# The Overlooked, Neglected, Criticised Gedan Barai



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 28, 2015)

One of the 'basics' of many karate styles is the down-block / punch combination often known as *'gedan barai, seiken tsuki'*.  It is taught right away to beginners in many dojos.

Typically, it involves the karateka crossing their own centerline with the blocking hand, then sweeping down in a blocking (or sweeping) motion, ending up somewhere in the area of the knee on the same side as the arm doing the blocking.  This is then withdrawn to the hip as the other arm throws a straight punch to the opponent's body.

The first question that beginners ask is what it is for.  It is usually taught in the beginning as a defense against a kick, followed by a counter-attack (the punch).

Some beginners (and a lot of outsiders) criticize this application and point out:

1) They are not very likely to be kicked by an assailant in the street.
2) Even if they were, they would not be likely to try to block a kick like that.
3) Crossing center takes time; by the time you draw your arm back to 'cross center', the kick has been delivered.

These comments have validity.  However, the lack of a fuller understanding of the technique can then prevent the student from bothering to get a handle on the technique to the point of being able to apply it.

Consider, first of all, that most of the beginner's basic movements have reasons to practice them that go well beyond the technique itself.  In fact, most of the 'upper body' basics get the beginner's body to move in ways that are useful.  For gedan barai, this would include hip rotation.  It is important to develop power through turning the body, and for gedan barai to be effective, much more than muscle power is required.

Please note that moving the arm from the chest (like one is thumping one's chest in a salute) to the opposite knee area does not involve major muscle groups.  In other words, it's not a powerful move if delivered by muscle power alone.  One can of course build strength specifically to perform this motion, but one can gain much more speed and power in the movement when the hips are involved.  *This is, I believe, one of the 'secrets' of gedan barai.  One of the first explorations of power-generation via the hips.*

Also, consider that the technique does not start when the block or sweep is delivered to the incoming kick.  it starts when the karateka begins to move.  Crossing the centerline of one's own body gives ample opportunity to intercept all manner of incoming attacks.  One example would be a straight punch.  Although the 'middle body block' is typically prescribed for such attacks, the 'low body block' works just as well, and gives different opportunities when applied.  The punch comes in, the karateka intercepts with his forearm as he crosses his centerline, then reverses in a circular motion to complete the 'down block' (or sweep), which tosses the attacker's arm down and out away from the karateka's body.  Because it is applied with force, using the hips, this can turn an attacker's body, causing unbalance and opening them up to the follow-on strike to the body (seiken tsuki).

That's one example.  Same technique, but no kick was involved.  Works just the same regardless.  Why would it be preferred to a simple middle-body block?  Well, it isn't always, but it can be useful when a smooth intercept is desired to prevent the attacker from realizing instantly that their incoming punch had been intercepted and then firing their other fist as an instant follow-up.  A good sweeping motion can deflect the punch, turn the body, and open them up for your punch before their brains can realize that their punch was deflected away, because there is very little impact to them until they get punched at the end of the technique.

As well, the 'barai' can be an armbar, applied at shoulder level but then brought to the traditional low-block position using the exact same hip movement to generate power.  The straight punch follow-up would then be turned into a face-punch delivered a tad low...where the opponent's face is now...

The 'barai' can be a release for a collar-grab as well; again, the movements are the same.  Cross center line, minor circular motion, then twist the body and apply the 'low block', which in this case would not block a kick, but take a properly-twisted hand/wrist to knee level, where again a follow-up punch could be applied.

In summary, it is not the basic notion of a 'low block, punch' combination that makes gedan barai so useful.  It is the basic movements that are developed when practicing this technique, which open up a world of techniques beyond the simple ones I've described here.  The body learns to smoothly intercept by crossing over (seen again and again in many Okinawan kata in various sorts), to apply power from the hips to turn the opponent, open him to counter attack, and off-balance him.  It is the movement that is most important, because it builds the power, speed, balance, and confidence necessary to apply this technique in a wide variety of ways.

*Gedan Barai is much more than a simple low-block, punch.  It is a mistake to dismiss it as a useless defense against an attack one would never see 'in the street'.*


----------



## Paul_D (Dec 7, 2015)

I train once a year with John Burke Sensei as he usually finds his way to my part of the world once a year.  He teaches 100 different uses for Gedan Barai, none of them are blocks.

If you need to step forward to "block" then standing still will mean the attack falls short and you didn't need to block it anyway.  If you need to step back to "block" then the simple act of stepping back takes you out of range of begin hit so again there is no need to block.  If anyone is teaching "blocks" in karate then they clearly don't understand the very art they claim to teach.  Which is such as shame, as karate is, imo, the most effective art for civilian self defence (if you know how to interpret the movements that is).


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 7, 2015)

Paul_D said:


> I train once a year with John Burke Sensei as he usually finds his way to my part of the world once a year.  He teaches 100 different uses for Gedan Barai, none of them are blocks.
> 
> If you need to step forward to "block" then standing still will mean the attack falls short and you didn't need to block it anyway.  If you need to step back to "block" then the simple act of stepping back takes you out of range of begin hit so again there is no need to block.  If anyone is teaching "blocks" in karate then they clearly don't understand the very art they claim to teach.  Which is such as shame, as karate is, imo, the most effective art for civilian self defence (if you know how to interpret the movements that is).



Well, yes and no.  Granted that in your definition, stepping in or back to perform the block means you could probably avoid needing to block, I will also say that there are plenty of valid uses for a block, including redirection of the opponent's body, trapping the incoming arm, setting up the counter-attack you wish to use, etc, etc.  I understand what you are saying, but I think sometimes a good block and counterpunch are quite effective and worth doing.  Depends on the situation, depends on the level of expertise, depends on what you want to do.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Dec 7, 2015)

Paul_D said:


> I train once a year with John Burke Sensei as he usually finds his way to my part of the world once a year.  He teaches 100 different uses for Gedan Barai, none of them are blocks.
> 
> If you need to step forward to "block" then standing still will mean the attack falls short and you didn't need to block it anyway.  If you need to step back to "block" then the simple act of stepping back takes you out of range of begin hit so again there is no need to block.  If anyone is teaching "blocks" in karate then they clearly don't understand the very art they claim to teach.  Which is such as shame, as karate is, imo, the most effective art for civilian self defence (if you know how to interpret the movements that is).


You shouldn't make any motion, or step, to block. Your motion is about strategery . and blocks help.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Dec 7, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Some beginners (and a lot of outsiders) criticize this application and point out:
> 
> 1) They are not very likely to be kicked by an assailant in the street.
> 2) Even if they were, they would not be likely to try to block a kick like that.
> 3) Crossing center takes time; by the time you draw your arm back to 'cross center', the kick has been delivered.


1) Was.
2) Did.
3) Worked.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 14, 2015)

Paul_D said:


> If you need to step forward to "block" then standing still will mean the attack falls short and you didn't need to block it anyway.  If you need to step back to "block" then the simple act of stepping back takes you out of range of begin hit so again there is no need to block.  If anyone is teaching "blocks" in karate then they clearly don't understand the very art they claim to teach.  Which is such as shame, as karate is, imo, the most effective art for civilian self defence (if you know how to interpret the movements that is).



That argument is based purely in theory and reminds me of a saying about glass houses and stones.

It is true for a nice tidy oizuki aimed at a standing karateka, from far enough that only the fist penetrates. It is not true for an opponent standing at argument range who is trying to punch through you.

A blow that penetrates or that comes from someone stepping into your space with his body will require both movement and deflection (or at least some level of cover) to ensure that it doesn't land.

While I fall firmly on the side of deeper application study, the key to making any method work is to understand the environment you wish to use it in. Whether that is ring fighting or street fighting or shobu ippon kumite, once you understand it you can effectively apply any technique to it (provided you understand the technique).

All the applications of low block you can muster won't save you from the guy who can time fast simple punches and block or avoid the same.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 14, 2015)

Paul_D said:


> I train once a year with John Burke Sensei as he usually finds his way to my part of the world once a year.  He teaches 100 different uses for Gedan Barai, none of them are blocks.



Why? What percentage have you routinely deployed in free sparring? How many can you even remember? Of those how many fit with the surrounding kata techniques? 

Unlimited application prior to mastery of the fighting method is just an invitation to confusion. A way to junk up the mind and the most common excuse for not actually training any of it. Even if you do you can't possibly do so with any depth which means you never master any skills.

We've replaced kata collecting with set piece collecting. All the while deluding ourselves that we are so much better than the poor fools using basic blocks.

Personally I'll take five simple repeatable reliable techniques that I can understand inside 
out and expand upon, to 100 techniques per movement any day.


----------



## Paul_D (Dec 14, 2015)

DaveB said:


> All the applications of low block you can muster won't save you from the guy who can time fast simple punches and block or avoid the same.


If you assume these applications are re-active, and not pre-emptive, then yes.  But common sense, Okinanwan Karate Masters and modern SP experts all advocate pre-emption. 




DaveB said:


> A blow ..... that comes from someone stepping into your space with his body


People only attack with a stepping and punch in the dojo.  Google "Habitual Acts of Violence".

Your entire post could have been written by me, 25 years ago.  Since then the internet has givne me assess to Karate-ka with experience of real world violence, common sense, and the historical evidence to show everything I thought I "knew" and "understood" was complete nonsense and had in fact been taught to me by instructors who did not understand the very art they claimed to teach, and had no understanding of the realities of civilian violence.

I wish you well in your martial journey, you have a long way to go.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 14, 2015)

And I could have written your post 15 years ago when I first discovered that the information I was searching for was being developed by others.

You may have grown from the dogma of the old school, but your approach is still based on dogma. I don't need to Google HAPV because I've been studying this aspect of karate since before Pat McCarthy coined the term. And being vulnerable to a good puncher is a reality whether you hit first or not.

By trying to fit me into such a black and white view of martial arts you are missing my message.

I am saying that quality is what matters, not quantity. Yes there is much to learn from kata. I agree that there is more to application than good old Three K block punch and kick and I agree that blocks having other uses is part of that. I even agree that preemption can be a very important part of self defense, but...

You take it too far. There is no always. There is no never. Theory is great but real life requires flexibility. If I had pre-emptied every time I was in danger while policing I would have started many many more fights than I ever had. And people don't usually punch standing still. They commit their body weight and come forward because that is how you hit hard. It's why so many fights go to the ground: one party is usually charging into the other and balance goes.

So you see, calling out folks for a lack of understanding doesn't mean much if all you have to offer is a different brand of dojo experience.

What matters in terms of technique is what you can take into a conflict and use reliably. That requires training, repetition and variation at progressively increasing levels of resistance. That takes time. Time you can't put in if you are trying to stretch the first move of the first kata into 100 separate techniques. I have yet to meet a karateka who spouts infinite application theory and actually trains application to any depth.

Furthermore you make kata pointless if you try to make them into all things for all men. The sequences within kata have a point. The collection of those sequences into a single form has a reason behind it. You are not just stringing moves together as you like. You are learning a particular lesson/method of fighting. If the applications don't follow the theme of the kata; if they don't follow the previous movement and lead into the next then they don't belong. Those themes teach you how to land blows, how to enter and escape holds: how to fight.

Collecting techniques doesn't develop karateka, it hinders them.

As for having a long way to go, that is undoubtedly true. But I make my comments as one who thought as you think but who grew beyond that place. I offer my comments so that you and others might do the same.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 14, 2015)

DaveB said:


> Personally I'll take five simple repeatable reliable techniques that I can understand inside
> out and expand upon, to 100 techniques per movement any day.



Many people prefer the kick, block, punch, basic methods and there is no reason not to - they work and work well.  And someone who is well versed and heavily trained in them is typically a very dangerous person.  No doubt about it, and much respect to them.  I have often mentioned _"Jack of all trades, master of none,"_ so I know where you are coming from.

However, I find it greatly instructive to have my eyes opened about other potential uses of the same basic exercises.  We are not talking about mastering a new set of moves, but rather in finding new application for an established set of movements.  For many of the potential applications of _'gedan barai'_, I don't have to change the technique at all; it is simply applied to a different attack.  For others, the modification is quite minimal and within my capabilities.  Some, I have not mastered and may never do so; but it remains a library for me to refer to as I learn and grow as a martial artist.

Once the body is trained, for example, in applying the '_barai_' movement with the hips and arms, applying them to an incoming punch or kick should not be much of a difference.

As to why a person would want to do that, it comes down to one's desire to more deeply understand the underlying principles of karate (in my case).


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 14, 2015)

DaveB said:


> Collecting techniques doesn't develop karateka, it hinders them.



Collecting techniques without context can certainly hinder, and adding techniques that do not build upon a firm foundation are not generally helpful, I've found.  But adding techniques based on a firm grasp of the underlying principles seems helpful to me, and does not hinder me that I am aware of.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 14, 2015)

Bill you seem to have missed the bulk of my posts.

It was not "why learn various applications for a movement?", it was "why learn 100 variations to a single movement when doing so reduces the time you have to develop effective useful skill with any of them?".

As I said I was on the application band wagon before I knew there was a band wagon. But there is a path beyond collecting techniques and stroking ones own ego over how much more advanced we are.

Off the top of my head there's about 7 standard applications I use for the gedan barai movement, probably more. They are so ingrained that I sometimes confuse people by using the term to mean entirely different things to the standard block. This is plenty but if I come across others that fit my needs I don't object to them, but that very rarely happens.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 14, 2015)

DaveB said:


> Bill you seem to have missed the bulk of my posts.
> 
> It was not "why learn various applications for a movement?", it was "why learn 100 variations to a single movement when doing so reduces the time you have to develop effective useful skill with any of them?".
> 
> As I said I was on the application band wagon before I knew there was a band wagon. But there is a path beyond collecting techniques and stroking ones own ego over how much more advanced we are.



Sorry if I missed your point.  I do agree that being a 'collector of applications' isn't the way to go.  Reminds me of the people who make a lifetime of taking as many seminars as they can, as if that alone could help them improve.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 15, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Typically, it involves the karateka crossing their own centerline with the blocking hand, then sweeping down in a blocking (or sweeping) motion, ending up somewhere in the area of the knee on the same side as the arm doing the blocking.  *This is then withdrawn to the hip as the other arm throws a straight punch to the opponent's body.*


I never agreed or understood why anyone would want to put their fist on their hip. I know it's a tradition, but I'd much rather have my fist guarding my jaw. That's how I've always trained, and it works for me.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 15, 2015)

Tames D said:


> I never agreed or understood why anyone would want to put their fist on their hip. I know it's a tradition, but I'd much rather have my fist guarding my jaw. That's how I've always trained, and it works for me.



It serves two purposes, 1. In training to help you align your body so that your hips power your punch, 2. In kata it's either representative of using maximum acceleration or that you are/have grabbed and pulled something (hikite in Japanese).

Part of the point of big movements and interpreting them from kata is to practice the maximum possible range of motion to get students to understand that your techniques have to be able to come from anywhere (starting from any point in the basic method).

Karate has no single official fighting guard so any and all guards are valid. The closest things are the shuto uke and morote uke postures, plus one or two Kata poses.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 15, 2015)

DaveB said:


> It serves two purposes, 1. In training to help you align your body so that your hips power your punch, 2. In kata it's either representative of using maximum acceleration or that you are/have grabbed and pulled something (hikite in Japanese).
> 
> Part of the point of big movements and interpreting them from kata is to practice the maximum possible range of motion to get students to understand that your techniques have to be able to come from anywhere (starting from any point in the basic method).
> 
> Karate has no single official fighting guard so any and all guards are valid. The closest things are the shuto uke and morote uke postures, plus one or two Kata poses.


No disrespect intended, but with my JKD background, if you had your fist on your hip I would have no problem executing a Straight Blast on you.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2015)

double post


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2015)

Tames D said:


> No disrespect intended, but with my JKD background, if you had your fist on your hip I would have no problem executing a Straight Blast on you.



You clearly missed my last post where I explained that the hand on hip is a training device not a fighting method.

But if it makes you feel better I'm sure you could beat me up too.

But in all fairness, traditional competition does insist on fighting from that posture. A bit like how boxing insists that you only hit with the front of the glove. Sport is sport.

What it means though is that traditionalist competitors.developed defence based on distance and evasion. Though he didn't fight with a hand on his hip (as the rules didn't require it), Lyoto Machida demonstrated that defensive method in the UFC. So maybe it would not be as easy as you think.

Taking a single element from a martial art without supporting context is not a useful means of drawing conclusions.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 16, 2015)

DaveB said:


> You clearly missed my last post where I explained that the hand on hip is a training device not a fighting method.



Quite a few people who do not train in TMA look at some of the basic exercises and training methods and decided that must be the way we fight, hands on hips, squared up against our opponents.  Hey, let 'em believe that if they wish.  People who mock what they do not understand can generally not be made to understand anyway; they lack the intellect for it.  Leave it be and move on is my advice.  I used to argue with such nonsense, but over time it reminded me of the old advice against wrestling with a pig.  You both get dirty, but the pig likes it.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2015)

It's fine. If everyone backed off the moment someone disagreed with them then nobody would ever discuss anything and we'd all sit smug and comfy believing we know it all.

I'm not accusing you or anyone in particular of this, Bill, but I feel people who dump their ideas on forums but won't stand and be challenged by those who disagree, are probably only posting to stroke their ego's as opposed to sharing information and learning from others. 

There's no rule saying that one motivation is better than another but I'd rather not be a part of someone else's verbal self loving.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 16, 2015)

DaveB said:


> It's fine. If everyone backed off the moment someone disagreed with them then nobody would ever discuss anything and we'd all sit smug and comfy believing we know it all.
> 
> I'm not accusing you or anyone in particular of this, Bill, but I feel people who dump their ideas on forums but won't stand and be challenged by those who disagree, are probably only posting to stroke their ego's as opposed to sharing information and learning from others.
> 
> There's no rule saying that one motivation is better than another but I'd rather not be a part of someone else's verbal self loving.



I get it.  I only recently 'came back' to MT and a couple other forums I used to frequent because I've adopted a new attitude, which is basically to stop feeding the trolls.  They want act the ***, welcome to my ignore list.  I can't let them suck me into their angry little worlds again.  And that's my problem, not theirs, when they manage to get me into that state.  I am on your side; but I just can't engage to the point of letting myself get angry anymore.  Not good for my health.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 18, 2015)

A few more thoughts about the hand on the hip, not directed to anyone in particular. 

The question and assumptions about its use were I feel raised because it is a common belief that everyone fights the same way. 

Indeed the MEANTIME-Is-Ultimate crowd dismiss as useless anything that doesn't look like the standard MMA fighter.

The thing is it all works if you know how to make it work. Lyoto Machida demonstrated sport Shotokan karate. I saw a kickboxer on a martial arts show consistently land a one handed cartwheel kick on a range of fighters. We all say the guy who leaped and bounced off the cage to perform a knockout flying round kick. I watched an MMA guy Judo throw the hell out of his opponent right after the commentator said Judo throws don't work in MMA...

So why are we so dogmatic about what is effective? 

I can't answer that, but I do know how to make most techniques work regardless of their orthodoxy.

When I was sparring at a kung fu class I found myself playing in trapping range and unable to get through my opponents defence. So when he punched rather than parry and counter, I hopped back out of range and drawing my hand to my hip, and shot back in with a full extention karate reverse punch that knocked the wind clean out of him.

So how come he could block all the short fast blows at trapping range, but a big slow full arm reverse punch slipped right through? 

It's because his mind was in trapping range as well as his body. The change in movement type threw him off. Had I pulled back into a boxing guard it wouldn't have worked because his perceptions were geared to attacks beginning in that zone. 
There are other factors about the specifics of the technique and the circumstances, but that is the biggest one. 

The only other thing we really have to note about using unorthodox techniques (or.any technique really), is that all of it comes down to ma-ai: the harmony of distance and timing. When I stepped back to avoid kung fu guy's punch I changed the distance which changed completely the technique list that was available to me. Assessing his response to my moving changes the list again, i.e. is he following, is he kicking, is he backing off..? But also where is he looking, where is his body.weight, is he aggressive generally or defensive?

All this affects the timing I have to slot in or set up a technique. All this is happening in your head too. The difference between a beginner and an experienced fighter is that in the experienced fighter it is a largely conscious thought process. Beginners think that it's honed/ingrained instinct because it happens too fast to be conscious. 

The techniques and methods that people think don't work are the ones they have not trained long enough to find the right distance-timing-perception gap width for. 

Conversely, if.you find a particular martial art difficult to fight, it's probably because their techniques have unfamiliar gap widths which makes reading and defending them harder (hence the whole wing chun vs boxing debate).

As ever the medicine for this ailment has a bad taste: keep training the thing you can't make work. Keep getting beat up by your nemesis style. Consciously analyse why it's not working instead of dismissing as useless and when you know,  work out how to set it up so it will work. 

You will be a much better martial artist for it.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 18, 2015)

DaveB said:


> ...The difference between a beginner and an experienced fighter is that in the experienced fighter it is a largely conscious thought process. Beginners think that it's honed/ingrained instinct because it happens too fast to be conscious.



Yes, but it can also become ingrained.  'Mushin' is the word in Japanese as I understand it, and the underlying principle is from the Bubishi, _"Techniques will occur in the absence of conscious thought."_



> The techniques and methods that people think don't work are the ones they have not trained long enough to find the right distance-timing-perception gap width for.



I'll go along with that.  In addition to timing and distance, some cannot make certain techniques work because their basic body mechanics are not correct to apply the technique.  For example, applying a wrist release properly as it pertains to the hand formation, but being unaware of the movement of the body to cause the wrist release to actually work and trying to 'muscle' it instead.  Trying to trap a punch using speed and power instead of body shifting (tai sabaki).



> Conversely, if.you find a particular martial art difficult to fight, it's probably because their techniques have unfamiliar gap widths which makes reading and defending them harder (hence the whole wing chun vs boxing debate).



Quite possibly.



> As ever the medicine for this ailment has a bad taste: keep training the thing you can't make work. Keep getting beat up by your nemesis style. Consciously analyse why it's not working instead of dismissing as useless and when you know,  work out how to set it up so it will work.
> 
> You will be a much better martial artist for it.



Agreed.  Also seek input from those who can do the technique.

One of the problems with communicating such information, however, is that often the person who can do the technique is not themselves aware of all the small things they do correctly in order for the technique to work.  So they pass on the gross motor skills they are aware of, and perhaps leave out the smaller ones that they have clearly mastered, but which they don't actually realize they are doing.  Unless the student has a trained eye, they may also miss the more subtle movements required to make a given technique work.  So it does very much help to have an instructor or partner who can really break it down and show all the tiny but oh-so-important bits of a given technique.

This, in my opinion, and off-topic, is also why I do not believe in video or book training.  It can demonstrate the gross movements; it cannot deliver instruction on the tiny adjustments needed for effective techniques other than the most basic block-punch-kick exercises.  In many cases, the adjustments required cannot be delivered without also being with the student; every person's body is different and moves harmoniously in slightly different ways.  We may all generate power in similar ways, but the turn of a hip or the bend of a knee might be different from person to person; only trained personal instruction can see and make the necessary adjustments for that.


----------



## seasoned (Dec 19, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Agreed.  Also seek input from those who can do the technique.
> 
> One of the problems with communicating such information, however, is that often the person who can do the technique is not themselves aware of all the *small things they do correctly in order for the technique to work.*  So they pass on the gross motor skills they are aware of, and perhaps *leave out the smaller ones that they have clearly mastered, but which they don't actually realize they are doing.*  Unless the student has a trained eye, they may also miss the more subtle movements required to make a given technique work.  So it does very much help to have an instructor or partner who can really break it down and show all the tiny but oh-so-important bits of a given technique.
> 
> This, in my opinion, and off-topic, is also why I do not believe in video or book training.  It can demonstrate the gross movements; it cannot deliver instruction on the* tiny adjustments* needed for effective techniques other than the most basic block-punch-kick exercises.  In many cases, the adjustments required cannot be delivered without also being with the student; every person's body is different and moves harmoniously in slightly different ways.  We may all generate power in similar ways, but the turn of a hip or the bend of a knee might be different from person to person; *only trained personal instruction can see and make the necessary adjustments for that*.



Bill,
(Your above statement hits on the elements of traditional karate that are so important to development).

Not to side tract the thread but to add to it.

When I first started my training there was a lot of solo training of techniques with the emphasis always on hand positioning in regard to punches and blocks. We would spend hours over weeks, months and into years lining up doing this type of solo training.
Then to my amazement in later years on trips back to Okinawa guess what, they were doing the same thing over there. The Okinawans were stickers for proper hand positioning.
It wasn't until later years after the punch, kick, block phase of training was ingrained in us that we learned that a block wasn't always a block and a punch wasn't always a punch. By then though with, muscle memory, we fully understood the application of technique pertaining to grabs, locks and traps and how important those slight unimportant little changes made all the difference.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 19, 2015)

seasoned said:


> Bill,
> (Your above statement hits on the elements of traditional karate that are so important to development).
> 
> Not to side tract the thread but to add to it.
> ...



Boom.

Take the 'dump' in Wansu. Oh man, does it get criticized. And yet, the first preparatory move, an open hand on the obi shaped as a kind of shovel, has tons of applications, none of which will work if you just 'place' the hand there. It has a very precise position and movement to get the hand there, and a purpose, which doesn't interfere with the 'obvious' bunkai, but which all the other more subtle applications depend upon. The stance, the hand, the body shifting move as the 'dump' is applied, it's all very subtle and very important. Same for the x block in Chinto. Tiny turn of one hand changes it from getting punched in the face to a killer setup for a sideways backfist from hell.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Dec 20, 2015)

Sorry, I missed this post until now.  And I never studied Karate, but TKD for a short while.



Tames D said:


> No disrespect intended, but with my JKD background, if you had your fist on your hip I would have no problem executing a Straight Blast on you.



Am I understanding you are referring to a hand on the hip and there is no other opponent hand?



DaveB said:


> You clearly missed my last post where *I explained that the hand on hip is a training device not a fighting method.*
> 
> But if it makes you feel better I'm sure you could beat me up too.
> 
> ...



I have learned that one fights as one trains.  If a move or technique has no application in actual fighting, I would question if it has value.  In my TKD training, I was taught the non-striking hand moved to the rear, with the hand at the hip, to increase the power of the strike; action/reaction.  That along with other things to increase the power of the strike, such as the rotation of the hips you mentioned. 

Also, I was taught that should my elbow strike an opponent behind me, I should immediately strike upwards with my fist with the idea of a strike to the opponent's face, hopefully up under the nose.  Then, depending, perhaps a strike to the opponent's pelvis/groin.  It is learned as an almost instinctive reaction; elbow contact, face strike.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 20, 2015)

DaveB said:


> You clearly missed my last post where I explained that the hand on hip is a training device not a fighting method.
> 
> But if it makes you feel better I'm sure you could beat me up too.
> 
> ...


Please. I didn't mean to insult you. I just believe that we should train to fight. If we are not going to fight with out hands on out hip, Why would we train that way? And I don't think I could beat you up.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 20, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Quite a few people who do not train in TMA look at some of the basic exercises and training methods and decided that must be the way we fight, hands on hips, squared up against our opponents.  Hey, let 'em believe that if they wish.  People who mock what they do not understand can generally not be made to understand anyway; they lack the intellect for it.  Leave it be and move on is my advice.  I used to argue with such nonsense, but over time it reminded me of the old advice against wrestling with a pig.  You both get dirty, but the pig likes it.


Please, Bill. Stop. I'm not mocking and I don't lack intellect. And I'm not a pig. Stop with the insults. I just gave my opinion.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 21, 2015)

Tames D said:


> Please. I didn't mean to insult you. I just believe that we should train to fight. If we are not going to fight with out hands on out hip, Why would we train that way? And I don't think I could beat you up.



Your not going to start doing press ups in a bar fight either, does that mean you shouldn't do them in the dojo?

It is true that we fight how we train, but what do you think happens if you train to do two different things? You gain the flexibility to choose which to employ, like in the kung fu sparring example.

The first karate class I attended we spent roughly equal time training from a fighting guard with both hands in front and from the hand on belt position. It is a part of karate training, not the totality of it.

Training in traditional MA is a journey. It is a path of development that begins with learning how to move your body. You don't stop at that stage even though you may revisit those beginning exercises, you do so with a more advanced understanding of movement and so take different things from the training.

Understanding how to move correctly is not essential for learning to fight, but it is helpful and it makes some things easier as you learn more.

I think I've done a lot of explaining around this point now, from illustrating the place of the hip-fist kamae in training to giving examples of execution and application in free fighting. If you still don't get it, I suggest referencing the explanation that doesn't work for you and why. If nothing else the reread might reveal something you missed.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 22, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Quite a few people who do not train in TMA look at some of the basic exercises and training methods and decided that must be the way we fight, hands on hips, squared up against our opponents.  Hey, let 'em believe that if they wish.  People who mock what they do not understand can generally not be made to understand anyway; they lack the intellect for it.  Leave it be and move on is my advice.  I used to argue with such nonsense, but over time it reminded me of the old advice against wrestling with a pig.  You both get dirty, but the pig likes it.


I know you have  a new internet philosophy, but it would be nice if you responded to me regarding your rude post. I responded to you. Please respond to mine.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 22, 2015)

Tames D said:


> Please, Bill. Stop. I'm not mocking and I don't lack intellect. And I'm not a pig. Stop with the insults. I just gave my opinion.


Please take responsibility for your rude posts or leave this site. Respond to my posts please.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 22, 2015)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I get it.  I only recently 'came back' to MT and a couple other forums I used to frequent because I've adopted a new attitude, which is basically to stop feeding the trolls.  They want act the ***, welcome to my ignore list.  I can't let them suck me into their angry little worlds again.  And that's my problem, not theirs, when they manage to get me into that state.  I am on your side; but I just can't engage to the point of letting myself get angry anymore.  Not good for my health.


Why are you playing the troll roll? You were pretty rude to me. We didn't miss you. Maybe it's time to leave again.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 23, 2015)

Tames D said:


> I know you have  a new internet philosophy, but it would be nice if you responded to me regarding your rude post. I responded to you. Please respond to mine.



I apologize for my rudeness.  With regard to my statement, although I could and should have worded it better, I was not responding to you, nor did I mean you.  In fact, I had not read your comments, so I was unaware you had made them.

I said:

_Quite a few people who do not train in TMA look at some of the basic exercises and training methods and decided that must be the way we fight, hands on hips, squared up against our opponents. Hey, let 'em believe that if they wish. People who mock what they do not understand can generally not be made to understand anyway; they lack the intellect for it. Leave it be and move on is my advice. I used to argue with such nonsense, but over time it reminded me of the old advice against wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it.
_​You are not a pig, nor do I think of you as one.  My comment was far more general in nature; I was referring to the myriad of people whom I have encountered in the past who seem to think that traditional karate is ridiculous, based on what little they think they know of it.

For example, if one takes traditional style karate classes for a few months and then quits, one might well have the opinion that we fight squared up to our opponents, with our fists on our hips, etc, because that's how beginners train.  Nothing could be further from the truth, but I have personally experienced a great difficulty getting that point across to people who choose to hate on karate for whatever reason.  They seem to have made up their minds what karate is all about, they dislike it, and they bring up this false accusation whenever they can.  I do not waste my time arguing with such people anymore.  Since no one is going to change their mind about it, there is no point to having the discussion yet again.

I will say this one last time - I will not argue about it.  Traditional karate teaches basic exercises with the student standing in a face-front, squared-off position with fists on hips for some specific reasons.  Very quickly, the beginning student transitions to a more natural and defensive fighting position, with their fists in a guard position that is not at all unlike what is seen in boxing or any other fighting style.  We begin our training with fists on hips to teach a reference point to where the power is generated from in our style; that is all.  We do not fight like that.  End of discussion.

Peace on you this holiday season.  I sincerely apologize for any insult you took from my statements; I sincerely meant none.  But the fault is mine and I do apologize.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 23, 2015)

oftheherd1 said:


> .  In my TKD training, I was taught the non-striking hand moved to the rear, with the hand at the hip, to increase the power of the strike; action/reaction.  That along with other things to increase the power of the strike, such as the rotation of the hips you mentioned.
> 
> .



Ah now you see I was taught, in karate, that the non striking hand moving to the rear was a grab and pulling down your opponent/attacker to do something like a knee strike on them. For shorter, less strong people like myself it's a good 'surprise' technique, it works well. I've never punched from the hip in sparring or fighting.


----------



## BryceSPQR (Jan 13, 2016)

Just a note, after training a traditional gedan barai of blocking a kick at stomach level, I became very used to responding to a kick like that. When I made the transition to MMA I made the mistake of reaching for low kicks with a gedan barai style block. It was a habit, but I fixed eventually. I agree whole heartedly with the OP, it is an excellent teaching tool for body mechanics.

I believe downward blocks have tons of great real world applications. It all depends on if you practice it right! 

www.northernshotokan.com


----------

