# Path vs. Line



## ProfessorKenpo (Oct 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by kenposikh _
> *The problem here is that people try to blind us with science here. A strike going from A to B must follow a path to the end, whether this be a straight line or circular either way it is a path.
> 
> Your instructors are trying to blind you here.
> ...



Thank you Amrik, for having the good sense to see this.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 30, 2003)

Needle vs. squeegee; man-to-man vs. zone defense; immaculate perfection vs. good enough to work well.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Sep 30, 2003)

Anyone who has been in kenpo for any amount of time has been told that they should use a *Path of Action* when doing certain techniques.  I thought it might be of some value to explore the differences between a Path of Action and a Line of Action and perhaps benefits of using one over the other.  Is there ever a time when a line of action is more advantageous than a path? When?


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Oct 1, 2003)

Obviously a path of action, referred to earlier as the squeegee principle, lends itself well to blocking incoming attacks (this is taught in starblock), but let's look at striking.  Is there ever an appropriate time to strike using a line of action over a path of action?  What benefits are there to using a path of action in striking?


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Oct 3, 2003)

Kenpo2dabone:

I totally agree.  Good points all around.


----------



## ArnoldLee (Sep 30, 2003)

Okey, I'll give this a shot.  

A path of action falls under the self defense principle of Margin for Error.  I'd assume that a line of action is utilized where the need for Margin for Error is lessened.

Before I go any further I'll use the example of thrusting with the front portion of the fist (a "punch") where you go straight from point A to B (line of action) instead of "wiping" using the forearm in a hammering method of execution (path of action).

This instance not requiring Margin for Error might be when you limit an opponent's amount of freedom so much that you can choose to strike him at leisure (you have both ends of a limb pinned down and then break his elbow for example) or when using a path of action would mean overextending or compromising proper body structure.

I dunno, I'm kinda fumbling in the dark and extrapolating here.  Does my definition fit what you had in mind?


----------



## ArnoldLee (Oct 1, 2003)

I don't think that this would start a fight.  I believe Mr. Parker and many of the seniors I questioned demonstrated their punches this way... anchoring their elbows and thus delivering the punch via a path.  If anything there is very rarely a straight line from A to B, it's usually a very flat arc (mayhap something to do with elongating circles?).  This would apply not only to punches but even something like a whipping backfist the elbow would anchor and thus move through a slight path even if the fist looked like it was going straight.


----------



## Kenpomachine (Oct 1, 2003)

You mean straight and arched?
Because a line doesn't need to be straight, just see the *S*


----------



## WhiteTiger (Oct 1, 2003)

This sounds like circular motion vs. linear motion.  You AK guys seem to have not end of complex and flowery definitions for otherwise simple concepts.

Respectully


----------



## Touch Of Death (Sep 30, 2003)

Other than threading, what do you mean by line of action?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 1, 2003)

Not to start a fight here but we teach that by anchoring our elbow, our strait punches follow a path of action in that the first half of that strike is always a block. My point being that the weopon may follow a line but the vehicle(your arm or leg) would always end up on a path.:asian:


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 1, 2003)

Obviously verticle paths are easier to evade as a potential target; however, the master key method of execution for empty handed fighting is thrust. Five Swords works great against a straight punch but you need to tag the throat as part of the first move. You are more likely to be the recipiant of a thrust. Yes, it is easier to evade but if you are unsucsessfull you are going down.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by WhiteTiger _
> *This sounds like circular motion vs. linear motion.  You AK guys seem to have not end of complex and flowery definitions for otherwise simple concepts.
> 
> Respectully *


Actualy I'm talking about vertical vs horizontal. In my particular version of kenpo we work only in paths while understanding that your weopon itself is of course traveling on a line.


----------



## kenpo2dabone (Sep 30, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *Other than threading, what do you mean by line of action? *



A line of action strike would be, for example, a straight punch to the face. A path of action strike would be a back-knuckle to the face. Line of action strikes, in my opinion, are more devastating than path of action strikes due to the fact that you can hit with all your mass behind it. Path of action strikes tend to be limited in back up mass to only the backup mass of the weapon itself, such as your fist. Another analogy would be stabbing a person with a knife, which is line of action, and slicing somebody, which is path of action. 

Line of action advantages:

you can hit with all your mass. 
straight line strikes get from point A to point B quicker than strikes that travel on an arch.

Disadvanteges:

smaller margin for error. 
you have to be more accurate. 

Path of action advantages:

Greater margin for error.
less accuracy is needed.
Tend to be easier for beginner students due to gross motor skills

Disadvanteages:

Do not have as much power.
Take longer to get to target.


----------



## kenpo2dabone (Oct 1, 2003)

Well, I think I pointed out pretty clearly what I felt the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each type of strike in my original post. I would like to add however, that there are times that I prefer one over the other. Like everything else in Kenpo, it is situational. For instance, I prefer a path of action forarm under the chin after a hammer fist to the groin. The reason for this is do to the fact that I am closer to my attacker. A line of action strike would require me to aim my weapon, my fist, first and then strike taking up half a beat in the technique. A rising forarm is now quicker because no adjustment or "aiming" is required. It goes straight to the target with no articulation of the elbow needed before the strike can make contact. It does not matter if I strike him with my forarm closer to my fist or closer to my elbow. Therefore, I do not need to make as much adjustment for range. In my previest post I made it sound like "line of action" is better or more advanced. I just wanted to point out that there are times when I prefer a "path of action" much more. After thinking about some more I would have to say that more often than not I prefer to use path of action strikes when I am doing consecutive strikes with the same hand. I prefer to use line of action strikes when alternating hands because while one hand or foot is striking the other has time to set up for the next strike.    

Salute,
Mike Miller UKF


----------



## MisterMike (Oct 1, 2003)

A path is curved, but not necessarily circular. Look at the ovals in the universal pattern.

A line, well, is a line.

As your motion advances, paths transition to lines, and vice-versa.

You can see linear techniques, such as Parting Wings (although there are some corners rounded), but the three strikes are linear.

As for paths, look at Circles of Protection for instance.

I think there is more fluidness in "circular" motion. USing the figure-8 pattern you can pick up attcaks and easily insert defenses.


----------



## MisterMike (Oct 1, 2003)

> Agreed a line is a line but surely a path is the vector along which the weapon travels and therefore can be linear or circular.



I did not learn in Kenpo that a Path was anything but non-linear.

As far as mathematics, there are path solutions which are linear, but a vector is always linear.

I'm trying to answer within the definitions of Kenpo, as I was taught. The travel of weapons is either straight or curved, or linear or along a path.


----------



## kenposikh (Oct 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by WhiteTiger _
> *This sounds like circular motion vs. linear motion.  You AK guys seem to have not end of complex and flowery definitions for otherwise simple concepts.
> 
> Respectully *



The problem here is that people try to blind us with science here. A strike going from A to B must follow a path to the end, whether this be a straight line or circular either way it is a path.

Your instructors are trying to blind you here.

I would have to say that the all encompassing phrase is to take a course of action


----------



## kenposikh (Oct 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by MisterMike _
> *A path is curved, but not necessarily circular. Look at the ovals in the universal pattern.
> 
> A line, well, is a line.
> ...



Agreed a line is a line but surely a path is the vector along which the weapon travels and therefore can be linear or circular.

I'm sorry I just don't understand.


----------



## kenposikh (Oct 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kenpomachine _
> *You mean straight and arched?
> Because a line doesn't need to be straight, just see the *S*  *



 I meant line to mean linear, but well done for that


----------



## kenposikh (Oct 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo _
> *Thank you Amrik, for having the good sense to see this.
> 
> 
> ...



I just say it as I see it Clyde.


----------

