If   they learn  single concept they may understand 100 techniques.
> 
> Think of Daniel San.   :Wax On - Wax off.   Mr. Miyagi taught the motions but  Daniel San had no idea what they could be used for until he was told.  I know it's a movie but it was art imitating life.


I teach movements and positions. Show a movement to a position. Drill it a bit. Then I show 2 'potential' applications for that movement and position. Then drill the movement again not concerned about the application but the movement. Then we may work on the form when that movement is presented or we'll work the whole form asking where is the movement is within the form. We get deeper into potential applications as they grow.


----------



## skribs (Jul 3, 2018)

Danny T said:


> I teach movements and positions. Show a movement to a position. Drill it a bit. Then I show 2 'potential' applications for that movement and position. Then drill the movement again not concerned about the application but the movement. Then we may work on the form when that movement is presented or we'll work the whole form asking where is the movement is within the form. We get deeper into potential applications as they grow.



When we teach a movement, there's usually at least one application tied to it.  That way students can conceptualize what they're doing.  If there are other applications we teach those applications, and if the movements are similar then the students will pick up on that.

I've seen issues the other way, where a student's outward blocks and outward strikes are the *exact *same motion, which results in weaker strikes.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 3, 2018)

skribs said:


> I've seen issues the other way, where a student's outward blocks and outward strikes are the *exact *same motion, which results in weaker strikes.



Why should my hand impact a forearm (block) with weaker force than when my hand impacts a head (strike)? Shouldn't it be the other way around, since the other guys head is more likely to break my hand, than his forearm is?

Which targets should receive weaker impacts? Which should receive harder impacts?

Forearm
Calf of the leg
Thigh
Bicep
Head
Neck
Rib
Now that you have identified which targets need to be hit less hard, explain why they need to be hit less hard.


----------



## skribs (Jul 3, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Why should my hand impact a forearm (block) with weaker force than when my hand impacts a head (strike)? Shouldn't it be the other way around, since the other guys head is more likely to break my hand, than his forearm is?
> 
> Which targets should receive weaker impacts? Which should receive harder impacts?
> 
> ...



It's not a weaker motion.  It's a weaker strike.  The key differences between the block and the strike are:


The block is meant to push the incoming punch out of the way.  The primary goal is defense, any striking damage to the arm is secondary.  The chop is meant to cause penetration damage into the target.  It is an offensive move.  (And I would aim for the neck instead of the head, anyway, much softer target).
The block is done in such a way that I have about a foot of vertical real estate that can impact the incoming punch.  It might be the blade of my hand, my wrist, my forearm, or my elbow, but I've got a good chance of blocking it.  Going for this vertical real estate sacrifices on the amount of power you can put behind a more linear, whiplike motion of the chop.





Look at the strike at 0:40 and 1:02.  Now look at the block at 2:10.  Notice how in the chamber for the strike the elbow points at the target, and in the block the elbow points down.  Notice how the strike is done with a straight arm (and essentially resembles a roundhouse kick in terms of the snapping motion), and the block is done with a bent arm.

It's not about which targets must be hit harder or softer.  By all means, if you're striking an arm, strike hard.  But if your goal is to prevent an attack from getting to you, there are different ways you perform techniques in order to meet that application.  Just like there's different roundhouse kicks for power, speed, or showing off.

The motion at 2:10 makes a weaker strike than the motion at 0:40.  It also makes a better block.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 3, 2018)

What you have there are 2 different motions that you are studying. Motion "A" at 0:40 and Motion "B" at 2:10. 

Motion A is a strike. Motion B is also a strike. Motion A is a more powerful strike at range... there is more whip in the hand and a larger lever. Motion B is a more powerful strike closer in... Motion A would throw all the power behind a close range opponent.

Motion B is a block. Motion A is also a block. Motion B can be used for a more general purpose block. But, Motion A can be used as a block in certain situations as well.

Now that I see what you are talking about...


skribs said:


> I've seen issues the other way, where a student's outward blocks and outward strikes are the *exact *same motion, which results in weaker strikes.


It sounds like the students have not been taught both motions, no matter what you call them. Calling one a strike and one a block, are teaching aids, to help people learn these two different motions.

Question: This video shows no hip motion at all with these two techniques. Is that the way TKD teaches it or the way that guy does it? 

In Shotokan, both of these motions involve hip motion. (in Shotokan, these would be wrong as shown, as they do not involve the hip at all) If TKD has no hip motion in these motions, that might be why its hard to see some of the applications that have been mentioned, as they involve hip motion. If TKD teaches these motions as "arm only motions," then many of the applications offered here actually would not apply... as they are applications of the body movement, not the arm movement. (both would still be a strike and a block though)


----------



## skribs (Jul 3, 2018)

wab25 said:


> What you have there are 2 different motions that you are studying. Motion "A" at 0:40 and Motion "B" at 2:10.
> 
> Motion A is a strike. Motion B is also a strike. Motion A is a more powerful strike at range... there is more whip in the hand and a larger lever. Motion B is a more powerful strike closer in... Motion A would throw all the power behind a close range opponent.
> 
> ...



When we're practicing the motions isolated or in other combinations, there is hip motion.  In Taekwondo forms, it's typically a strong, unmoving stance, or a change from one stance to another.  Combinations are more staccato in our forms, as well.

---

I disagree that both are a strike and both are a block.  That's like saying a screwdriver is a hammer because you can hit the nail with the handle, and a hammer is a screwdriver because if you hit the screw it will go into a block of wood like a nail.  One motion is clearly better at blocking, and one is clearly better at striking. 

If I was striking closer in, I wouldn't switch to Motion B.  I would take Motion A and modify it to work at a shorter distance by pointing my elbow out, not down.  If I did want to make a downward strike instead (i.e. to the collar bone), I would point my elbow down, but then make a linear strike diagonally with my hand, and it would look different than Motion B.

And I wouldn't see much reason to block further out.  If they're further away, they're not hitting me.  I can wait until the punch gets closer to block it.  Motion A means I'd need to be fairly precise where I hit, and there's a much bigger margin for error (error meaning I go over or under the punch, and the punch hits me).


----------



## wab25 (Jul 3, 2018)

skribs said:


> I disagree that both are a strike and both are a block. That's like saying a screwdriver is a hammer because you can hit the nail with the handle, and a hammer is a screwdriver because if you hit the screw it will go into a block of wood like a nail. One motion is clearly better at blocking, and one is clearly better at striking.


 We will have to agree to disagree then. Its my opinion that by limiting these motions to the named application, one will miss 90% of the art. I understand if you disagree here. What I don't get is why ask these questions then? If a strike is a strike, not a block and a block is a block and not a strike... then you already know what they are. So their practical applications should be self evident then. The strike is a strike. The block is a block.



skribs said:


> If I was striking closer in, I wouldn't switch to Motion B. I would take Motion A and modify it to work at a shorter distance by pointing my elbow out, not down. If I did want to make a downward strike instead (i.e. to the collar bone), I would point my elbow down, but then make a linear strike diagonally with my hand, and it would look different than Motion B.


 I would truly like to see force generated in the knife hand, for a close in strike, with the elbow pointed out.

I was thinking of a horizontal strike to the vegas nerve on the side of the neck, a horizontal strike to the jaw or and horizontal strike to the side of the head. When the opponent is in close, this works nicely as a close in strike, especially if the other hand cleared out the other guys hands.



skribs said:


> And I wouldn't see much reason to block further out. If they're further away, they're not hitting me. I can wait until the punch gets closer to block it. Motion A means I'd need to be fairly precise where I hit, and there's a much bigger margin for error (error meaning I go over or under the punch, and the punch hits me).


 If the other guy were throwing a big hammer fist to the side of my head, I could step back and block his forearm with the reach. I could hit anywhere along his forearm, I wouldn't have to be accurate at all. If he were using a hammer or short club, this would allow my head to be out of range, while I punished his forearm. Delivering the increased power to the inside of his forearm would make it harder for him to keep his grip on the weapon.

But, since blocks are blocks and strikes are strikes... it doesn't matter how I see it. The practical application is the named application. For this thread, the practical application of a double knife hand block, is a double knife hand block.


----------



## skribs (Jul 3, 2018)

wab25 said:


> We will have to agree to disagree then. Its my opinion that by limiting these motions to the named application, one will miss 90% of the art. I understand if you disagree here. What I don't get is why ask these questions then? If a strike is a strike, not a block and a block is a block and not a strike... then you already know what they are. So their practical applications should be self evident then. The strike is a strike. The block is a block.



In this particular case, the question was "why is the other hand held at your solar plexus."

If you believe that a strike and a block are the same thing, how is that relevant to the question of "why is the other hand at your solar plexus."  Ok, it's a strike.  Why, in that strike, is the other hand held at your solar plexus?  You've created a whole new question while avoiding the one that was originally asked.

Or, if you believe it is a block, or are applying it as a block, why would you have your hand at the solar plexus?  The question is still the same if it's not a strike.  It's still the same if it COULD be strike, but isn't right now.  The question is still the same if you close your fists and keep everything else the same in a double middle block.  It's the same thing if the forward hand is held down in a down block position, and the other hand is at your solar plexus.  The question is still "why is that hand there."



wab25 said:


> I would truly like to see force generated in the knife hand, for a close in strike, with the elbow pointed out.
> 
> I was thinking of a horizontal strike to the vegas nerve on the side of the neck, a horizontal strike to the jaw or and horizontal strike to the side of the head. When the opponent is in close, this works nicely as a close in strike, especially if the other hand cleared out the other guys hands.



Are you saying you want to see numbers in the amount of newtons of force generated by how you chamber?  I can feel the difference when I'm doing the techniques.  It's like the difference between a punch and a shove.



wab25 said:


> If the other guy were throwing a big hammer fist to the side of my head, I could step back and block his forearm with the reach. I could hit anywhere along his forearm, I wouldn't have to be accurate at all. If he were using a hammer or short club, this would allow my head to be out of range, while I punished his forearm. Delivering the increased power to the inside of his forearm would make it harder for him to keep his grip on the weapon.
> 
> But, since blocks are blocks and strikes are strikes... it doesn't matter how I see it. The practical application is the named application. For this thread, the practical application of a double knife hand block, is a double knife hand block.



If you step back, the blow misses you.  Or if you step back and it won't miss you, better to keep your arms in close than to extend yourself.  If you extend your arm straight up and out to intercept a hammerfist, that's a lot of rib opened up to take a roundhouse kick.

If your opponent has a club, you don't want to keep your head in the optimal range for the club.  If you successfully strike their arm, that's good, but if your timing is off you're going to get your arm broken, especially with your arm fully extended like that.  It would be *much *better to attack the lever arm at its weakest point than trade blows with a hammer.  Striking their arm with a knife-hand isn't going to be nearly as effective as a baseball bat that has full time to swing.

---

What I find hard to believe is that there is a situation where Motion A is a better block than Motion B, or where Motion B is a better strike than Motion A.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 3, 2018)

skribs said:


> What I find hard to believe is that there is a situation where Motion A is a better block than Motion B, or where Motion B is a better strike than Motion A.


 There are going to be fewer situations where A is a reasonable block. The striking limb needs to be vertical during the strike. There are some attacks where the limb is vertical during the attack. Motion A could be used to block these. But Motion A is a lot more than a strike, and a block. Its a grab, and the throw and an escape and a joint lock and on and on.

As for Motion B being a better strike... we already saw that. When your opponent is very close... like the first application here:






If you tried Motion A, at that distance, your power would go behind his head.


skribs said:


> If I was striking closer in, I wouldn't switch to Motion B. I would take Motion A and modify it to work at a shorter distance by pointing my elbow out, not down.


I would like to see this generate power in the hand, to hit a guy as close as above.



skribs said:


> In this particular case, the question was "why is the other hand held at your solar plexus."


We already went over this. Since this move is a knife hand block, then that is all it is. If you won't allow it to be anything else, then it does not matter where this hand goes.

I guess what you are really after is to contrive of a situation where putting your hand there, while you block with the other, is practical. I can't help you there. Thats not how I was taught martial arts. But someday I may learn better... Until then, we will have to just disagree here.


----------



## skribs (Jul 3, 2018)

wab25 said:


> As for Motion B being a better strike... we already saw that. When your opponent is very close... like the first application here:



That's not Motion B.  That's Motion A at an angle.  You'll notice he's extending his arm.  The extension is stopped by the neck, but if the other guy wasn't there his extension would be down and across, instead of ending in the same position as Motion B.



wab25 said:


> I would like to see this generate power in the hand, to hit a guy as close as above.



Same as a roundhouse kick up close vs. far away.  You chamber tighter and a bit past where you normally would (i.e. a roundhouse kick with the right leg you would chamber across further to the left).



wab25 said:


> We already went over this. Since this move is a knife hand block, then that is all it is. If you won't allow it to be anything else, then it does not matter where this hand goes.
> 
> I guess what you are really after is to contrive of a situation where putting your hand there, while you block with the other, is practical. I can't help you there. Thats not how I was taught martial arts. But someday I may learn better... Until then, we will have to just disagree here.



Yes, that is what I am asking.  And whether it's a block or a strike is really irrelevant.  Why would you put your hand there if it's a strike?  It becomes the same question.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 3, 2018)

skribs said:


> It's like the telephone game kids play, where you line up ten kids and have Kid 1 whisper a phrase to Kid 2, who whispers it to Kid 3, and somewhere along the line "I like apples and bananas" turns into "I'm in love with an alien named Brandon."
> 
> If the techniques were first put into Kata 200 years ago, then there's been plenty of time for people along the way to:
> 
> ...



Yes, all of that could happen, but I wasn't speaking in hypotheticals, the application of kata was withheld. It's a point of history.



> I would argue it's a little different.  For me, it's that as you learn more about martial arts, your understanding grows.  It doesn't change.  For example, an inward knife-hand block and inward knife-hand strike will usually be pretty similar.  If you're throwing a block, then knowing that it could also be a strike is irrelevant.  You don't forget how to throw a block.  You still need to understand the motion and the technique in that application.  You just *also *know that it could be a strike.  But in knowing it's a strike, you don't forget it's a block.
> 
> If that makes sense.



It makes sense, it's just wrong for most people I've known. 

First off, that a technique can be both a block and a strike is not a principle, it's just a point of fact.

The principle would be in how and when you use said block or said strike, or how you use your body to generate said technique. These are rules you can apply to different situations.

As to growing vs changing, it should be both. Yes a block is still a block, but what it means to block an attack and all the possibilities it opens or closes and how it fits into your conception of combat should all change with experience.


----------



## skribs (Jul 3, 2018)

DaveB said:


> The principle would be in how and when you use said block or said strike, or how you use your body to generate said technique. These are rules you can apply to different situations.



See, to me, if you're changing the way the gross movement is done for the sake of the application, it's a different technique.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 4, 2018)

skribs said:


> I disagree that both are a strike and both are a block.  That's like saying a screwdriver is a hammer because you can hit the nail with the handle, and a hammer is a screwdriver because if you hit the screw it will go into a block of wood like a nail.  One motion is clearly better at blocking, and one is clearly better at striking.
> 
> If I was striking closer in, I wouldn't switch to Motion B.  I would take Motion A and modify it to work at a shorter distance by pointing my elbow out, not down.  If I did want to make a downward strike instead (i.e. to the collar bone), I would point my elbow down, but then make a linear strike diagonally with my hand, and it would look different than Motion B.
> 
> And I wouldn't see much reason to block further out.  If they're further away, they're not hitting me.  I can wait until the punch gets closer to block it.  Motion A means I'd need to be fairly precise where I hit, and there's a much bigger margin for error (error meaning I go over or under the punch, and the punch hits me).



Your view here is understandable but it's based on a lot of misconceptions. You should re-read the stuff I posted earlier about the use of the knife hand block in close. 

Until you learn to let go of labels you will miss a great deal of the potential in your ma.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 4, 2018)

skribs said:


> See, to me, if you're changing the way the gross movement is done for the sake of the application, it's a different technique.



CONGRATULATIONS you've figured it out. 

Everyone keeps telling you to play with the technique, because the technique is variable. You can push, you can thrust, you can whip, you can move in straight lines or circles...
This is the point of kata. They are fluid and variable as fighting is fluid and variable. 

A hammer is not a screwdriver, but if you need a screwdriver why would you not put down the thing you don't need and pick up the tool that you do need? Because it has a label on it?

To translate: if your fighting for your life and a knife hand "block" can fit in the gap you see as a hit, are you going to let the opportunity pass because it's a block not a strike? 

Since you like to play devil's advocate I'll just tell you, the answer is no, that would be stupid. 

And while there might sometimes be stronger strikes, you maximise the power available through training. Just because your basic block is competent doesn't mean that you are physically ready to use all its application potential. We have to develop strikes once we know they are there.

Lastly the block is also a strike idea is just the beginning of expanding how you use these movements. I've already pointed out that there is a whole tactical framework around the use of knife hand block in back stance (or cat stance) for close quarter fighting. 

You're idea that the chop in Koryo only works as a block from further away shows a really limited understanding of the use of movement. Why not stay close and contact the strike at a different point? 

I get that you want to understand the basic techniques better, but again the real answer to that question is that the basic techniques were designed to hold more than basics and if you want to vary where you place your rear hand when you block you can because it doesn't matter at all.


----------



## TrueJim (Jul 4, 2018)

I think the most _practical_ application of the Double Knifehand Block is to fight Bruce Lee in the Roman Coliseum.


----------



## skribs (Jul 4, 2018)

DaveB said:


> CONGRATULATIONS you've figured it out.
> 
> Everyone keeps telling you to play with the technique, because the technique is variable. You can push, you can thrust, you can whip, you can move in straight lines or circles...
> This is the point of kata. They are fluid and variable as fighting is fluid and variable.



No, I haven't figured it out.  I've been saying it all along.



> A hammer is not a screwdriver, but if you need a screwdriver why would you not put down the thing you don't need and pick up the tool that you do need? Because it has a label on it?
> 
> To translate: if your fighting for your life and a knife hand "block" can fit in the gap you see as a hit, are you going to let the opportunity pass because it's a block not a strike?
> 
> Since you like to play devil's advocate I'll just tell you, the answer is no, that would be stupid.



This makes no sense at all.  You tell me to put down the screwdriver and pick up the hammer and use the right tool for the job.  Then you tell me not to use the right tool and just use the tool I have on hand.  On top of that, it's not like a video game where I can only have so many moves equipped.  It's not like knowing knife-hand block prevents me from knowing knife-hand strike, and that I'd have to put one down in order to use the other.  Your metaphor doesn't make much sense at all here.

To that, I say no.  You wouldn't use the blocking motion.  You might use that if you're doing a sweep, trap, or push.  But if you want to do the strike you do the same linear striking motion at a different angle.



> And while there might sometimes be stronger strikes, you maximise the power available through training. Just because your basic block is competent doesn't mean that you are physically ready to use all its application potential. We have to develop strikes once we know they are there.



If you train both, the strike will stay stronger than the block.



> Lastly the block is also a strike idea is just the beginning of expanding how you use these movements. I've already pointed out that there is a whole tactical framework around the use of knife hand block in back stance (or cat stance) for close quarter fighting.



I mean, in both applications I'm waving my hand in the same way.  But the way we learn at my school, we start off with the gross movement and then learn more and more details on each technique as time goes on.  The more details you learn about the techniques, the more it quickly becomes clear that they are separate techniques with separate advantages and disadvantages.



> You're idea that the chop in Koryo only works as a block from further away shows a really limited understanding of the use of movement. Why not stay close and contact the strike at a different point?



In what scenario is the strike motion going to be better as a block close up?



> I get that you want to understand the basic techniques better, but again the real answer to that question is that the basic techniques were designed to hold more than basics and if you want to vary where you place your rear hand when you block you can because it doesn't matter at all.



"It doesn't matter at all" doesn't sound like the right answer to me.  What else "doesn't matter at all" in your techniques?


----------



## skribs (Jul 4, 2018)

TrueJim said:


> I think the most _practical_ application of the Double Knifehand Block is to fight Bruce Lee in the Roman Coliseum.



Lol it's Way of the Dragon, not Enter the Dragon.  Good find.  Although he still keeps his hand a bit away from his body instead of pressed in.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 4, 2018)

> skribs, post: 1910700, member: 31615"]...
> To that, I say no.  You wouldn't use the blocking motion.  You might use that if you're doing a sweep, trap, or push.  But if you want to do the strike you do the same linear striking motion at a different angle.



Except that would expose your ribs and your elbow which in close is pretty fatal. Hence why your knife-hand block also functions as a close strike, which ties into that bit you ignored while looking for holes in my point about the tactical close quarter framework.



> If you train both, the strike will stay stronger than the block.


Hopefully now you can see that there's more to technique than just power.




> I mean, in both applications I'm waving my hand in the same way.  But the way we learn at my school, we start off with the gross movement and then learn more and more details on each technique as time goes on.  The more details you learn about the techniques, the more it quickly becomes clear that they are separate techniques with separate advantages and disadvantages.


Are you conflating the 45degree knife hand block movement with the horizontal strike motion again?

That is not what we mean when we say that the block is also a strike.



> In what scenario is the strike motion going to be better as a block close up?



For one, when you need to block from a position where your elbow is raised.


> "It doesn't matter at all" doesn't sound like the right answer to me.  What else "doesn't matter at all" in your techniques?



Sigh.

If you think you can fight taking fixed positions into every situation without consideration for what is happening be my guest.

You are insistent on viewing all movements through the lens of their teaching labels when it is the broader applications that reveal more about the construction of the movement.

The labels don't matter.

When fighting, obeying the principles behind the form are more important than each specific position. In other words, if you are blocking , what matters is the block, not a standardised place holder for the other hand.


----------



## skribs (Jul 5, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Except that would expose your ribs and your elbow which in close is pretty fatal. Hence why your knife-hand block also functions as a close strike, which ties into that bit you ignored while looking for holes in my point about the tactical close quarter framework.



I'd still end up with a slightly different chamber and motion if I'm going for a strike.

The block uses the shoulder as the primary actuator.  The shoulder doesn't make for a strong fulcrum for a strike, especially in the case of something in close.  The elbow is a much better actuator.

So I would chamber palm out and make a linear motion along my elbow, whereas with the block I would chamber palm in, rotate on the elbow and make an angular motion from my shoulder.



> Hopefully now you can see that there's more to technique than just power.



Yes.  But if you can do a technique with more power, the technique with less power isn't favorable.  



> For one, when you need to block from a position where your elbow is raised.



In that case I would drop my elbow as I do the motion, instead of doing a linear motion.



> Sigh.
> 
> If you think you can fight taking fixed positions into every situation without consideration for what is happening be my guest.
> 
> ...



Ok.  So why is THIS fixed position used?  It shows up in the Palgwe forms, in the Taegeuk forms, and in the Koryo and Taegeuk forms.  Maybe even more.  It shows up in Karate kata.  It shows up virtually everywhere.  It has to be there for more than just "to show you labels don't matter".

There is definitely a reason to keep your off-hand tight to your side, or to pull your off-hand tight when doing a technique.  There's a reason to do another technique with the off-hand (i.e. block with one hand and strike with the other).  There's a reason to keep your offhand ready in front of you in a guard position.  

The position with your hand at your solar plexus comes up too often, and comes up in every set of forms I've seen in TKD, that it can't be there by accident.  It can't be there just to tell you that your other hand doesn't matter.  In fact, the more we learn forms at my school, the more we learn that the minor details DO matter.  We learn more details about techniques as we get further along in our training.  For this to be a detail that doesn't always apply would be fine.  But for it to be a detail that doesn't matter is not something I can accept.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 5, 2018)

1. Both block and strike use the whole body in sequence, all that should change is the emphasis. 

2. If you just drop your elbow into a standard knife-hand block you miss all the control options of the long movement. They horizontal is a different technique not interchangeable with the standard knife-hand. Try to understand it before you throw it out.

3. I told you why that and all the fixed positions are used, but you are too busy looking for argument's to take anything in.

And technique repeating across multiple form sets doesn't mean anything except that they came from the same source. 

I and most of the people who posted answers to your questions have been where you are. I wasn't able to find answers as easily as posting on a forum because there were non available when I was trying to understand my forms.

If you want to develop your own understanding that ignores all the work that's been done in the past 20 yrs, go for it. But I don't get why you would ask other people if that's your plan?


----------



## Danny T (Jul 5, 2018)

Why hand at solar plexus, why at hip? Maybe I'm placing something there, maybe I'm getting ready to remove something from there, maybe something is there and I'm covering it. There are numerous potentials. 
How about a bend arm lock...You are placing the opponent's elbow to your sternum. Maybe you are doing a standing arm lock holding the opponent's wrist at your sternum. It really is about what is being attacked, how it is being attacked, what the the spatial relationship between you and the opponent.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 5, 2018)

skribs said:


> Ok.  So why is THIS fixed position used?  It shows up in the Palgwe forms, in the Taegeuk forms, and in the Koryo and Taegeuk forms.  Maybe even more.  It shows up in Karate kata.  It shows up virtually everywhere.  It has to be there for more than just "to show you labels don't matter".
> 
> There is definitely a reason to keep your off-hand tight to your side, or to pull your off-hand tight when doing a technique.  There's a reason to do another technique with the off-hand (i.e. block with one hand and strike with the other).  There's a reason to keep your offhand ready in front of you in a guard position.
> 
> The position with your hand at your solar plexus comes up too often, and comes up in every set of forms I've seen in TKD, that it can't be there by accident.  It can't be there just to tell you that your other hand doesn't matter.  In fact, the more we learn forms at my school, the more we learn that the minor details DO matter.  We learn more details about techniques as we get further along in our training.  For this to be a detail that doesn't always apply would be fine.  But for it to be a detail that doesn't matter is not something I can accept.


 
One last time. There is no great mystery to these things if viewed from level 1, simple blocking and striking. 

You insist on viewing the techniques at level 1, so the answer is the level one answer, ie training body mechanics.

But you didn't ask about training, you asked about application at level 1. 

At level 1. 
A block is a block. 
A strike is a strike. 
At this level of interpretation, your *formal* hand placement when *applying* these techniques, does not aid or improve your application of the technique. Keeping your palm infront of your solar plexus while knife-hand blocking is mmeaningless. You are better off keeping a guard up with the other hand. 
At this level.

There are other levels for which the hand placement is relevant and it is these levels that explain the hand placement.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 5, 2018)

Danny T said:


> Why hand at solar plexus, why at hip? Maybe I'm placing something there, maybe I'm getting ready to remove something from there, maybe something is there and I'm covering it. There are numerous potentials.
> How about a bend arm lock...You are placing the opponent's elbow to your sternum. Maybe you are doing a standing arm lock holding the opponent's wrist at your sternum. It really is about what is being attacked, how it is being attacked, what the the spatial relationship between you and the opponent.


All great points, but he wants to know about the block, only the block, nothing but the block.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 5, 2018)

DaveB said:


> You are insistent on viewing all movements through the lens of their teaching labels when it is the broader applications that reveal more about the construction of the movement.


If you read my last question to him and his response... you will see that he is not interested in learning the mechanics, the movement, the principles or the application of any of this. What he specifically wants is for us to give him a situation where he can perform the labelled application, and at the same time, every other piece of the technique is practical and must be in that exact spot. I have never trained under anyone, that taught that method of investigation, nor can I come up with a situation where he can perform the labelled application, with every other detail being exact as in the form / kata. It could be that I have not trained under someone that is at his level yet, so that could be why I don't see it his way.



skribs said:


> The position with your hand at your solar plexus comes up too often, and comes up in every set of forms I've seen in TKD, that it can't be there by accident. It can't be there just to tell you that your other hand doesn't matter. In fact, the more we learn forms at my school, the more we learn that the minor details DO matter. We learn more details about techniques as we get further along in our training. For this to be a detail that doesn't always apply would be fine. But for it to be a detail that doesn't matter is not something I can accept.


You are correct. This detail does indeed matter. However, it does not matter for the labelled application. There are many examples of people using an outward, knife hand block in the ring and in real life, where the other hand was in a different position. The block worked just fine for them, plenty of power and everything. In order, for that specific detail to matter, you have to let go of the outward knife hand block idea. Why does it show up so much? Because their are a lot of reasons for it. But exactly zero of those reasons have anything to do with the outward knife hand block.


----------



## skribs (Jul 5, 2018)

DaveB said:


> One last time. There is no great mystery to these things if viewed from level 1, simple blocking and striking.
> 
> You insist on viewing the techniques at level 1, so the answer is the level one answer, ie training body mechanics.
> 
> ...



The very first techniques I've learned at any Taekwondo school I've been to have been horse stance punching, which chambers the other hand at the side, and there are multiple reasons to pull the hand down to the side that way when punching, and most relate to the punch itself.

This is also done in our forms, our drilled combinations, and in our drilled self defense scenarios.  There are times we keep our hands up, but usually that hand comes tight at the side when doing a combo.  For example, in a situation where I am in a standard sparring stance, do left hand jab, right hand reverse punch, right hand backfist, and then step forward and do left hand reverse, when I do the jab I will keep my right hand up by my face, but I will pull the jab to my hip as I do my punches with my right hand, to get a stronger reverse punch with the right hand as I turn into the punch, as well as to get a stronger reverse punch from a better chamber position when I punch with that hand again.

Putting my hand tight at my side isn't an arbitrary thing done for the sake of appearances or formality.  There are reasons to do this.  I see no reason why the same should not apply to any other technique that is trained.



> If you read my last question to him and his response... you will see that he is not interested in learning the mechanics, the movement, the principles or the application of any of this. What he specifically wants is for us to give him a situation where he can perform the labelled application, and at the same time, every other piece of the technique is practical and must be in that exact spot. I have never trained under anyone, that taught that method of investigation, nor can I come up with a situation where he can perform the labelled application, with every other detail being exact as in the form / kata. It could be that I have not trained under someone that is at his level yet, so that could be why I don't see it his way.



This honestly shocks me that the question is so shocking for so many people.  Let me summarize the conversation so far:

*This is a double knife-hand block.*
_Okay, so why do you hold your hand here instead of at our side like we normally do._
*Well, if you're doing a wrist-lock, you might be grabbing the wrist.*
_But I thought it was a block._
*It can be a block, but it might be a grab.*
_Okay, so if it's a block, why do you hold your hand here._
*But it's not a block, it's a grab.*
_But you said it can be a block, and it's called a block._
*You're getting too hung up on the name.  It can also be a strike.*
_Okay, say it's a strike.  Why do you have your hand here?_
*Why are you so hung up on if it's a block or a strike?  You don't understand the principle of it.*
_I just said it could be a block or a strike._
*But it could also be a grab.
*
We're going around in circles avoiding the question.  In a striking scenario, meaning use of blocks and strikes (which is what typically show up in most of the Taekwondo forms):

Why is it an advantage to have your hand tight against your solar plexus, palm up?
Why does this only show up with outward blocks and low blocks?  I've never seen this hand position show up with an inward block or high block.
Now, in a grappling scenario, I'm still having trouble with the motion and it's set points as well.  The position of the double-knife-hand-block is one palm out away from your body and one palm up, with the hand against your body.  Let's assume the right hand is held palm out, and the left hand is tucked in palm up.  The scenarios I can see are:

*A wristlock with the right hand and left hand pressing on their elbow or shoulder.  *In this case, I would likely have my hands flipped from the double-knife-hand, with my right hand palm up and my left hand palm down.
*A figure-4 lock as I think @Danny T  was referencing.*  Again, for a figure 4, I'd have my left hand down.  My right hand would be in a completely different position (across my body instead of away from it).
*A wristlock with the left hand and armbar on the elbow with the right.  *In this case, I would have made my motion in the opposite direction, my right hand would point different, and I'd rather be at a different angle so I have more control over the situation.
*A wristlock from an attacker in front of me instead of the side.*  In this case, I'd end up more in the position in Taegeuk 7, only instead of my other hand blocking in front of me, I'd bring it into the wrist lock as well.  I'd also have my palms pointing inward at each other instead of up.
*An armbar with the left arm wrapped around their arm, and my right hand in a wristlock.*  In this case, the motion of my left arm would be completely different (an up-and-around scoop instead of an out-to-in snap), and again my right hand would be palm up instead of palm out.
So, even in a grappling scenario, I'm having trouble with when you would make the a motion similar to the double-knife-hand block and/or end up in a similar position to the double-knife-hand.

And yes, I am shocked.  I am shocked that a motion that is called a block isn't expected to sometimes be a block.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 5, 2018)

The conversation so far is:
You - what is this hand position for during the block.
Everyone else - nothing much when you block.
You - I don't want it to be that, I want a different answer, I want all TKD technique to be based on my preference for following labels. 

Wishing things were simpler won't change them. 

The history of Taekwondo is what it is, the labels are what they are and the developmental structure that starts with simple gross motor movement before layering more skillful techniques over those gross movements (enabling multiple levels of training in each repetition) is what you've got.

You can try to see the elegance in a system that enables you to study a few movements  and find deep wells of application or you can try and do your own thing based on level 1.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 5, 2018)

BTW Skribs,  I'd love to hear your reason for hip side chambers in punching?

I know you said it makes me the punch stronger, but how exactly. And if it's so effective why do we only see it done by junior level TKD and karate students?


----------



## wab25 (Jul 5, 2018)

skribs said:


> We're going around in circles avoiding the question. In a striking scenario, meaning use of blocks and strikes (which is what typically show up in most of the Taekwondo forms):
> 
> Why is it an advantage to have your hand tight against your solar plexus, palm up?
> Why does this only show up with outward blocks and low blocks? I've never seen this hand position show up with an inward block or high block.


Alright... you have asked enough... we can let the secret out. (this is not usually taught until a person reaches sandan) 
When you hold the other hand in that position, for outward and low blocks, it helps create a better path for your chi to flow, giving the blocking hand much more power. Yeah, the chi thing is over rated. The real reason is that it sets your shoulders in the correct relationship to your rib cage, to allow your muscles more freedom of movement which results in more power. But, this is only true for outward and low blocks.

(now at yodan, we will learn about the exact placement of the tip of your thumb on the non-blocking hand. If it is touching the right meridian along your index finger, it will multiply the power of the block... however, this is dependent on the arm and hand being in the correct alignment, which is why that alignment is taught from white belt on up.)

I am reminded of a guy that was wondering around the desert until he found a drinking fountain. The lever to make the water flow, was broken off and the water was continuously flowing. However, the poor guy could not drink. You see, in order to drink the water, you have to push the lever. Since the lever is gone, how can you drink? The lever says  "Press for water" for a reason.



skribs said:


> And yes, I am shocked. I am shocked that a motion that is called a block isn't expected to sometimes be a block.


No one here ever said it was not sometimes a block. It absolutely is sometimes a block. But, only sometimes. Much more often, it is something else. In the few times that it is a block, it doesn't matter where your other hand is. But, for all the other times, when it is not a block, that other hand matters a lot more.



skribs said:


> We're going around in circles avoiding the question.


No, actually, the question has been answered directly many times. The answer is just not being accepted. We are going through quite a few exaggerated circles to get around accepting those answers.



skribs said:


> This honestly shocks me that the question is so shocking *for so many people.*


Does this tell you anything? Either you have learned something that none of these "so many people have," or there is something else you should be picking up here. Are any of these people, martial artists who you respect as martial artists?


----------



## Danny T (Jul 5, 2018)

DaveB said:


> All great points, but he wants to know about the block, only the block, nothing but the block.


The term 'block' is a misnomer.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 5, 2018)

Danny T said:


> The term 'block' is a misnomer.


Lol, maybe so, but he wants to know anyway.


----------



## skribs (Jul 6, 2018)

DaveB said:


> BTW Skribs,  I'd love to hear your reason for hip side chambers in punching?
> 
> I know you said it makes me the punch stronger, but how exactly. And if it's so effective why do we only see it done by junior level TKD and karate students?



Because it's an actual chamber position instead of a guard position, which gives it more room to accelerate towards the target.  This is why it's very difficult to generate power in a 1 inch punch, and why a rifle with a 14.5" barrel will shoot at a lower velocity than a rifle with a 22" barrel.  

Why don't we see it used at higher levels in Taekwondo?  Probably because the guard position becomes preferred.  As I stated in my example, I typically have a guard up, it's only during combinations that I chamber at my side, and at the end of a combo my guard comes back up.  Similarly, most if I am going back and forth between punches and kicks, I will keep my guard up, and a lot of our advanced defense drills involve a combination of grappling and striking, in which case your hands are too busy to return to the hip chamber.  But there are times still that the hand comes to side.

In WTF style Taekwondo, punches don't really score points anyway, so protecting your head from a 3- or 4-pointer is a lot better than getting 1 point with a punch.

So I think it's not that the hip chamber is bad or inferior.  It's just that it's a tool you have.  When you have more tools to work with, then each tool becomes less used.  When I bought a hacksaw, I didn't use my utility knife as much.  When I got a rubber mallet, I didn't use my hammer (with a cloth) as much.  So as you learn how to things from a guarded position, and how to flow between kicks and punches, and engage in rules where punches aren't of much value, then the chamber can fall by the wayside.

The other aspect is simply if people don't see the value in it, they might not think it's worthwhile and ignore it.

I can't speak for why it doesn't show up much in karate.  But my experience with Taekwondo is that it hasn't been phased out at higher belts, it's just that higher belts have less situations in which that is the best tool to use.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 6, 2018)

skribs said:


> Because it's an actual chamber position instead of a guard position, which gives it more room to accelerate towards the target.  This is why it's very difficult to generate power in a 1 inch punch, and why a rifle with a 14.5" barrel will shoot at a lower velocity than a rifle with a 22" barrel.
> 
> Why don't we see it used at higher levels in Taekwondo?  Probably because the guard position becomes preferred.  As I stated in my example, I typically have a guard up, it's only during combinations that I chamber at my side, and at the end of a combo my guard comes back up.  Similarly, most if I am going back and forth between punches and kicks, I will keep my guard up, and a lot of our advanced defense drills involve a combination of grappling and striking, in which case your hands are too busy to return to the hip chamber.



But how can this be??? 

A TKD punch has a hip chamber, how can you have "advanced" techniques and drills that don't use the hip chamber when clearly TKD punches have a hip chamber?? 

Punching without a hip chamber is less powerful so surely you should just use the hip chamber instead of the guard? 
If you don't then you're not making use of part of the established technique, as if at advanced level you find some elements of beginner technique to be unnecessary...?


----------



## skribs (Jul 6, 2018)

DaveB said:


> But how can this be???
> 
> A TKD punch has a hip chamber, how can you have "advanced" techniques and drills that don't use the hip chamber when clearly TKD punches have a hip chamber??
> 
> ...



I realize you're trying to throw my logic against me.  But it's not working, because the questions you're asking are different.  I'm asking how the solar plexus chamber CAN be used practically.

You are asking why, if there is a practical use of the hip chamber, why it's not the only chamber ever used.

Two completely different questions.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 7, 2018)

skribs said:


> I realize you're trying to throw my logic against me.  But it's not working, because the questions you're asking are different.  I'm asking how the solar plexus chamber CAN be used practically.
> 
> You are asking why, if there is a practical use of the hip chamber, why it's not the only chamber ever used.
> 
> Two completely different questions.


Actually it was a more general satire covering what you said but also the fact that technique and the understanding thereof change as you progress and showing you that it's pretty common for tactical concerns to outweigh power generation for technique. 

Though you've mischaracterised your argument. You've been given practical uses for this posture, but you want uses that pertain to blocking and there just aren't any because you only need one hand to block and because older martial arts are not actually split into discreet categories like blocking and grappling. Fighting is fighting and though application is often layered into levels for teaching, application is where it all blends together because fighting is fluid.

Even if my post were a one to one comparison you would just say something like "yes I would drink the bleach," because your aim is to confirm your own incorrect view rather than learn and so you try and poke holes in everything that's not what you want to hear.

You proved that when your argument about using the horizontal strike was shown up for the shallow, incomplete and tactically unsound guesswork that it was, and you just breezed on by to the next excuse to not listen.

Form is to train the body in a bunch of good ideas and useful skills. Labels make it easier to get everyone doing the same thing. Fighting (application) is a different ballgame.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Jul 8, 2018)

DaveB said:


> ............................it's pretty common for tactical concerns to outweigh power generation for technique.
> 
> .



I think the above statement is extremely important. Having the elbow down / protecting the ribs in any number of "Block" applications is important.   Had an instructor who would smack us hard in the ribs if we did not have the elbow down.   Terrific reminder of why it needed to be there.


----------

