# Power and economy of motion



## Rick Wade (Jan 26, 2004)

This weekend we had an impromptu seminar (so to speak)  where we analyzed techniques and juiced them up.  We learned how to deliver power with the timing.  Which then provided speed. 

Maybe I am showing my ignorance but in the past I have tried to become faster, thinking faster is more powerful.  However it is just the opposite if you work on your timing.

I was amazed.  

Can anyone out there offer some insight.  

Thanks 
Rick


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Jan 26, 2004)

Power comes from (among many other things) proper position, proper alignment, proper angles and lines of motion, coordinated timing.

Economy of motion is the ability to execute all those proper and coordinated things I just mentioned without extra and unecessary movements.  This economy enables you to deliver powerful strikes quickly.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 26, 2004)

I find that getting down in stance, increases power; however, the constant head level stuff can really hinder you. Don't be afraid to rise up with your uppercuts and drop into your downward strikes.


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 26, 2004)

We analyzed Five Swords and I was amazed that the initial double block Sword 1 and 2 (if you choose to do it that way) at how much power you are trying to absorb.  Where if you use your right hand to check him in the neck and the left more like an angled block (his arm slips off).  

Third sword:  If you execute that uppercut before you go into the twist stance and bring it from low (from your hip).  I was AMAZED at how much more power just these two simple adjustments made in the technique and it flowed a lot better.  

P.S. Any Black Belts want to pick up and move to Oahu, Hawaii to be MY personal Trainer? I will support you.  I will be taking applications all week.  Just Kidding


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rick Wade _
> *We analyzed Five Swords and I was amazed that the initial double block Sword 1 and 2 (if you choose to do it that way) at how much power you are trying to absorb.  Where if you use your right hand to check him in the neck and the left more like an angled block (his arm slips off).
> 
> Third sword:  If you execute that uppercut before you go into the twist stance and bring it from low (from your hip).  I was AMAZED at how much more power just these two simple adjustments made in the technique and it flowed a lot better.
> ...


I wouldn't think the first move in "Five Swords" was about absorbing power, but about getting on the inside and beating him to the punch. The left hand is more of a check. What twist stance?
Sean


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *I wouldn't think the first move in "Five Swords" was about absorbing power, but about getting on the inside and beating him to the punch. *


I agree with you but that is the way I was taught I am just saying that it is amazing when taught properly with body in alinement How it changes the technique and sudenly makes sense.




> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *
> What twist stance?
> Sean *


I mispoke on the twist stance:

here is the section of the technique that I am talking about as written 
"5. Immediately have your left foot slide counter clockwise (to 4 o'clock) into a right forward bow as you left heel of palm strikes to the left jaw of opponent (striking in an outwardly fashion). Without hesitation and while shifting into a right neutral bow have your left hand hook and pull opponent's head down as you deliver a right overhead downward hand sword to back of opponent's neck. "
I was refering to the shift in stance.

Thanks for setting me straight.  It is people like you tha empower students.

Thanks 
Rick


----------



## ob2c (Jan 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rick Wade _I mispoke on the twist stance...here is the section of the technique that I am talking about as written "5. Immediately have your left foot slide counter clockwise (to 4 o'clock) into a right forward bow as you left heel of palm strikes to the left jaw of opponent (striking in an outwardly fashion).



I was originally taught to use a full twist stance here, but later corrected to the step to 4:00. Both work, but the step is far more stable.

As a point of interest, I've seen other styles teach this cross behind step as the proper way to do a twist stance, and  I always considered it to be a variation on the twist stance. Out of curiosity, how does AK in general view this- is the step across with the rear foot to 4:00 a variation on the twist, or just a positional adjustment?


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by ob2c _
> *I was originally taught to use a full twist stance here, but later corrected to the step to 4:00. Both work, but the step is far more stable.
> 
> As a point of interest, I've seen other styles teach this cross behind step as the proper way to do a twist stance, and  I always considered it to be a variation on the twist stance. Out of curiosity, how does AK in general view this- is the step across with the rear foot to 4:00 a variation on the twist, or just a positional adjustment? *




I was originally taught that the twist was to give you torque for the right sword hand across the neck.  That is why I always called it a twist stance.  

However as I was shown this weekend it is defiantly a position adjustment for the shot across the back of his neck.   

Thanks 
Rick


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rick Wade _
> *I agree with you but that is the way I was taught I am just saying that it is amazing when taught properly with body in alinement How it changes the technique and sudenly makes sense.
> 
> 
> ...


 We don't teach grabbing or hooking the opponents head. At this point it becomes more like "charging ram" if you correctly executed the uppercut, step to four, handsword thing.
Sean


----------



## rmcrobertson (Jan 27, 2004)

Some other cheap ways to power up 5 Swords:

1. Step in faster
2. Deliver a right elbow along with the initial right inward block
3. Shuffle between each move
4. Settle into a horse stance with the uppercut
5. Slide into a forward bow with the next move

--and--
6. Use a hooking chop to position the opponent


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *Some other cheap ways to power up 5 Swords:
> 
> 1. Step in faster
> ...



My poor workout partner will just love your sugestions tonight.  I will let you know how it goes tomorrow.

Thanks
Rick


----------



## Rainman (Jan 28, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka _
> *Power comes from (among many other things) proper position, proper alignment, proper angles and lines of motion, coordinated timing.
> 
> Economy of motion is the ability to execute all those proper and coordinated things I just mentioned without extra and unecessary movements.  This economy enables you to deliver powerful strikes quickly. *



Power does not come from proper position.  Position is more akin to the 4 ranges,  defensive and offensive choices, and grafting.  Whips executed from odd angles and totally out of position are quite capable of taking someones head off- Just one example out of a thousand.


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 29, 2004)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *Some other cheap ways to power up 5 Swords:
> 
> 1. Step in faster
> ...



We were working this last night.  We are good with everything you suggested except the elbow on the right block.  

We practice that as a left block and the right hand would come out and check the opponent at their neck.  Now the left block the arm would actually be 45-degree angle away from your body.  The reason for this is so that you dont absorb as much force.  The right hand checking his neck just stops him dead in his track.  

I hope I painted a good enough picture.

Back to the topic when we execute it our way we are not sure where the elbow goes?  

Please elaborate

Thanks 
Rick

I love this stuff!!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 29, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rick Wade _
> *We were working this last night.  We are good with everything you suggested except the elbow on the right block.
> 
> We practice that as a left block and the right hand would come out and check the opponent at their neck.  Now the left block the arm would actually be 45-degree angle away from your body.  The reason for this is so that you dont absorb as much force.  The right hand checking his neck just stops him dead in his track.
> ...


I don't thing adding a move increases power either.
Sean


----------



## rmcrobertson (Jan 30, 2004)

I usually stick the elbow to the left of their sternum, a little, when doing the version in which you block upwards with the initial two blocks. But I see I've confused different types of power--that generated by, say, a shuffle, and what I guess could be called, "stopping power." My oopsie...though that elbow does tend to elicit a little more torque out of you. 

I'd also argue that things like that hooking chop help generate power because a) they help position the opponent correctly (sorry, I agree with OFK), b) they increase the force with which that right hand draws back, (see Parting Wings?), which really works if you round that corner a little, and c) they help with the "can-of-snakes," effect you get as the opponent tries to rise, as you release and drop the right hand-sword...

Above all, I'd say drop your weight.

Personally, my fave version of 5 Swords is the one that begins and ends with a right ball-kick on an opponent charging in with a right punch...


----------



## Seig (Jan 30, 2004)

Let me ask a question.
To set the stage so we are all on the same page,  when the punch comes in, you step to in to a right neutral bow, check the wrist of the punching hand with your left hand and execute a right inward block to the inside of the oppoent's arm.  Now, if we are following the yellow belt rule, "When blocking on the inside of an opponent's arm, do so below the elbow never above it" how are we going to deliver an elbow to the opponent's sternum without interrupting the flow of motion of the right handsword?


----------



## Rainman (Jan 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Seig _
> *Let me ask a question.
> To set the stage so we are all on the same page,  when the punch comes in, you step to in to a right neutral bow, check the wrist of the punching hand with your left hand and execute a right inward block to the inside of the oppoent's arm.  Now, if we are following the yellow belt rule, "When blocking on the inside of an opponent's arm, do so below the elbow never above it" how are we going to deliver an elbow to the opponent's sternum without interrupting the flow of motion of the right handsword? *




Stand with your hands at your sides and your feet shoulder width apart.  Violently snap your hips to the left... What do your arms do but fly out from your sides- centrifugal force. Samething with the elbow strike to the sternum.   The technique Triggered Salute uses a like idea with the outward elbow and back knuckle combo then followed by the half fist uppercut.   So there are three or more things that will seriously make this work or as you say interrupt the flow if not added.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rainman _
> *Stand with your hands at your sides and your feet shoulder width apart.  Violently snap your hips to the left... What do your arms do but fly out from your sides- centrifugal force. Samething with the elbow strike to the sternum.   The technique Triggered Salute uses a like idea with the outward elbow and back knuckle combo then followed by the half fist uppercut.   So there are three or more things that will seriously make this work or as you say interrupt the flow if not added. *


 Let me get this strait. You want us to face off to an oponent with our feet shoulder width apart, and our hands at our sides? what is this a gun fight?


----------



## Thesemindz (Jan 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Seig _
> *Let me ask a question.
> To set the stage so we are all on the same page,  when the punch comes in, you step to in to a right neutral bow, check the wrist of the punching hand with your left hand and execute a right inward block to the inside of the oppoent's arm.  Now, if we are following the yellow belt rule, "When blocking on the inside of an opponent's arm, do so below the elbow never above it" how are we going to deliver an elbow to the opponent's sternum without interrupting the flow of motion of the right handsword? *



I do this all the time when I execute this technique. All you do is raise the right elbow to a closer to horizontal angle as you step in with the block. Instead of the traditional inward block structure, your fist is slightly cocked as it hits the opponents bicep/tricep at the same time as the right elbow connects with his sternum or solar plexus. Striking the sternum can really stop an opponent and the solar plexus takes the air out of them right away. From there the technique flows normally. The right handsword goes straight to its target along the same path it would have followed because the point of origin off the arm is the same for the weapon. 



I also use a chop to the neck to crane the head down at the end. I figure if I'm gonna touch my opponent it might as well hurt. I also like to add a finger flick to the groin with the right hand as I step towards four oclock on the way to the final sword.



I was taught to step with the rear foot up the circle, essentially rotating my torso over the right foot rather than the rear crossover to the twist stance at the end of this technique. Basically like the beginning of charging ram.


-Rob


----------



## Thesemindz (Jan 31, 2004)

The only problem I've had with this technique is knocking my opponent back and having to chase him down with the succesive strikes. 

I'm not sure how this would work for someone significantly smaller than their opponent. The elbow could help them stop the opponent or stun him, but they might need the correct structure of the block to stop the attack.

Maximum protection before maximum penetration?

-Rob


----------



## Rainman (Jan 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *Let me get this strait. You want us to face off to an oponent with our feet shoulder width apart, and our hands at our sides? what is this a gun fight? *



When are you ever going to learn how to read?   Nowhere does it say to do the exercise with a person.  The exercise shows centrifugal force.   It shows a place to start- the hips.  Not the only place,  just a place.  Using centrifugal force it but one element that can aid in adjusting the continuity of what was being discussed.  I showed one place where it is already used and a technique to start the concept.   Now we are on the third time of you misreading and reinterpreting my post to the way you think.   Surely at one point you are going to say something worth reading aren't you?


----------



## Rick Wade (Feb 3, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Thesemindz _
> *The only problem I've had with this technique is knocking my opponent back and having to chase him down with the succesive strikes.
> 
> I'm not sure how this would work for someone significantly smaller than their opponent. The elbow could help them stop the opponent or stun him, but they might need the correct structure of the block to stop the attack.
> ...



But isn't that the idea.  If you are succesful in knocking him or her back you should clear out and not chase them down?  

Just a question.

Thanks


----------



## parkerkarate (Feb 8, 2004)

since I tested for my second degree black belt in '02 I have gone back and started to analyze what I have learned so far. At this same time I started working on my timing and speed. I think of it this way, you have two kind of hit or "shots". A power shot or a stinger, I have figured out which moves in each technique are power shots and which are not. When you go through techniaues the more powerful you want to something the more explosive you have to be. My instructor Mr. Palanzo would always say some people move their body too much while others move it too little. I have figured out the mideum, I do not over extend anything but I do not under-extend, if thats a word. You must work on explosions, and understanding the termonology of Kenpo. Such as Marriage of Gravity and Borrowed Force. Keep those things in the back of you mind when you do techniques, hopefully that will help some.


----------



## Thesemindz (Feb 8, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rick Wade _
> *But isn't that the idea.  If you are succesful in knocking him or her back you should clear out and not chase them down?
> 
> Just a question.
> ...





I would generally agree with you. If I knock my opponent so far back that he is out of range, then I probably have a chance to escape. However, I may not be able to escape if my opponent is still willing to do harm to my person. Remember, at this point I have only blocked his attack and hit him once with an elbow to the sternum. My opponent may not have been sufficiently deterred as of this time. If he is still trying to attack, I would rather stay close to him and continue to strike. In this case, if I were to prematurely evacuate I may end up back to squares facing an opponent who gets a second chance to defeat me, when I could have ended it all by just capitalizing on his first mistake.


-Rob


----------



## kenpo2dabone (Apr 23, 2004)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> This weekend we had an impromptu seminar (so to speak)  where we analyzed techniques and juiced them up.  We learned how to deliver power with the timing.  Which then provided speed.
> 
> Maybe I am showing my ignorance but in the past I have tried to become faster, thinking faster is more powerful.  However it is just the opposite if you work on your timing.
> 
> ...



There are really only two ways to add power to a strike. Increase the mass of the weapon or increase the speed of the weapon. Think of dropping a soccer ball on your foot. It is not going to hurt very much. Now think of dropping a soccer ball made out of lead on your foot. Major pain. According to the laws of gravity they will travel at about the same speed when dropped. The lead is going to hurt more because it has more mass. Now imagine someone throwing a bullet at you. O.K. if it hits you in the eye it might hurt a little. Now imagine that same bullet being shot out of a gun. It is going to do damage no matter where it hits you. 

It is much more difficult to add mass to our natural weapons then it is to practice speeding them up. When I say speed them up I am not talking about trying to do an entire technique as fast as you can. I mean the speed of each individual strike. Economy of motion will play a role in this but it is not the definition. Economy of motion basically teaches us that there is no need to pull a punch backwards before it goes forwards. Again that is a very basic definition. It is all too common to try and blow through a technique as fast as you can, thinking that you are doing it with more power. This is simply not true. Proper timing will feel like you are adding power but you really are not. You are simply doing the technique that way it was originally intended to be done in the first place. When it comes to practicing I would practice form and timing above trying to add speed. It does you no good to try and strike with speed if you are striking with incorrect form and incorrect anatomical alignment. This is where the saying practice it a thousand times slow before doing it one time fast comes from. I believe this is why you felt like you were hitting with more power than before. 

Salute,
Mike Miller UKF


----------



## Bill Lear (Apr 23, 2004)

Thesemindz said:
			
		

> I would generally agree with you. If I knock my opponent so far back that he is out of range, then I probably have a chance to escape. However, I may not be able to escape if my opponent is still willing to do harm to my person. Remember, at this point I have only blocked his attack and hit him once with an elbow to the sternum. My opponent may not have been sufficiently deterred as of this time. If he is still trying to attack, I would rather stay close to him and continue to strike. In this case, if I were to prematurely evacuate I may end up back to squares facing an opponent who gets a second chance to defeat me, when I could have ended it all by just capitalizing on his first mistake.
> 
> 
> -Rob



This is a good point. I've actually had this happen to me, unfortunately my attacker had to have his jaw wired shut for a little while after he caught up to me for the second round (which I completely realize could have been me if circumstances were different).

:idunno:


----------



## Michael Billings (Apr 23, 2004)

kenpo2dabone said:
			
		

> There are really only two ways to add power to a strike. Increase the mass of the weapon or increase the speed of the weapon. Think of dropping a soccer ball on your foot. It is not going to hurt very much. Now think of dropping a soccer ball made out of lead on your foot. Major pain. According to the laws of gravity they will travel at about the same speed when dropped. The lead is going to hurt more because it has more mass. Now imagine someone throwing a bullet at you. O.K. if it hits you in the eye it might hurt a little. Now imagine that same bullet being shot out of a gun. It is going to do damage no matter where it hits you.
> 
> It is much more difficult to add mass to our natural weapons then it is to practice speeding them up. When I say speed them up I am not talking about trying to do an entire technique as fast as you can. I mean the speed of each individual strike. Economy of motion will play a role in this but it is not the definition. Economy of motion basically teaches us that there is no need to pull a punch backwards before it goes forwards. Again that is a very basic definition. It is all too common to try and blow through a technique as fast as you can, thinking that you are doing it with more power. This is simply not true. Proper timing will feel like you are adding power but you really are not. You are simply doing the technique that way it was originally intended to be done in the first place. When it comes to practicing I would practice form and timing above trying to add speed. It does you no good to try and strike with speed if you are striking with incorrect form and incorrect anatomical alignment. This is where the saying practice it a thousand times slow before doing it one time fast comes from. I believe this is why you felt like you were hitting with more power than before.
> 
> ...


 Excellent post Mike.  I like the care with which you crafted this response.  Other factors can play in as well, specifically Borrowed Force, either through your disruption, or changing the orbit of your weapon.  An example may be Thundering Hammers, instead of chambering up, the hammers may orbit, or follow your outer rim to the target, same distance, no chamber (when coming from a check on the right arm), different path to the target.

 Have a good weekend.

 -Michael


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 25, 2004)

kenpo2dabone said:
			
		

> There are really only two ways to add power to a strike. Increase the mass of the weapon or increase the speed of the weapon.


Agreed


			
				kenpo2dabone said:
			
		

> Think of dropping a soccer ball on your foot. It is not going to hurt very much. Now think of dropping a soccer ball made out of lead on your foot. Major pain. According to the laws of gravity they will travel at about the same speed when dropped. The lead is going to hurt more because it has more mass. Now imagine someone throwing a bullet at you. O.K. if it hits you in the eye it might hurt a little. Now imagine that same bullet being shot out of a gun. It is going to do damage no matter where it hits you.


 I think you may have confused things a little about this example of soccer balls. For speed to be the same in the drop, mass must be the same, so the regular soccer ball is bigger in volume than a lead ball of the same mass. So it's not actually mass the difference, but the impact surface that comes into play, the smaller the surface, the greater the damage  
If you meant a ball of the same volume, then, the lead ball will have a greater mass than the regular one, greater speed at the moment of impact if thrown from the same height, and greater damage. So the lead ball will still cause the greater damage.
Just for clarification


----------



## parkerkarate (Apr 25, 2004)

Never forget torque or counter torque.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Apr 25, 2004)

> I think you may have confused things a little about this example of soccer balls. For speed to be the same in the drop, mass must be the same, so the regular soccer ball is bigger in volume than a lead ball of the same mass. So it's not actually mass the difference, but the impact surface that comes into play, the smaller the surface, the greater the damage
> If you meant a ball of the same volume, then, the lead ball will have a greater mass than the regular one, greater speed at the moment of impact if thrown from the same height, and greater damage. So the lead ball will still cause the greater damage.
> Just for clarification



I believe he was referring to the experiments that we all did in high school science with a lead ball and a feather.  Put them both in a tube in a state of vacuum.  If you drop both the feather and the ball, from the same height, at the same time they will both hit the bottom of the tube at the SAME TIME.

The amount of energy that is produced would be different due to the differences in mass.  Just for clarification.



> Never forget torque or counter torque.


Is there really such a thing as counter torque?  I guess since everyone uses this terminology most will understand what it implies, but that doesn't mean it really exists.  Kinda like centrifugal force which has achieved wide usage but doesn't really exist.


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 25, 2004)

No experiments for me in high school, but I guess you're right. Vacuum must have existed in my head when I read his email, geez :s


----------



## parkerkarate (Apr 25, 2004)

A couple weeks ago someone put a link up about counter tourque. It was very nice. Take Bow of Compulsion for example, coiling up and than exploding with the heal palms. It works trust me.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 29, 2004)

Kenpo Yahoo said:
			
		

> Is there really such a thing as counter torque?



Good Question!


 :uhyeah:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Apr 29, 2004)

It seems to me (and granted, it's been aeons since I had physics), that the effect of what wants to be referred to as "counter-torque" would create tangential opposites in complementary or singular planes of activity, cancelling each other out by creating a null difference in the amount of work done, compared to the amount of energy released.

Perhaps a better way of conceptualizing the kenpo concept of counter torque would be to consider the effects of loads placed on contractile tissues prior to the concentric contraction of primary agonists. It's really a light plyometric load placed on muscles that have been placed at "pre-stretch" tension. 

Experiment: Sit on a spinning stool and turn at the waist; explode out of that position, and note that your upper body going one way provides a certain set of potentials, as does your lower body turning the other. Each motion, individually, is powered by complementary sets of muscles in the pelvis, torso and back. Some get longer to let it happen, some get shorter to make it happen, and aside from the spin you're putting on the stool by being the external actor, the whole gig has little to do with torque.  When all is said and done, you're still on the stool; no actual work (aside form the machinations of the screw mechanism in the stool) has been done, even though energy has been released.

My Q to the forum: doesn't torque have something to do with the creation of tangential centripi-force (not centrifug), to create work? Measured through change? I could be dead nuts wrong on this...have been before, will be again...but I think, mechanically, counter-torque would be any force preventing Torque1 from doing work, or cancelling out the measurable effects of T1.

I expect the acu-definitions to exceed my meager ability to remember what I want to when I want to, so am open to correction/clarification.

Regards,

D.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 29, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Good Question!
> 
> 
> :uhyeah:


How about counter balance?


----------



## Michael Billings (Apr 29, 2004)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> How about counter balance?


 Excellent point TOD. The counter balance is the most obvious thing to me in watching the method of execution Mr. Tatum is demonstrating. It yields a synergystic amount of power because of the borrowed force, body momentum, and timing.

 Good Kenpo!!! Not sure about "Counter Torque" and it's actual existance as a principle of physics ... or rather I am sure about it. Mr. Tatum chooses a naming convention for the confluence of forces he creates in that particular techique, it works for me so long as we keep it in the arena of "Kenpo vernacular" and not try to really attribute the power to a principle that physics has not defined. OK, so I am being a little too rigid here. It is still a great smack-down Billy Lear took. Good stuff!

  -Michael


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Apr 30, 2004)

> How about counter balance?


Counter balance actually exists in the realm of physics.  

My point was not to assert my knowledge of physics or to try and tout my intellectual understanding of kenpo, but rather to point something out to those who believe that "other" groups are using "pseudo-science" within their flavor of kenpo.  These are the same people who use terms like Reverse Marriage of Gravity, Counter-torque, Angle of Incidence (which refers to all angles of impact not just 90's), etc, etc.  These terms, with the exception of Angle of Incidence, do not exist within the realm of physics.  They have, however, achieved wide spread usage which has lead to a general consensus as to what each specific term implies.  This, at least to me, is as much an example of "pseudo-science" as anything else out there in kenpo land.  Obviously there are those who add asinine terminology to the art to intentionally befuddle their poor students, but there is some terminology worth learning whether it's real or not.  

Despite the absurdity of the term "Reverse Marriage of Gravity" I understand, as I'm sure others do as well, what this term implies.  The same goes for counter-torque.

I try my best to stay away from physics conversations, because I'm a firm believer that concepts and equations don't mean jack unless you can actually put that knowledge to work in your fighting art.  However, I take issue with people who are just as guilty of indulging in "pseudo-science," lecturing others about how wrong such indulgences can be.

I apologize if this post appears off topic.  I do, however, feel that these statements are relevent to this particular subject in light of recent comments.
Again I apologize if this seems severe, that was not my intent.


----------



## Kenpodoc (May 2, 2004)

Power and Economy of Motion are related but separate entities.

Economy of motion creates an illusion of speed.  In my experience all of the current seniors have it.  They look fast even when their moving in a controlled manner.  The lack of wasted motion allows their movement to be fluid, precise and fast enough to do the job.  When Mr. Planas has demonstrated on me every strike led into the next strike and he had complete control of the situation.  It is always fast enough to do the job.  I've had others strike much faster but with wasted motion and it's more like being attacked by a Moth.  Rapid ineffective strikes, more of a massage than a beating.

The physicists out there will say that power can only be developed by 2 things, increased mass and increased speed.  This is true but forgets the fact that biomechanics is so complicated that these equations are no longer simple. Proper body mechanics is the over simplified way of saying powerful strikes need back up mass.  All Human motion involves Mass and torque but some movements emphasise one or the other.  We must also consider elasticity, opposing muscle groups and other biomechanical functions in any fuly scientific discussion of movement.  Thus I've been struck by people who are moving very fast but because they are not rooted, or they are not moving in a well coordinated manner or they putting on the brakes with their opposing muscle groups I've not felt much power.  It is the coordination of speed and backup mass that creates effective power.  This makes a Mr. Planas, or Mr. Wedlake or Mr. Tatum so effective.  My 120 lb 16 year old son hits me harder that a lot of 200 lb adults.  Proper body mechanics works.

As I get older and slower I find that I can use improved economy of motion to look faster  and improving body mechanics to hit harder.  The  miracle of well taught EPAK is not that it makes you super human but that it teaches everyone to use what they have more effectively. Every time I work with my instructor Mr. Hatfield or his instructors Mr. Wedlake and Mr. Planas I am more impressed by this system that allows us to taylor the principles to our own strengths and weaknesses.  

Thanks,

Jeff


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 6, 2004)

A great example of power and economy of motion is Bruce Lee's 1 inch punch.  Kenpodoc, I liked your explanation of back up mass.  It makes a lot of sense.


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 6, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> A great example of power and economy of motion is Bruce Lee's 1 inch punch.  Kenpodoc, I liked your explanation of back up mass.  It makes a lot of sense.


I disagree, the one inch punch is a great example for launching, but thats about it, the timing and path of your weapons along with lauching is really what economy of motion is all about;so, I here by declare, NOT.
Sean :asian:


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 6, 2004)

My understanding of economy of motion is to get the most out of doing the least.  Call it launch, call it explosion, whatever.  He is getting a very powerful result from doing very little.  No wasted movements is another way to describe EOM.  There are no wasted movements in his 1 inch punch.  BTW, there are many things done with economy of motion that does not include lauching, like not stepping farther then you have to to avoid a strike, or keeping your hands up instead of at your waste.  So launching really has very little to do with economy of motion in the big picture.  

With Respect,
Jerry


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 6, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> My understanding of economy of motion is to get the most out of doing the least.  Call it launch, call it explosion, whatever.  He is getting a very powerful result from doing very little.  No wasted movements is another way to describe EOM.  There are no wasted movements in his 1 inch punch.  BTW, there are many things done with economy of motion that does not include lauching, like not stepping farther then you have to to avoid a strike, or keeping your hands up instead of at your waste.  So launching really has very little to do with economy of motion in the big picture.
> 
> With Respect,
> Jerry


Launching is your attitude of motion so stepping off the line of attack could be considered launching off the line of attack by some. Anyways, I did miswrite. Launch is not a required component; however I can't go with a one inch punch as the example of economy of motion. It may or may not be the closest weapon to the closest target, while still achieving the desired effect. Since when is your hip the closest weapon to the closest target? The guy really had to pass through all your defensive ranges to wind up with a target one inch from your hip.
Sean (www.iemat.com)


----------



## psi_radar (May 6, 2004)

Five Swords is a fun technique to play with. We've worked on the entry quite a bit with the universal conclusion that the technique works, and well, if the roundhouse is intercepted very early in the launch. On the other hand, if the roundhouse/haymaker has time to come around, you'd be better off trying to tighten range and deliver an elbow to the solar plexus or use your opponent's momentum and arm to throw them to the ground. You can retain the arm and lock it up once they're on the ground. Another fun variation is to insert a hip throw at the point you'd normally do an uppercut. But I digress. 

Here's something you may or may not have thought of. Rather focusing on the power, i.e. force of your blows, try thinking about the effect you want to deliver. You ultimately want pain and compliance, right? A lot of pain isn't generated simply by the force of the blow, but where and how deep that blow resonates within the body. 

For example, try this as an exercise. Get a skilled and willing accomplice to punch you once fast and hard in the abdomen (not in the solar plexus, to the left or right and a little lower), but while only attempting to penetrate to the back of your abdominal muscle walls. This is how we often strike, especially when thinking about building speed or over-anticipating our next move; we tend to pull it a little early, penetrating shallowly while retaining a lot of energy in tensed muscles. After appreciating that experience, ask him to slowly, with a relaxed arm, deliberately punch in the same place while trying to reach your backbone, and without immediately drawing back his arm. It's almost like a deep push with knuckles on the end. Even though the first punch cost your friend a great deal more energy, my bet is the second one made you feel MUCH more shocked and debilitated.  

Now try it with the technique. In the Five Swords entry, get in as fast as necessary, but instead of focusing on speed and force with your blocks, try thinking of staying relaxed until the point of impact, and then suddenly "put weight" or "intent" directly into your hands. Yes, you are using a conscious thought that results in your mass fully engaging on a localized area of contact. Sounds weird, but it works. Then think the movement through, and rather than simply making contact, aim deeper and use follow-through to really nail the muscle and nerve centers. Penetrate rather than hit; think about your hands actually coming out the other side. Once you get the feel for this, try adapting the practice to other strikes. Have fun and be sympathetic to your partner, this can really sting!


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 6, 2004)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> so stepping off the line of attack could be considered launching off the line of attack by some.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Ok, and the 1 inch punch could be considered a good example of economy of motion by some depending on how you look at it.

I don't get the hip reference, what is that referring to?


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 6, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> Ok, and the 1 inch punch could be considered a good example of economy of motion by some depending on how you look at it.
> 
> I don't get the hip reference, what is that referring to?


I was assuming you were punching one inch from your own body, or off the hip. From where would you execute a one inch punch?
Sean


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 6, 2004)

So, have you not seen the 1 inch punch? He starts with his fist 1 inch from the target, which is a guy holding a pad against his chest. Without drawing back or chambering he punches the guy and knocks him back several feet.  It would seem to weaken your arguement if you are debating something you haven't seen.  

Respectfully,
Jerry


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 6, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> So, have you not seen the 1 inch punch? He starts with his fist 1 inch from the target, which is a guy holding a pad against his chest. Without drawing back or chambering he punches the guy and knocks him back several feet.  It would seem to weaken your arguement if you are debating something you haven't seen.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Jerry


I saw it done by a local JKD guy named Paul. His arm didn't look extended but lets forget methods and talk about economy of motion. The term refers to moving from one move to the next as well as efficiantly executing a single move; so, we are arguing apples and oranges.
Sean


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 8, 2004)

Let's break this down a little.  Motion indicates movement.  Any time you make your movements more economic without sacrificing results, thats economy of motion!


----------



## Rainman (May 8, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> Let's break this down a little.  Motion indicates movement.  Any time you make your movements more economic without sacrificing results, thats economy of motion!



Movement idicates movement.  Is more specific than motion because movement is a particular instance or manner in moving.    To define in the way you did is very open ended and leaves too much for interpretation.   What does make your movements more economic mean?  What concepts to follow in order to make this statement true or false?  

The flip side is you are using this as a header that sub divides out for further detail and gives the definition it's real meaning depending on the circumstance in which the concept is used.   Meaning is will have some flexibility in how in can be applied.


----------



## Bill Lear (May 9, 2004)

Rainman said:
			
		

> Movement indicates movement.  Is more specific than motion because movement is a particular instance or manner in moving.    To define in the way you did is very open ended and leaves too much for interpretation.   What does make your movements more economic mean?  What concepts to follow in order to make this statement true or false?
> 
> The flip side is you are using this as a header that sub divides out for further detail and gives the definition it's real meaning depending on the circumstance in which the concept is used.   Meaning is will have some flexibility in how in can be applied.



*MOVEMENT*
Main Entry: move·ment 
Pronunciation: 'müv-m&nt
Function: noun
1 a (1) : the act or process of moving; especially : change of place or position or posture (2) : a particular instance or manner of moving b (1) : a tactical or strategic shifting of a military unit : MANEUVER (2) : the advance of a military unit c : ACTION, ACTIVITY -- usually used in plural
2 a : TENDENCY, TREND <detected a movement toward fairer pricing> b : a series of organized activities working toward an objective; also : an organized effort to promote or attain an end <the civil rights movement>
3 : the moving parts of a mechanism that transmit a definite motion
4 a : *MOTION* 7 b : the rhythmic character or quality of a musical composition c : a distinct structural unit or division having its own key, rhythmic structure, and themes and forming part of an extended musical composition d : particular rhythmic flow of language : CADENCE
5 a : the quality (as in a painting or sculpture) of representing or suggesting motion b : the vibrant quality in literature that comes from elements that constantly hold a reader's interest (as a quickly moving action-filled plot)
6 a : an act of voiding the bowels b : matter expelled from the bowels at one passage  

*Economy*
Main Entry: 1econ·o·my 
Pronunciation: i-'kä-n&-mE, &-, E-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -mies
Etymology: Middle French yconomie, from Medieval Latin oeconomia, from Greek oikonomia, from oikonomos household manager, from oikos house + nemein to manage -- more at VICINITY, NIMBLE
1 archaic : the management of household or private affairs and especially expenses
2 a : thrifty and efficient use of material resources : frugality in expenditures; also : an instance or a means of economizing : SAVING b : *efficient and concise use of nonmaterial resources (as effort, language, or motion)*
3 : the arrangement or mode of operation of something : ORGANIZATION
4 : the structure of economic life in a country, area, or period; specifically : an economic system

*MOTION*
Main Entry: 1mo·tion 
Pronunciation: 'mO-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mocioun, from Middle French motion, from Latin motion-, motio movement, from movEre to move
1 a : *an act, process, or instance of changing place : MOVEMENT* b : an active or functioning state or condition <set the divorce proceedings in motion>
2 : an impulse or inclination of the mind or will
3 a : a proposal for action; especially : a formal proposal made in a deliberative assembly b : an application made to a court or judge to obtain an order, ruling, or direction
4 obsolete a : a puppet show b : PUPPET
5 : MECHANISM
6 a : an act or instance of moving the body or its parts : GESTURE b plural : ACTIVITIES, MOVEMENTS
7 : melodic change of pitch
- mo·tion·al  /'mO-shn&l, -sh&-n&l/ adjective
- mo·tion·less  /'mO-sh&n-l&s/ adjective
- mo·tion·less·ly adverb
- mo·tion·less·ness noun
- in motion of an offensive football player : running parallel to the line of scrimmage before the snap 

Chad,

I think tumpaiguy is onto something, and your splitting hairs that just don't seem to be there.

 :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (May 9, 2004)

Rainman said:
			
		

> Movement idicates movement. Is more specific than motion because movement is a particular instance or manner in moving. To define in the way you did is very open ended and leaves too much for interpretation. What does make your movements more economic mean? What concepts to follow in order to make this statement true or false?
> 
> The flip side is you are using this as a header that sub divides out for further detail and gives the definition it's real meaning depending on the circumstance in which the concept is used. Meaning is will have some flexibility in how in can be applied.


Don't Bogart whatever you're smoking cuz it must be some good stuff.   What exactly are you trying to say?

Dark Lord


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 9, 2004)

Economy of motion is one of those things that gets covered in the history of stats, physics, org. development, etc. Relates historically to the efficiancy experts from the onset of the industrial age, assisting with bricklaying. Efficiency guy observes brick layers, and counts how many bricks can be laid per some period of time. Watching them, he notes the slower ones make bigger motions in picking the brick up, and holding it well above the intended placement target before putting it down.

This wider arc takes longer to get a brick placed, meaning fewer bricks per hour, meaning increased labor costs. What to do? Shorten the path of delivery...point of origin (the brick heap) to point of contact (the wall with cement schmutz). Trying to apply the brick REALLY HARD is not even part of the picture; simply applying MORE bricks in LESS time.

Take a mental inventory of the martial arts that were available at the time AK was being developed into what it is we train in now. Mainly, hard-style karate, with the hand returning to the chambered position at the hip prior to execution of each next move. Want to hit a guy 5 times? Return to the hip between each hit. 

Five swords would take forever, and look very different than what we know. Inward block, return R. hand to hip. Outward handsword, return right hand to hip...and so on. The flow of energy from blow to blow that is the visually identifiable hallmark of AK techniques, without a lot of "returning to hip" types of movements, is the economy of motion. 

Power is still related to increases in momentum. Wanna hit hard? Need more energy. Chamber that blow! Wanna hit a buncha times fast? Don't chamber it...instead, find the next open target near your next readily available natural weapon, and stick a hard part of your body in a soft part of theirs. With practice, you'll develop the ability to put some chutzpah behind the shorter moves, but they are simply not designed to take you through a stack of terra cotta tiles like some of the power blows.

Complementary, but different.

D.


----------



## Rainman (May 9, 2004)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> *MOVEMENT*
> Main Entry: move·ment
> Pronunciation: 'müv-m&nt
> Function: noun
> ...



They are not there for you... Kenpo perpetually refines itself.   What I use are sub cats to aid in refinement of movement.  I have only shown you a small version of what exits here. Use it or don't.


----------



## Gary Crawford (May 9, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Economy of motion is one of those things that gets covered in the history of stats, physics, org. development, etc. Relates historically to the efficiancy experts from the onset of the industrial age, assisting with bricklaying. Efficiency guy observes brick layers, and counts how many bricks can be laid per some period of time. Watching them, he notes the slower ones make bigger motions in picking the brick up, and holding it well above the intended placement target before putting it down.
> 
> This wider arc takes longer to get a brick placed, meaning fewer bricks per hour, meaning increased labor costs. What to do? Shorten the path of delivery...point of origin (the brick heap) to point of contact (the wall with cement schmutz). Trying to apply the brick REALLY HARD is not even part of the picture; simply applying MORE bricks in LESS time.
> 
> ...


I find this completely true(long way to get there though).Econemy in motion should always be the goal when effecency is essential.To put it in simple terms,if you have time to chamber your strike,do it.You will obviously hit harder.The point(I think) is that having that luxury of having time to chamber strikes in a real fight (or competition) isn't always there.That's why it is a good idea to also train in the ability to strike without chambering and still deliver hard impact.The "one Inch punch" was mentioned before and is a great example of the potential of unchambered power.If you don't believe what the one inch punch is capable of,then find someone who is at least half assed proficient in the strike.Have them hit a thick phonebook press against your chest.If they have a good concept of how to exicute it,you will feel it go all the way through you.Then after you understand that,then imagine how much impact potential that one can really deliver from slightly longer ranges.


----------



## Rainman (May 9, 2004)

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> Don't Bogart whatever you're smoking cuz it must be some good stuff.   What exactly are you trying to say?
> 
> Dark Lord



Sorry I refuse to feed the trolls anymore.


----------



## Rainman (May 9, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Economy of motion is one of those things that gets covered in the history of stats, physics, org. development, etc. Relates historically to the efficiancy experts from the onset of the industrial age, assisting with bricklaying. Efficiency guy observes brick layers, and counts how many bricks can be laid per some period of time. Watching them, he notes the slower ones make bigger motions in picking the brick up, and holding it well above the intended placement target before putting it down.
> 
> This wider arc takes longer to get a brick placed, meaning fewer bricks per hour, meaning increased labor costs. What to do? Shorten the path of delivery...point of origin (the brick heap) to point of contact (the wall with cement schmutz). Trying to apply the brick REALLY HARD is not even part of the picture; simply applying MORE bricks in LESS time.
> 
> ...



Complementary but different... Wish I thought of that!


----------



## Bill Lear (May 9, 2004)

Rainman said:
			
		

> They are not there for you... Kenpo perpetually refines itself.



What is not there for me? What are you talking about???




			
				Rainman said:
			
		

> What I use are sub cats to aid in refinement of movement.



Subcatagories of what exactly?



			
				Rainman said:
			
		

> I have only shown you a small version of what exits here. Use it or don't.



You haven't shown me anything. I don't know what you're talking about. Do you? (Seriously.)


:asian:


----------



## Bill Lear (May 9, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Economy of motion is one of those things that gets covered in the history of stats, physics, org. development, etc. Relates historically to the efficiancy experts from the onset of the industrial age, assisting with bricklaying. Efficiency guy observes brick layers, and counts how many bricks can be laid per some period of time. Watching them, he notes the slower ones make bigger motions in picking the brick up, and holding it well above the intended placement target before putting it down.
> 
> This wider arc takes longer to get a brick placed, meaning fewer bricks per hour, meaning increased labor costs. What to do? Shorten the path of delivery...point of origin (the brick heap) to point of contact (the wall with cement schmutz). Trying to apply the brick REALLY HARD is not even part of the picture; simply applying MORE bricks in LESS time.
> 
> ...




So your comparing Economy of motion to an actual economic system...

Inflation = chambering

Depression = Not enough momentum

etc...

I get it, but I thought we were training in proper body mechanics to hit just as hard from point of origin, instead of having to waste time and rechamber. ( <---Just a thought.)


 :asian:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 10, 2004)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> So your comparing Economy of motion to an actual economic system...
> 
> Inflation = chambering
> 
> ...


Leopards Paw, 1st strike. The most economical line of drive would be to simply place the inverted backnuckle to the back of attackers head, without gaining distance prior to the strike via the looping action. However, the impact at time of contact, as well as the excursion of the strike into the target, would be pretty much nil.

(still like the grab-and-beat stuff  )


----------



## pete (May 10, 2004)

the beauty of kenpo is in its continuity... offense within defense, action within reaction.  the beginning of one technique cannot be separated from the end of the previous, making "point of origin" more of a path than a specific point.  the use of minor moves to obscure, distract, and unsettle, and major moves to deliver power are balanced and build an economy of motion towards the condition as a whole, not just a single action or even a series of singular cause and effects.  

...or, i may just be mistaken... 

pete.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 10, 2004)

pete said:
			
		

> the beauty of kenpo is in its continuity... offense within defense, action within reaction. the beginning of one technique cannot be separated from the end of the previous, making "point of origin" more of a path than a specific point. the use of minor moves to obscure, distract, and unsettle, and major moves to deliver power are balanced and build an economy of motion towards the condition as a whole, not just a single action or even a series of singular cause and effects.
> 
> ...*or, i may just be mistaken... *
> 
> pete.


Smartass


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 11, 2004)

Pete:

Curious about "when a cigar is just a cigar"...

The multiplicity thing can be taken to extremes. Staying with Leopards Paw for a minute, assume you are surrounded by multiple opponents, some of which are shooting at you. It could be extrapolated that stepping back in the first move also stomps the forefoot of the opponent behind you, while evading a discharged round from a nearby gun that just fired at your head, and that the arcing of the backnuckle strike to the base of the occiput is also an inverted vertical hooking punch to the guy standing behind the guy who has got you, prior to being conveniently routed into the occiput blow after impact. 4 guys, 1 move. 

Now, given that we're not in the Matrix, I'll venture this explanation as an unlikely exploration of the potentials of this technique.

How would you posit the similarities to, and differences from, each of the thread-raised issues (power & economy of motion) with rotational momentum, or related "strength" generating forces relative to the application of force in a blow over small distances?

Only partly being a smartass myself: I'm interested in the "conceptual" kenpo presentation of how to generate greater force and/or greater impact behind a blow, without building greater momentum.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 11, 2004)

Most comcepts in martial arts can be described rather easily.  It seems that some of you on here like to make things way too difficult.  My teacher has a saying he uses quite often.  "keep it simple stupid".


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 11, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Pete:
> 
> Curious about "when a cigar is just a cigar"...
> 
> ...


Posture, balance, relaxation, speed... and attention to points of reference.
Sean (www.iemat.com)


----------



## pete (May 11, 2004)

increase mass or increase acceleration.  that's science...  but, then i'm not much of a scientist, so i'll just say to round off the edges 'cause corners will slow you down and to develop whole body unity to leverage power and maintain balance.

a cooper mini will give you economy of motion, but not if you are taking your wife and three kids cross country.


----------



## Rainman (May 14, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> Most comcepts in martial arts can be described rather easily.  It seems that some of you on here like to make things way too difficult.  My teacher has a saying he uses quite often.  "keep it simple stupid".



Oh?   So everyone should remain with the first thing they learn... If what is being discussed is complex for you should that not tell you there is much more than what you have?

I really have to laugh at people who say things like "keep it simple stupid".  It is the commercial product gone unchecked for way too long.   So what happens after 15 years in the art?  Just keep doing and saying the same things over and over?  Don't get me wrong, I didn't use concepts much for the first 2 years of AK,  just did the "motion"- is a losing battle, concepts are what give an edge.  The greater and deeper the understanding of concepts the more efficient one's technique is.


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 19, 2004)

Rainman said:
			
		

> Oh? So everyone should remain with the first thing they learn... If what is being discussed is complex for you should that not tell you there is much more than what you have?
> 
> I really have to laugh at people who say things like "keep it simple stupid". It is the commercial product gone unchecked for way too long. So what happens after 15 years in the art? Just keep doing and saying the same things over and over? Don't get me wrong, I didn't use concepts much for the first 2 years of AK, just did the "motion"- is a losing battle, concepts are what give an edge. The greater and deeper the understanding of concepts the more efficient one's technique is.


I sure hope there is a lot more than what I have.  If not I am wasting my time.  My post is in relation to the 1 inch punch being a good example of power with economy of motion.  I have enough knowledge to know that it is.  Pretty simple!


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 19, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> I sure hope there is a lot more than what I have.  If not I am wasting my time.  My post is in relation to the 1 inch punch being a good example of power with economy of motion.  I have enough knowledge to know that it is.  Pretty simple!


Then I also hope you recognize that it is a specialized move and has very little to do with your over all ninja prowess.
Sean :asian:


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 19, 2004)

What's so specialized about it?  He uses a very common concept in generating power.  Rotating the hips!


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 20, 2004)

That being said, have you ever heard of Bruce Lee using it in sparring or combat? Perchance, to wonder why not?

D.


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 20, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> That being said, have you ever heard of Bruce Lee using it in sparring or combat? Perchance, to wonder why not?
> 
> D.


exactly!


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 20, 2004)

No, but I use the concept in sparring and see it used quite often in our school.  BTW, it may be a specialized move but, it is NOT a specialized concept.


----------



## Kenpo_Chick (May 21, 2004)

Ok my 2 cents again (Yes yes it's me again shhh!)...

Our Instructor's teach us the three steps to power:

*1/ Sight* 
_*The ability to mentally concentrate on the target*_

E.g. if you believe that your boyfriend/girlfriend is in front of your then you will not hit that target (I'm talking abotu current ones not ex's!!! That doesn't count!!) However if you believe that someone who is going to kill you in standing in front of you your mentality changes!! (Does it not!?)

Therefore Sight is the ability to mentally focus and visualise your opponents in front of you.

*2/ Stance*
E.g. If you're on your tip toes you cannot do a powerful punch can you!? (Try it for any smart asses out there who think they can!!) but however if you're in a deep stance yo achieve a greater deal of power.

*3/ Breathe*
Well this one is plain and simple. Hold your breathe, and do ten punches as hard as you can!! Did you do it!? Or fall down dead trying!? It's simple, you need to be able to breathe while you're training it cleans your mind and supplies oxygen to your muscles so that they do not tense up

Right so....

Together, all three techniques bring to your techniques alot of power.  I can see where you're coming from with the changing the hips (which is covered in stance) but that is a small part of what power you can get (1/3 of it actually). It is the torque of the hips, or the torque of any move that creates power.

E.g. Hammer fist strike that starts beside your ear and you strike down across the opponents face.

Factors to worry about: 
Stance - Making sure stacnce is deep
Breathe - Breathing and exhaling with the strike of the move
Sight - Mentally believing your opponent is in front of you
But there is also this fact...
Torque - the turn of the fist from the ear to the opponents face generates powers
Gravity - Yes Yes, and you thought it was something that held you down!! It helps with your power!! Althought not particularly a good example but the hammer generates gravity when you bring it down, therefore it creates more force which in return creates power :uhyeah: 

So that's it from me but just a final comment...

To me (no disrespect to anyone or their style or instructors) Kenpo is not simple, there is alot to think about. But we train for years so that these factors we think about now are actually second nature to us. If we're attacked on the street and we have to defend ourselves we can deliver powerful blocks/attacks wihtout thinking. 

Well that's it from me...


----------



## Robbo (May 21, 2004)

[QUOTE Althought not particularly a good example but the hammer generates gravity when you bring it down[/QUOTE]

Actually this is a very good example as you are using marriage of gravity to perform the hammerfist which will increase power. For the small guys MOG is invaluable. For the big guys MOG is devastating.

Rob


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 21, 2004)

Kenpo_Chick said:
			
		

> Ok my 2 cents again (Yes yes it's me again shhh!)...
> 
> Our Instructor's teach us the three steps to power:
> 
> ...


Deep stances are not needed for power. If you can excellerate your mass off the ball of your foot you have power. Deep stances will add a bracing angle for force against force, but launching your body into a retreating force is actualy hindered by a deep stance. :asian: 
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 21, 2004)

Robbo said:
			
		

> [QUOTE Althought not particularly a good example but the hammer generates gravity when you bring it down



Actually this is a very good example as you are using marriage of gravity to perform the hammerfist which will increase power. For the small guys MOG is invaluable. For the big guys MOG is devastating.

Rob[/QUOTE]I don't think anyone creates gravity, but I know what you are trying to say :asian: .
Sean


----------



## Kenpo_Chick (May 21, 2004)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> Deep stances are not needed for power. If you can excellerate your mass off the ball of your foot you have power. Deep stances will add a bracing angle for force against force, but launching your body into a retreating force is actualy hindered by a deep stance. :asian:
> Sean


Ok I want to rephrase (Hey! It was late at night and it was a long post!) Deep stances was not the right wording but rather Steady stances. SOrry guys!!


----------



## Rainman (May 22, 2004)

tumpaiguy said:
			
		

> What's so specialized about it?  He uses a very common concept in generating power.  Rotating the hips!




Power comes from pushing off the floor.  It can be done as an internal whip so it depends on how much power one wants to generate.  You may also sink or rise using gravity and body momentum to add to the power.  Then add directional harmony so as no to have parts of your body going different directions.  If you are using chinese arts as an example they are not any simpler.  They use something they call fah-jing for the one inch punch.  Which is sorta like and internal wave of energy that comes from the floor.   There is much more to the one inch punch if you so choose to maximize the movement.


----------



## Kenpo_Chick (May 22, 2004)

Rainman said:
			
		

> Power comes from pushing off the floor. It can be done as an internal whip so it depends on how much power one wants to generate. You may also sink or rise using gravity and body momentum to add to the power. Then add directional harmony so as no to have parts of your body going different directions. If you are using chinese arts as an example they are not any simpler. They use something they call fah-jing for the one inch punch. Which is sorta like and internal wave of energy that comes from the floor. There is much more to the one inch punch if you so choose to maximize the movement.


EXACTLY WELL SAID!


----------



## tumpaiguy (May 22, 2004)

I am beginning to understand why not many Kajukenbo people use this site.

Adios!


----------



## Bill Lear (May 23, 2004)

*What happened to directional harmony, rotational force, and gravitational marriage being the three generators of force in Kenpo? Did I miss something?*

:idunno:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 23, 2004)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> *What happened to directional harmony, rotational force, and gravitational marriage being the three generators of force in Kenpo? Did I miss something?*
> 
> :idunno:


Directional harmony: Everybody singing while facing the same way.

Rotational Force: The energy behind projectile vomiting for one of those spinning platforms on the playground.

Gravitational Marriage: Massechusettes-sanctioned union between Isaac Newton &  Niels Bohr.

Did I win? artyon: 

D.


----------



## Bill Lear (May 23, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Directional harmony: Everybody singing while facing the same way.
> 
> Rotational Force: The energy behind projectile vomiting for one of those spinning platforms on the playground.
> 
> ...



 Oh man... This is hopeless.


----------



## Kenpo_Chick (May 25, 2004)

Bill Lear said:
			
		

> Oh man... This is hopeless.


heh...if it helps I know what you mean...advanced ways to look at a technique/move!! All is not lost Luke Skywalker :boing2:


----------



## bluenosekenpo (May 26, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Gravitational Marriage: Massechusettes-sanctioned union between Isaac Newton &  Niels Bohr.
> 
> Did I win? artyon:
> 
> D.


great, now i have to wipe coffee of the screen, thank you very much!


----------



## Seig (May 26, 2004)

Very funny, now bring it back to topic.....

:rofl:


----------



## Tydive (Aug 22, 2004)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> This weekend we had an impromptu seminar (so to speak) where we analyzed techniques and juiced them up. We learned how to deliver power with the timing. Which then provided speed.
> 
> Maybe I am showing my ignorance but in the past I have tried to become faster, thinking faster is more powerful. However it is just the opposite if you work on your timing.
> 
> ...


I think I can help you out. slow is smooth, smooth is fast, which is to say that if you;

1. Maintain your center at all times

2. Use proper technique (driving from the ground, using your entire body to concentrate force to a single end point).

3. Be relaxed, which is to say that the muscles moving in the direction of the strike are not being impeded by counter movement (tricep/bicep) until point of impact.

4. Use your opponents energy to increase your power.

5. Control the other persons center (circle theory anyone?).

6. Use you own Chi and sense of the other persons Chi to guide your strikes.



Then you will be very fast and do much more damage.



No real order to the above, but you get the idea. The area that most people mess up is the relaxed issue. You want to fill your body with energy, feel the flow from your center and have a full or dynamic tension feeling throughout (unbendable arm technique for the entire body if you will). The other problem is that people equate flexing muscles with strength and power.



As an exercise try this, pick any technique you know and slow it down. Do it so slow that you can stop your body at any point in the technique (have your partner do green light / red light for you). Then speed it up, in increments. After a while you will be able to stop/start the movement at any point even at full speed, this is what I call being in control.


Timing is everything,

Ty


----------

