# Blocks



## Mekosho (Apr 26, 2005)

We went over a little "densho" in class last night, and I want to share with you something my sensei told us and see if anyone else had ever heard of this. While it makes alot of since, It was still the first time I had ever heard it...
The topic was blocks...he stated that way back when, back when martial arts was a life skill, something learned for survival in daily life, there really was nothing deemed as a block...meaning that it was a different way of doing things and reasonings etc. that made the martial artist strike and destroy anything in its path to save ones neck...and even though something might block an incoming kick or punch, it was meant mainly as a strike to cause pain or injury to the opponent, and that in old text, there really is not even a term for block!
He also went on to state (and this is his opinion) that he feels the "blocks" came from the martial arts becoming sport in the west, and in our sports, there is always an offense and a defense.. you catch the ball, run at me, I tackle you and its my turn to try till someone makes a miscalculation and the other scores...much like sport karate, I punch you block, you punch etc...now before anyone jumps on the whole "thats not really how it is in competition" bandwagon, please understand, that was just a very simple description..


----------



## eyebeams (Apr 27, 2005)

In the ideal form of a technique, nothing you do should merely keep the conflict in a steady state. A block protects you but does not actually sieze the advantage in a fight.

 However, many techniques are less than ideal when you actually *use* them, so the advantage of the structure in receiving techniques is that they do protect you and teach you to protect yourself without weakening your position. So when you can't employ the technique to its fullest, it is a "block." Sometimes you make a mistake or the opponent is too skilled to be effectively struck or guided, but it still serves a purpose.

 That said, you must *train* receiving techniques as if they are techniques, not as theoretical techniques. That means you work the bag with "blocks," you try to use them proactively as well as in reaction and you treat them as  you woul a throw or punch.

 The core physical elements of defense are, however, in timing, posture and body movement. If you can get out of the way and your body and limbs are in the right place, there is little need for extra movement. Again, that's ideal, and often you need to put a technique out there to bridge to decisive action.


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 27, 2005)

> Kenpo is a combination of Ancient fighting techniques and modern Scientific Principles, an unending flow of motion, a Force which can overwhelm any attacker. Every move creates a specific reaction in your opponent. Every reaction leads you to your next move. Every strike is a block. Every block is a strike. Each move flows into the next. This Logical and Sequential flow of Action is the Essence of Kenpo. Kenpo can be the most lethal of the Martial Arts. To control the power of Kenpo you must first control yourself. Train your spirit as you train your body; developing inner strength, balance and harmony as you learn. A Master of Kenpo is more than an expert in Karate, he is a Martial Artist. He is a Master of himself.
> 
> -excerpted from The Perfect Weapon.


Mekosho,

I think you might be on to something when describing blocks and their application in "sport karate". However, in nearly every Kenpo school I've been in almost all of the instructors advocated the use of a block to injure your opponent in self-defense situations.

:idunno:


----------



## KenpoTex (Apr 27, 2005)

"blocks are strikes, strikes are blocks, and checks can be strikes..."  Gotta love kenpo, everything hurts 

I definately agree with the idea that hard blocks are weapons as opposed to mere defensive maneuvers (attack the attacking weapon).  If not getting hit is the sole purpose then I'd rather parry, or wedge/jam, and/or use angles.  Block can be very effective as strikes.  I'm sure we've all had bruises and sore-spots from catching a block in the wrong place.  I got tagged last night with a block to the outside of my forearm that completely stunned my arm. (and I have the goose-egg and bruise to prove it ).


----------



## lonekimono10 (Apr 27, 2005)

kenpotex said:
			
		

> "blocks are strikes, strikes are blocks, and checks can be strikes..."  Gotta love kenpo, everything hurts
> 
> I definately agree with the idea that hard blocks are weapons as opposed to mere defensive maneuvers (attack the attacking weapon). If not getting hit is the sole purpose then I'd rather parry, or wedge/jam, and/or use angles. Block can be very effective as strikes. I'm sure we've all had bruises and sore-spots from catching a block in the wrong place. I got tagged last night with a block to the outside of my forearm that completely stunned my arm. (and I have the goose-egg and bruise to prove it ).


  hey tex you beat me to the punch, took the words right out of my mouth


----------



## OrangeLeopard (Apr 27, 2005)

A good example of painful blocks is this one kid i spar with sometimes who does hungar. He conditions and sharpens his wrists, enough so one time my friends were fighitng him two on one with a shinais (kendo sticks) in freestyle long sword fighting and he actually blocked a full overhead blow with his wrist. When you throw a punch at hiim and he blocks it with his wrist, it feels like made a big mistake trying to hit him, and then theres his fists...


----------



## Simon Curran (Apr 27, 2005)

OrangeLeopard said:
			
		

> A good example of painful blocks is this one kid i spar with sometimes who does hungar. He conditions and sharpens his wrists, enough so one time my friends were fighitng him two on one with a shinais (kendo sticks) in freestyle long sword fighting and he actually blocked a full overhead blow with his wrist. When you throw a punch at hiim and he blocks it with his wrist, it feels like made a big mistake trying to hit him, and then theres his fists...


I was thinking something similar about my instructor, whose background is in Wing Tsun and Seven Star Mantis, blocking drills with him hurt...


----------



## rmcpeek (Apr 27, 2005)

In my early days, I was always accused by my Instructor of blocking too much with my face and not enough with my arms!!


----------



## The Kai (Apr 27, 2005)

There has always been blocks in Karate.  Hard Blocks to hurt, Soft Blocks to protect yourself.  If during the course of a fight or sparring match you attempt to strike and miss, do you bring your hands back to protect your face?  Thats a Block!  Do you use a Plam Check to Block your ribs.  The idea that blocking orginatedt with sport karate is kinda backward.  In fact, given the way the points game goes it could be arguing blocking has been underapprieciated!  


Of course there is the idea that old time karate men threw bombs at each other till one connected!


----------



## dsp921 (Apr 27, 2005)

I was taught that there are no blocks, everything is a strike.


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 27, 2005)

Mekosho said:
			
		

> We went over a little "densho" in class last night, and I want to share with you something my sensei told us and see if anyone else had ever heard of this. While it makes alot of since, It was still the first time I had ever heard it...
> The topic was blocks...he stated that way back when, back when martial arts was a life skill, something learned for survival in daily life, there really was nothing deemed as a block...meaning that it was a different way of doing things and reasonings etc. that made the martial artist strike and destroy anything in its path to save ones neck...and even though something might block an incoming kick or punch, it was meant mainly as a strike to cause pain or injury to the opponent, and that in old text, there really is not even a term for block!
> He also went on to state (and this is his opinion) that he feels the "blocks" came from the martial arts becoming sport in the west, and in our sports, there is always an offense and a defense.. you catch the ball, run at me, I tackle you and its my turn to try till someone makes a miscalculation and the other scores...much like sport karate, I punch you block, you punch etc...now before anyone jumps on the whole "thats not really how it is in competition" bandwagon, please understand, that was just a very simple description..


I would agree with most of this. For example, one could argue that a downward block against a hard kick is dangerous because one typically blocks with the smalll and weak ulnar bone and is not effective against very low kicks. A better application for the motion of a downward block would be a technique similar to Crossing Talon (right cross-wrist grab to our right wrist). In defense, we counter-grab his wrist and do a left hand knuckle rub onto the back of the opponent's elbow, hence the exact motion of what a downward block would like in the air. 

A vertical outward block could be used for the same attack as Lone Kimono (left hand grab and the opponent may be ready to punch you with his free right hand). In defense, we could pin the opponent's hand with our right hand, and then strike the top of his forearm with your left fist. As his head comes forward, immediately strike him under the jaw with your left fist. This would replicate the motion of a vertical outward block. 

Even in a technique like Shield and Mace, the "vertical outward block" is more of a guide than a block since you are borrowing the attacker's force. 


Jamie Seabrook 
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Benjp (Apr 27, 2005)

My instructor has said similar things. 

In Kosho, first comes the escape, then the avoid.  The avoidance motion keeps your opponent from striking you.  The "blocks" are for manipulation, or tactile reference and can be considered strikes.  Very different from the blocking techniques of traditional karate.


----------



## The Kai (Apr 27, 2005)

Yes Blocks can make a great counter to a grab, after all what's more staic then a grab.  Given the frozen nature of how most grabs happen in a dojo, you can make a lot of stuff work off a grab


----------



## The Kai (Apr 27, 2005)

Benjp said:
			
		

> My instructor has said similar things.
> 
> In Kosho, first comes the escape, then the avoid. The avoidance motion keeps your opponent from striking you. The "blocks" are for manipulation, or tactile reference and can be considered strikes. Very different from the blocking techniques of traditional karate.


When you work Waza exclusively, especially working against exaggrated motions, and haymakers-it becomes easier and easier to reset your frame of reference!  I guess that is why Grandmaster insists that we spar!!

Hard Block = Strike
Parries   =  Protecting
Obstructions = Protecting
Guard = Protecting
Evasions = protecting

So not all blocks are strikes.
In the course of a fight hard blocks are the most difficult to apply


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 27, 2005)

Just to throw a little something into the stone soup...

1. In American kenpo, upward blocks are deflecting blocks anyway. And if you look at the early teachniques against kicks (Intellectual Departure, Deflecting Hammer, Thrusting Salute), none of them use a "force on force," block. They all attack the leg at an angle, and if they strike, they go after meat, not bone...yes, even Thrusting Salute, in which, a) what really protects you from the kick is stepping back and a bit off-line, b) the primary block is the right inward downward block. And if you go past the basic techniques, I can't think of ANY that use a force-on-force downward block, what with legs being bigger than arms.

2. Inward blocks especially are a nice way of discouraging an attacker from going any further. For example, in Delayed Sword (assuming that you havent already run away or talked yourself out of it), blocking the living hell out of the grabbing arm is a lot better than having to kick them, let alone strike their neck...and regardless of what somebody's studied or how tough they are, that block (done well, anyway) will have an effect; it may not be enough of an effect, which is why there's more to the technique.


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 27, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Just to throw a little something into the stone soup...
> 
> 1. In American kenpo, upward blocks are deflecting blocks anyway. And if you look at the early teachniques against kicks (Intellectual Departure, Deflecting Hammer, Thrusting Salute), none of them use a "force on force," block. They all attack the leg at an angle, and if they strike, they go after meat, not bone...yes, even Thrusting Salute, in which, a) what really protects you from the kick is stepping back and a bit off-line, b) the primary block is the right inward downward block. And if you go past the basic techniques, I can't think of ANY that use a force-on-force downward block, what with legs being bigger than arms.


Nicely put Robert... very true of American Kenpo.

This runs in stark contrast to what I see a lot of traditional Japanese/Okinawan styles teaching and demonstrating.  

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## eyebeams (Apr 27, 2005)

Nevertheless, it's one thing to *talk* about receiving techniques, and another thing to train them as if they were part of a proactive set of tools. Even if they're not blocks, if you train them like blocks you will use them like blocks.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 27, 2005)

1. The system of American kenpo is so laid out as to teach, and then to deconstruct, the tradition-imposed (at least in Japanese and Okinawan arts) binary opposition artificially separating a block and a strike.

2. It is important to remember that there is a difference between the ideal phase with which nearly all beginners must begin kenpo, and the developed stages to which we are all trying to move. For example, one teaches a block as just a block so that a beginner can learn how to do a basic block, how to keep their hand closed when they hit something, how to connect their hand and their stance, etc. 

3. The block should be taught as a block. The "advanced," applications need to come later, which is what, "sophisticated basics," is all about.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 27, 2005)

I disagree, you never have to use the term block when teaching the motion. Block is an ethical term for striking. Even a full on round house kick to the head can be easily "checked" by understanding that stepping off the line of attack is every bit offensive as defensive that combined with multiple points of contact on the incoming leg [think hitting him with the whole truck] positions you for a bloody offensive. I agree that the whole blocking idea is new but I think it came about as a result pushing the defensive aspect to American parents over the years.
Sean


----------



## The Kai (Apr 27, 2005)

You are still Blocking the Roundhouse Kick, albeit somewhat passively (and calling it a check) with a more or less simultaneous strike (targeting the leg)


Sophistacted basics are the application of one basic technique to have two or more applicationa, or using the basics in a novel or unorthodox way
Block is still block regsrdless of the speed of trasition into your counter strike


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 27, 2005)

While I see your point, no.


----------



## distalero (Apr 27, 2005)

And, to raise that level of "soup" up just a bit, google for 'nightstick fracture'. Do a little light extrapolation and I would imagine that all will want to get to the sophisticated application pretty quick.


----------



## Mekosho (Apr 27, 2005)

"THE KAI" 

I totally agree with you on the fact there has always been a motion that served to block an incoming kick or punch in the martial arts, whether it was intinded to be a block or a strike to  cause pain to the arm or leg of the opponent, and just happened to block it as well is what I am questioning...
What my instructor is saying basically is that people trained and fought alot different than we do now days, and for a lot different reasons...while we may train to defend ourselves in the event of an attack that may never come, those people trained to stay alive at times...some were attacked daily!
Is kinda like the whole cornered dog scenario, he will come out fighting, he is gonna bite your arm, your leg, whatever is sent at him, and that will prob. cause you to recoil...was it a block?
Another thing I was curious about was that he (my instructor) said that there really was no word or kanji for the word block in old text...while there are many for strikes and kicks...


----------



## The Kai (Apr 28, 2005)

Different Block serve different purposes.  Some are there to save your hide, some are able to actually sting the attacking arm.  One of the reasons blocks don't work?  Attempting to check (block) a minor motion (jab) with a Major Motion (Hard Block)!  Many a martial artist has lost to a lesser skilled opponetent, when that opponant does'nt wind up and overly committ to each punch that is thrown.  Thinking that you can consistenetly and constantly cross the center and hit you attacker is a tad pollyannic, put some sparring gear on and give it a go!  

A dog's anatomy and fighting strategy are vasrly different from a human.  A dog's mouth serves as a "hand" for grasping and carrying objects, tactile information.  Dog's can't block by definition thier attacking simultaneously carries thier weapons (teeth) along with the vitals (Eye's, throat) to the targets.  As a Human we stand upright, have hands and don't lick our own nuts.  So our vital targets and attacking agents are seperate.  We have a choice A.) Protect your Vitals   B.) Attacker thier Vitals  C.) Try to simultaneously attack thier Vitals whilse keeping a protective check up to guard your vitals

People have always fought, and fought hard - it is not the times that change that context.


----------



## The Kai (Apr 28, 2005)

*agree that the whole blocking idea is new but I think it came about as a result pushing the defensive aspect to American parents over the years.
*

I think the idea of defensive blocking comes from a misunderstanding and mis application of the Shotokan Maxium "There is no first strike in Karate"


----------



## kenposikh (Apr 28, 2005)

In simple terms a block is also a strike.

Just look at defensive offence and offensive defence.

If someone is threatening you then you have the option of trying to react to their action and use a block which should still deliver pain or simply us a block strike for instance an inward block applied with correct structure and alignment can be devastating and can be used on an opponents head face nose, collar bone shoulder arm  etc. It's your intent that makes the difference.


----------



## The Kai (Apr 28, 2005)

When you spar with a "newbie", one of the hardest things is getting them to keep thier guard up, instead of chasing your arms all over the place trying hard to "block" you.  So in the course of sparring you Block hard when you can cover when you need to use slaps and parries for those inbetween times.  Now I think of blocks or blocking as that which prevents you from getting hit.  Parries are redirections not "hits"


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 28, 2005)

The Kai said:
			
		

> When you spar with a "newbie", one of the hardest things is getting them to keep thier guard up, instead of chasing your arms all over the place trying hard to "block" you.  So in the course of sparring you Block hard when you can cover when you need to use slaps and parries for those inbetween times.  Now I think of blocks or blocking as that which prevents you from getting hit.  Parries are redirections not "hits"


A strike + an angle change = a parry.
Sean


----------



## The Kai (Apr 28, 2005)

Do you Mean
Strike to the opponant's body
+
Evasion Footwork (tai saki)
= 
Evasion 

I would agree


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 28, 2005)

your evasion plus two objects clashing while traveling on different projectories will result in a change in both trajectories; hence, a parry.
Sean


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 29, 2005)

> Originally from Ed Parker's Encyclopedia Of Kenpo:
> 
> *Block(s) -* A defensive maneuver used to hinder or check an attack; all defensive moves employing physical contact to check, cushion, deflect, redirect, or stop an offensive move.
> 
> *Parry - *Redirecting a blow or kick by riding or going with the force.


A strike + an angle change does not = a parry.

I would say that Parries are a sub catagory of Blocking.


----------



## The Kai (Apr 29, 2005)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> your evasion plus two objects clashing while traveling on different projectories will result in a change in both trajectories; hence, a parry.
> Sean


A Strike to stop or change the opponant (Stop hit) is not a parry, in the series infinite insights parries are leg, or arm maneauvers.  You are not waiting on the arm (or leg) to come to you, you are stopping or changing the motion at the base


----------



## The Kai (Apr 29, 2005)

*"and that in old text, there really is not even a term for block*!"

Actually looking at a Japanese Language Guide, and I hope anyone knowledgeable in the language would jump on me 

_Cho = is a block, or a T-shaped section of paths_
Shi= To stop
Sesu=to cut
Oyoko=a cross bar
_Shu=to protect_
Bugai=obstruction
Setsu=Contact
_Boei=to defend_
Jukan=Traversing
Even Kyushu means crossing hands

So weather you mean block by manner of motion or the idea of defending I think that the idea is covered

Which is good because in my rationale mind I picture Sammy Samurai seeing his good friend Stan Samurai.  Just then Nick Ninja creeps out from behind a bush, swinging a sharp sword at unsuspecting head.  Knowing that Stan only has a fraction of a second to defend himself and save his life, Sammy opens his mouth and screams "HELLO".  Cuz of course there is no word meaning to block.


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Apr 29, 2005)

i think it would go against human nature not to block. let's say an inanimate object is flying at your face, you either a) get out of the way if you have enough time or b) put your hand up to block it from hitting your face. do you strike out at the inanimate object to hurt it and let it know never to hit your face again? its natural to protect.......so wouldnt it make sense to train your natural "blocking" reflex to make it natural? your body flinching is an involuntary reflexive block.


----------



## The Kai (Apr 29, 2005)

It's to bad the Japanese did not come up with a word for that natural, and one supposes common occurance!!


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Apr 29, 2005)

The Kai said:
			
		

> It's to bad the Japanese did not come up with a word for that natural, and one supposes common occurance!!


now i could be wrong.......but i think the term uke (which we use for the word block) means to receive. 
the japanese language use a bunch of other words to describe things that we think they have no word for.
its like some people think......well the japanese dont have a word for it, so they must pretend its not there or not happening.
i think i will leave this one for RRouuselot to answer.


----------



## The Kai (Apr 29, 2005)

Perhaps the fact that Karate teachers were a little more flexible in thier teaching of things that we consider set in stone, like Kata (how versions of Bassai Dai exist?). Perhaps you recieved the punch and blocked in the manner you chooose?

_Of course the odd thing is there seems to be plenty of terms to cover what we refer to as blocking, or defending.  _


----------



## Zoran (Apr 29, 2005)

The Kai said:
			
		

> *"and that in old text, there really is not even a term for block*!"
> 
> Actually looking at a Japanese Language Guide, and I hope anyone knowledgeable in the language would jump on me
> 
> ...


Hmm, Karate and Kenpo where originally an Okinawan system. I do believe that the people may have had their own language and dialect then. But I'm just guessing here.

Also, if you are empty handed, how would you block a sword as they usually had to defend against the samurai. So who knows, maybe they didn't have a term for block when it came to empty handed defense. 

Just a lot of guessing on my part.:idunno:


----------



## The Kai (Apr 29, 2005)

I think the problem is something gets misunderstood, and then passed on as a fact.  I tried to show that there are many japanese words meaning the same as "to block, or defend" (BTW my source was like a grade school primer).  Blocking is a natural and life extending idea,  Why would there be no word for it?  That would make the japanese language kind of incomplete, would it not?
Hell I even found a word for riposet(sp?).


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 29, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> i think it would go against human nature not to block. let's say an inanimate object is flying at your face, you either a) get out of the way if you have enough time or b) put your hand up to block it from hitting your face. do you strike out at the inanimate object to hurt it and let it know never to hit your face again? its natural to protect.......so wouldnt it make sense to train your natural "blocking" reflex to make it natural? your body flinching is an involuntary reflexive block.


If an object is "flying" it is no longer considered an inanimate object, but rather an "animated" object. I don't mean to be a nerd by splitting hairs, but you have a little bit of an oxymoron going on there...

:redeme:


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Apr 29, 2005)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> If an object is "flying" it is no longer considered an inanimate object, but rather an "animated" object. I don't mean to be a nerd by splitting hairs, but you have a little bit of an oxymoron going on there...
> 
> :redeme:


inanimate meaning not living.....that is the definition
1. *not living: *not alive

2. *not lively: *not active, energetic, or lively

3. *relating to nouns for nonliving things: *belonging to the category of nouns that refer to things and concepts considered to be without life


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 29, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> inanimate meaning not living.....that is the definition
> 1. *not living: *not alive
> 
> 2. *not lively: *not active, energetic, or lively
> ...


I follow... It's still an oxymoron though. :asian:


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Apr 30, 2005)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> I follow... It's still an oxymoron though. :asian:


no it isnt......animate means something that is alive....not moving. you dont understand the definition.....unless of course you just made that one up.


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 30, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> no it isnt......animate means something that is alive....not moving. you dont understand the definition.....unless of course you just made that one up.


Main Entry: *2an·i·mate*


Pronunciation: -"mAt
Function: _transitive verb_
Inflected Form(s): *-mat·ed*; *-mat·ing*
*1* *:* to give spirit and support to *: [size=-1]ENCOURAGE[/size]*
*2 a* *:* to give life to *b* *:* to give vigor and zest to
*3* *:* to move to action
*4 a* *:* to make or design in such a way as to create apparently spontaneous lifelike movement *b* *:* to produce in the form of an animated cartoon
*synonym* see [size=-1]QUICKEN[/size]

Not necessarily. I guess we're both right, and both wrong. He he he.


----------

