# Final Stance in Twirling Wings



## NTDeveloper (Apr 12, 2005)

Twirling Wings, according to my understanding, is executed as follows:

 Against a stiff arm left rear shoulder grab:

 1. Step your left foot behind your right foot into a twist stance.
 2. Unwind into a left forward bow facing 6:00 with a left outward block and a right horizontal elbow to the oppponents' ribs.
 3. Check with your right hand and deliver a left horizontal elbow to the opponents' ribs while you pivot into a right forward bow facing 9:00.

 Is this correct? I have seen descriptions of the technique where you end up in a horse stance facing 9:00 but I don't see how this could be correct (unless you reposition your feet, but I can't see why such repositioning would be necessary).

 Thanks for your comments.


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 12, 2005)

NTDeveloper said:
			
		

> Twirling Wings, according to my understanding, is executed as follows:
> 
> Against a stiff arm left rear shoulder grab:
> 
> ...


I teach the technique for a rear two hand choke and the opponent is pulling you back. You step back to a reverse bow by taking the angle of least resistance and you PIN the opponent's left hand so it doesn't run into your face as you are stepping back. I think the technique is potentially dangerous without the pin. 

About the stances, you unwind into a forward bow on the first elbow to the kidneys and/or ribs, and then shift your weight into a horse stance as you come back with the left elbow. 

Hope that helps.

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## parkerkarate (Apr 12, 2005)

NTDeveloper said:
			
		

> Twirling Wings, according to my understanding, is executed as follows:
> 
> Against a stiff arm left rear shoulder grab:
> 
> ...



I learned it exactly how you have described it. As for the horse stance, I have never seen it or heard of it taught like that.


----------



## KenpoTess (Apr 12, 2005)

Here's how we teach it 

1.  TWIRLING WINGS (Rear stiff two&#8209;hand neck or shoulder grab) 


1.  Standing naturally, tuck your chin (to help nullify the effects of a possible choke), an step back counterclockwise with your left foot (toward 5 o'clock) into a left rear twist stance. Simultaneously cock your right fist (palm up) on your right hip, and your left fist (palm facing down) across your waist and over your right fist. 

2.  Pivot counterclockwise into a left forward bow (facing 6 o'clock) while executing a left vertical outward block at or above the outside of your opponent's left elbow, and strike  simultaneously "with" a right inward horizontal elbow to the back of your opponent's left lower ribcage. This should cause your opponent to turn clockwise with his stomach to jutting forward.

3.  Pivot to your right (clockwise) into a left fighting horse (facing 9 o'clock) as you deliver a left inward horizontal elbow strike to the front of your opponent's left lower ribcage. Simultaneously have your right hand check high as it braces up and against your opponent's left arm. Be sure to have your left knee check, and/or buckle the inside of your opponent's left knee. (Your opponent should bend forward at the waist as he stumbles backward.)


NOTES ON: TWIRLING WINGS



1.  NAME: "Wings" is a symbolic term referring to the elbows. In this particular technique your elbows (wings) literally are twirling into your opponent's torso.  



2.  THEME: An opponent approaching from the rear is dangerous because the specific nature of his attack is unknown. However, once your opponent places both of his hands on you, you are able to FEEL the nature of his attack. FEELING your opponent's hands gives you a clue. At this point the unknown becomes semi-known. You may step to the rear, as well as outside of your opponent's weapons with greater confidence because the unknown becomes known during the transition. You know that you can create an Angle of Cancellation not only from your Point of View of the attack, but also from your opponent's Point of View of the attack. To achieve this, you must act swiftly and counter using the principle of "WITH" rather than "AND".



3.  THE ATTACK: The IDEAL PHASE of this technique begins with your opponent to the rear. It is a two-hand shoulder grab near your neck with your opponent's arms straight. His right hand grabs your right shoulder and his left hand grabs your left shoulder. Some additional WHAT IF factors are:



               a.  Your opponent pulls you toward him.

               b.  Your opponent pushes you away.

               c.  Your opponent chokes you with both of his hands.

               d.  Your opponent releases the grab of one of his hands.

               e.  His left foot is forward.

               f.  His right foot is forward.



4.  Study how the proper transition into a forward bow enhances your initial elbow strike.



5.  Consider how you may deal with the semi-unknown depth factors on your initial move.



6.  On your initial counter be sure to "block at or above the elbow".



7.  Your second strike must be coupled with an active check against his arm.



8.  You are moving into the semi-unknown. Therefore, the exact positioning of your legs in relationship to your opponent's legs will not always be known. Study how you can positionally check with your knees and prevent possible ANGLES OF ENTRY into your groin.


----------



## Michael Billings (Apr 12, 2005)

Good Tess ... now the extension and why we don't rotate on through to the forward bow?

  -Michael


----------



## NTDeveloper (Apr 12, 2005)

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> Good Tess ... now the extension and why we don't rotate on through to the forward bow?
> 
> -Michael


 I would be very interested in knowing the answer to this question; also, you can't pivot from a forward bow  facing 6:00 into a  horse stance facing 9:00 without repositiong the feet.  Maybe I'm missing something here...


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 13, 2005)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> I teach the technique for a rear two hand choke and the opponent is pulling you back. You step back to a reverse bow by taking the angle of least resistance and you PIN the opponent's left hand so it doesn't run into your face as you are stepping back. I think the technique is potentially dangerous without the pin.
> 
> About the stances, you unwind into a forward bow on the first elbow to the kidneys and/or ribs, and then shift your weight into a horse stance as you come back with the left elbow.
> 
> ...


Pin his hand with what? Why not become neutral instead of the horse?
Sean


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 13, 2005)

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> Good Tess ... now the extension and why we don't rotate on through to the forward bow?
> -Michael


 *BILLINGS!!!!!!!!!! ........ now shush up!

 :whip:
*


----------



## psi_radar (Apr 13, 2005)

Though I love this technique, the attack is highly unlikely--it's just too easy to get out of with a head neck/stance rotation. The attack, as I recalled it, was a stiff double-handed choke from the rear. With the attack you described, my conclusions are the same. Most people can naturally work against the forces here with instincts, unless: 

A) Someone was holding the defenders legs/have control of the body

B) There was another balance point for the person being attacked, like a wall

c) The attacked was on the ground (AH HAH!)

Conclusions: Try this technique on the ground or in different situations.Try a roll with the first elbow. The four primary fingers can choke you, but not if the rest of the body isn't controlled. Even the most inexperienced criminal can figure that one out. A headlock would be a more likely scenario. If they don't have that level of commitment, well, perhaps breaking their ribs isn't such a good idea.

To keep the thread on track, you settle into a neutral bow with the left elbow. Emphasis on settle. And tear and penetrate. Don' forget the check with the right. All that good stuff.


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 13, 2005)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> Pin his hand with what? Why not become neutral instead of the horse?
> Sean


Sean,

You pin his left hand with your right as he is choking you and pulling you back. It also causes a great deal of pain...LOL. You don't have to worry about the opponent's right arm because you are cancelling the opponent's width as you step back and clear the opponent's left arm off and deliver the right inward elbow strike while pivoting to the forward bow. 

Without the pin, you run the risk of the opponent's left arm running into your face. 


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Ray (Apr 13, 2005)

The initial Twirling Wings that I learned was nearly as described in Tess's notes (there was no initial cocking of the hands).  There was no pin in it.


----------



## Michael Billings (Apr 13, 2005)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> *BILLINGS!!!!!!!!!! ........ now shush up!
> 
> :whip:
> *


 Too much a question like you would ask *EH?* ... and proud of it!

 -Michael


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 13, 2005)

Ray said:
			
		

> The initial Twirling Wings that I learned was nearly as described in Tess's notes (there was no initial cocking of the hands). There was no pin in it.


That was the way I initially learned it as well. But after seeing Larry Tatum do it with the pin, and practicing that way on a partner, I would never consider doing it without the pin. The pin can snap the opponent's wrist, and like I mentioned earlier, prevents the opponent's left arm from running into your face. 

Cheers,

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 13, 2005)

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> Too much a question like you would ask *EH?* ... and proud of it!
> 
> -Michael


  hmmmm, well, I guess you are right... LOL:uhyeah:  (smart alek)!


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 13, 2005)

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> Too much a question like you would ask *EH?* ... and proud of it!
> 
> -Michael


Careful with the "eh's" Billings.....it sounds like you are making fun of us Canadians!!

BTW - Kenpo rocks, eh?

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 13, 2005)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> That was the way I initially learned it as well. But after seeing Larry Tatum do it with the pin, and practicing that way on a partner, I would never consider doing it without the pin. The pin can snap the opponent's wrist, and like I mentioned earlier, prevents the opponent's left arm from running into your face.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> ...


Is that the ideal phase of that tech in the LTKKA?


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 13, 2005)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> Is that the ideal phase of that tech in the LTKKA?


That's how Mr. Tatum does it on his Purple Belt DVD, so I think the answer is yes. Like I said, I find it so much more effective. 


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 13, 2005)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> That's how Mr. Tatum does it on his Purple Belt DVD, so I think the answer is yes. Like I said, I find it so much more effective.
> 
> 
> Jamie Seabrook
> www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


Sounds good to me, I suppose. If your hands are at your side to begin with, it could be construed as an "and", but so to would cocking at the hip. I'll play with that one.
Sean


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 13, 2005)

psi_radar said:
			
		

> Though I love this technique, the attack is highly  unlikely


 I beg to differ..... I think this is a very  likely technique.  As in any of the "scenarios" that we teach, it is a  possibility and has many functions.  How can anyone say that this  technique or that technique is unlikely, or won't happen, fact is I have  personally seen this attack on the street.  

 Keep in mind that this is  only one option in a *SYSTEM* of self defense variations.   It is in the  system for a reason, actually several reasons.  It all depends on where you are  on the "ladder of knowledge" as to what you learn from it.  To the beginner  coordination is a main factor as well as starting the bank of knowledge  variations and skill development.   As Mr. Parker taught us.... "What is truth  for one may not be truth for another"




			
				psi_radar said:
			
		

> --it's  just too easy to get out of with a head neck/stance rotation.


 While for you, that may be true, but something else may work  better for another.  We just don't know what will work for each different  individual in any given circumstance so, in the beginning so we create these  *BASE *or standardized "Point of Reference" techniques.  See it has already  served one of it's functions...... we are discussing and studying  it!



			
				psi_radar said:
			
		

> The attack, as I recalled it, was a stiff  double-handed choke from the rear. With the attack you described, my conclusions  are the same. Most people can naturally work against the forces here with  instincts, unless:
> 
> A) Someone was holding the defenders legs/have  control of the body
> 
> ...


 Wow, my goodness, you have brought up a lot of good  points........ *so* ..... *then*...... where do we start at to  learn to deal with all these different  points?




			
				psi_radar said:
			
		

> Conclusions: Try this technique on the  ground or in different situations.Try a roll with the first elbow. The four  primary fingers can choke you, but not if the rest of the body isn't controlled.  Even the most inexperienced criminal can figure that one out. A headlock would  be a more likely scenario. If they don't have that level of commitment, well,  perhaps breaking their ribs isn't such a good idea.
> 
> To keep the thread on  track, you settle into a neutral bow with the left elbow. Emphasis on settle.  And tear and penetrate. Don' forget the check with the right. All that good  stuff.


 Again, a lot of good points to study, ponder  and to *TRY*, particularly in the _*"what if"*_ phase  which follows the ideal phase or initial stage of learning any particular  technique.

 :asian:


----------



## Michael Billings (Apr 13, 2005)

The pinning check is a "What If" when I teach it (especially since I love Contact Manipulations). You can insert a shoulder lift (shrug), on the side you will be executing the first move with also. It pretty much restricts the amount of pressure the opponent can apply, and it prevents their letting go and punching you in the face as you pivot ... as does the pinning check Mr. Tatum has as his Ideal.

  -Michael


----------



## psi_radar (Apr 13, 2005)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> I beg to differ..... I think this is a very  likely technique.  As in any of the "scenarios" that we teach, it is a  possibility and has many functions.  How can anyone say that this  technique or that technique is unlikely, or won't happen, fact is I have  personally seen this attack on the street.



The technique I like, the attack in the ideal phase is what I question. All I can go with is my own experience and logic. I haven't and just don't see why it would be used as an attack. Since it's an asphyxiation attack, it would require a fair amount of time to work, so there's lots of time to escape--which wouldn't be difficult if the defender has full mobility--it's the full body against eight fingers. The attacker gives up all his weapons. It doesn't work well as a restraint either. The thumbs from the front, a la Blinding Sacrifice, I have seen and can understand, since the thumbs can provide more pressure on a smaller surface area on a better target between the clavicles.  Putting myself in a criminal's shoes, I'd have to ask myself why not a blow to any number of targets on the back or back of the head instead, or a headlock? 

Maybe I just don't have the right perspective. Would you mind explaining how you would or have seen this attack happening?



			
				Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Keep in mind that this is  only one option in a *SYSTEM* of self defense variations.   It is in the  system for a reason, actually several reasons.  It all depends on where you are  on the "ladder of knowledge" as to what you learn from it.  To the beginner  coordination is a main factor as well as starting the bank of knowledge  variations and skill development.   As Mr. Parker taught us.... "What is truth  for one may not be truth for another"



I don't discount the ideal technique as a viable self-defense option--or as a lesson in movement. It's also quite fun. But I see it coming into practical use in the what-if. I'm not saying it shouldn't be trained as ideal first. I think it should.




			
				Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> While for you, that may be true, but something else may work  better for another.  We just don't know what will work for each different  individual in any given circumstance so, in the beginning so we create these  *BASE *or standardized "Point of Reference" techniques.  See it has already  served one of it's functions...... we are discussing and studying  it!



 True enough! 

_Originally Posted by psi_radar
The attack, as I recalled it, was a stiff double-handed choke from the rear. With the attack you described, my conclusions are the same. Most people can naturally work against the forces here with instincts, unless: 

A) Someone was holding the defenders legs/have control of the body

B) There was another balance point for the person being attacked, like a wall

C) The attacked was on the ground (AH HAH!)_


			
				Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Wow, my goodness, you have brought up a lot of good  points........ *so* ..... *then*...... where do we start at to  learn to deal with all these different  points?




I'm not sure if you're talking about a temporal point in training, or which scenario to address first. As for when in training, I think anytime after learning the base technique is fine. And both the ideal and the what if's can be revisited later and perspectives may change. Though you and others _edit: may_ disagree, I think there is benefit from studying what ifs early in, since it stimulates thought about all ranges of the technique and the art in a more macro sense. That, for me, works. It may not work for others.

As for my points, I can provide a starting point. Simply put, in each of those scenarios the movement of the attacked is restricted, and therefore the choke is much more likely to be successful and therefore, attempted.




			
				Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Again, a lot of good points to study, ponder  and to *TRY*, particularly in the _*"what if"*_ phase  which follows the ideal phase or initial stage of learning any particular  technique.
> 
> 
> :asian:



Thanks! That means a lot coming from you. :asian:


----------



## Doc (Apr 14, 2005)

May I suggest that a "stiff-arm choke" from the rear in itself as an attack is not possible. You may perform one of the actions or the other but not both simultaneously. If you stiffen your arms, strength will leave the hand and fingers. If you apply strength to the hands and fingers, the arms will bend. This anatomical fact may indicate a re-thinking of the technique in its entirety.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 14, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> May I suggest that a "stiff-arm choke" from the rear in itself as an attack is not possible. You may perform one of the actions or the other but not both simultaneously. If you stiffen your arms, strength will leave the hand and fingers. If you apply strength to the hands and fingers, the arms will bend. This anatomical fact may indicate a re-thinking of the technique in its entirety.


I think the attack has and implied bending of the arms in the eventuality. As an attacker on the street, I would be reaching, cluching on to the kneck, and jercking him back to a possible blood choke with my arm; so, speed of action is crucial, which leads me to believe that inserting a pin might be risky, but done as a slap check it really sort of fits.
Sean


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 15, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> May I suggest that a "stiff-arm choke" from the rear in itself as an attack is not possible. You may perform one of the actions or the other but not both simultaneously. If you stiffen your arms, strength will leave the hand and fingers. If you apply strength to the hands and fingers, the arms will bend. This anatomical fact may indicate a re-thinking of the technique in its entirety.


Mr. Chapel,

I tried what you said while sitting at my computer....very true! 

But isn't the point of the technique (at least ideally) to respond as soon as the stiff-arm grab occurs before the arms bend for a "deeper choke"? Also, if they grab and pull you back, to take the angle of least resistance by going with it?


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Doc (Apr 15, 2005)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> Mr. Chapel,
> 
> I tried what you said while sitting at my computer....very true!
> 
> ...


 Well sir, it depends on who taught you and their understanding of the technique. Although "choking" from the rear is a distinct "possibility," it is not as common as a front choking action. Even so, the one thing that some instructors seem to ignore in the formulation of base techniques is something that Parker and I discussed because of his, and my extensive street experience, and law enforcement background. This component is called "Psychology of Confrontation Theory," and is considered in everything taught.

 Psychology of Confrontation Theory suggests you must look beyond the physical technique itself, and address the motivation and methodology of what occurs BEFORE the actual physical attack takes place. In that light, some techniques are specifically designed, (or should be) to address size and gender discrepancies because a great deal of these type "hands on" assaults are motivated by these factors first and other considerations secondarily. Im sure many have had the experience of defending themselves in class against an unlikely size/gender attack that would occur on them, or attacking someone not likely to be attacked by some one of their size or gender.

 The idea that an adult male would attempt to "choke" another adult male of similar size from the rear is not likely. Still the assault must be considered. More likely it will be a taller male against a shorter male or female that would be more easily overpowered by the size and strength disparity between the two individuals.

 For me the answer proposed to this question is discussed and answered in other techniques like "Circling Wing" which addresses the "Survive the Initial Assault" component mandated by our curriculum for an "anchored arm choking assault from the rear." Our interpretation of this technique, (Twirling Wing, no s) is a precursor to a two man assault that suggest the person from the rear is not attempting a "choke" at all. Instead the attacker is attempting to restrict your movement by a twin "stiff-arm" action while also seizing your shoulders.

 I do not personally teach techniques that address choking, or other "hands on" type assault as "attempts." These default techniques in our curriculum are designed to teach students to actually deal with the specified attack, with the assumption you will not always be capable of reacting or "moving first." Other actions in this assault are ludicrous in such scenarios where actions must be specified and not "implied' as some suggest.


----------



## Seabrook (Apr 18, 2005)

Thanks Doc.



Jamie Seabrook

www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## jaybacca72 (Apr 21, 2005)

the  final stance depends on what level you can deliver and your understanding of kenpo is. it seems to me that too many people use tapes and dvd's as the gospel of the techniques,and that most only train one dimensionally if that makes any sense? and i'm not referring to h,d,w, iether.
later
jay
ps love the post doc i train with anatomical alignment as my first priority and understanding of the response to the attack. artyon:


----------



## Doc (Apr 21, 2005)

jaybacca72 said:
			
		

> the  final stance depends on what level you can deliver and your understanding of kenpo is. it seems to me that too many people use tapes and dvd's as the gospel of the techniques,and that most only train one dimensionally if that makes any sense? and i'm not referring to h,d,w, iether.
> later
> jay
> ps love the post doc i train with anatomical alignment as my first priority and understanding of the response to the attack. artyon:


Thats why - udaman.


----------

