# Charging Ram- Front Tackle



## MJS (Sep 12, 2006)

1: Standing with feet together, shift by sliding your left foot to 3 o'clock, into a right neutral bow and have your left hand parry opponents left arm down and out.  Simultaneously deliver a right overhead, downward chop to opponents neck as your left hand guards at groin level.

2: Immediately deliver a right snapping ball kick to opponents rib cage, kicking toward 9 o'clock.

3: Plant your right foot slightly forward and deliver a left snapping ball kick to left jaw of opponent.

4: Cross/cover to 2 o'clock


Thought we could discuss this technique, any variations, etc.  In addition, are any adjustments made to deal with a committed tackle?


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 12, 2006)

MJS said:


> 1: Standing with feet together, shift by sliding your left foot to 3 o'clock, into a right neutral bow and have your left hand parry opponents left arm down and out. Simultaneously deliver a right overhead, downward chop to opponents neck as your left hand guards at groin level.
> 
> 2: Immediately deliver a right snapping ball kick to opponents rib cage, kicking toward 9 o'clock.
> 
> ...


 
To my understanding the attack is a committed tackle, but with the arms leading hense we can parry the arm.  If the shoulder leads and the arms trail we end up getting wrapped by at least one of the arms which leads into Broken Ram.

I tend to slide more to 4:30 however to have a stronger bracing angle incase the parry misses and that left arm connects around the waist.  Stepping to 3 doesn't have the same bracing angle and if the arm connects it's more likely to fall (and belly down no less, a big No No) and end up grappling.  Not that I don't mind the grappling though )) but's not the first option.


----------



## MattJ (Sep 12, 2006)

Never cared for that one. Seemed unlikely one would be able to get past the opponent's arm in the first place. I always ended up using the parry to strike the opponent's face, LOL. "Whoops! My bad!"  

Seemed to work better that way.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 12, 2006)

MattJ said:


> Never cared for that one. Seemed unlikely one would be able to get past the opponent's arm in the first place. I always ended up using the parry to strike the opponent's face, LOL. "Whoops! My bad!"
> 
> Seemed to work better that way.


 
That's because almost no one leads with the arms in class.  They lead with the body first and arms spread out wide like in football.  But an experienced grappler will often lead with the arms in a manner similar to diving in swimming.  It's quicker to get the legs that way but inexperienced grapplers think it's a simple as "bowling someone over".  Unfortunately the kenpoist's giving the attacks usually aren't experienced grapplers.  Hense, you get variations of this technique such as the infamous left chop to the clavicle followed by the right chop.

 D**n! did I just break your collarbone!  That technique didn't work as written!  This stuff sucks, LOL.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Sep 12, 2006)

I agree with KPJJ3. Slide your foot up the circle to 4:30. I suggest you stick the guy in the neck with a braced thrusting outward chop. Even if his momentum is to fast for you to stop you are still safe with the bracing ange and he (or she) will simply go by while you maintain enlighnment. I love this one because it is so similar to five swords but you are on the outside where you are supposed to be.
Sean


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 12, 2006)

I worked this technique with my instructor's instructor, in a private lesson, this past weekend. I have not finished transcribing my notes from that lesson, but here are some thoughts we discussed. 

Many beginners have a misunderstanding of the attack, because of the name; Charging does not mean to imply forward momentum on the part of the attacker, but rather the position the attacker. The attacker will be bent forward, in a similar body position of a Charging Ram. The attack, itself, consists of one step forward, and grab. Any forward momentum is halted by the attacker.

This type of attack can be completed with the attacker 'Leading with the Arms' (Charging Ram), or 'Leading with the Body' (Broken Ram). If the arms are foward, there is an opportunity to take action before the attacker reaches your body.

The step back must provide sufficient bracing against the attack. I think a step to 3 o'Clock would be incorrect. The attack force is coming from 12 o'Clock. In our step back, we are attempting to move off the line of attack, so the foot will move toward 4:30, but I think it may even be between 4:30 and 6, to provide the required stability.

The technique was written with the left outward parry to the attacker's left arm. But, he also suggested using a right inward parry to the attacker's left arm with a left heelpalm to the attacker's right ear. He called this the 'B Version'. After the heelpalm strike, the left hand continues over the attacker's head to pick up the left arm, and check the attacker's position, continuing to apply downward pressure, as the right hand circles for the handsword.

He stressed the marriage of gravity on the right downward handsword, settling into the kneel stance. He suggested that this strike could end the attack, dropping the attacker to the ground. 

We learned the technique with a right ball kick to the ribs, and a left roundhouse to the face. He suggested three different left kicks based on the attacker's reaction to the first kick.

Right front kick to the ribs - left front kick to the face, if the attacker is still bent over at the waist.
Right front kick to the ribs - left diagonal roundhouse, if the attacker raises up partiall.
Right front kick to the ribs - full left roundhouse, if the attacker is standing vertical.
Last thought for now. This is a chase technique. The attacker has no brace angle against the first kick, so he is going to be move down the 9 o'clock line pretty rapidly and pretty far; so, that right foot is going to have to plant pretty far forward as it lands from the kick.


----------



## kenpoworks (Sep 13, 2006)

4:30 is the angle for me, I dont parry I strike the penetrative value of your first point(s) of contact is what keys this technique for me, I use correctly executed "blocks" as the model exercise when teaching Charging Ram.
Rich


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 13, 2006)

kenpoworks said:


> 4:30 is the angle for me, I dont parry I strike the penetrative value of your first point(s) of contact is what keys this technique for me, I use correctly executed "blocks" as the model exercise when teaching Charging Ram.
> Rich


 
Rich, 

I understand the first clause of this response -- move your left foot to 4:30.

What do you mean, 'strike the penetrative value'? 

What do you mean, 'model exercise'?

I'm sure there is a reason you are using such language. To me, this language obscures meaning. 

Can you help me understand the language choice you have made, and what that language is attempting to describe in the four dimension world in which we execute techniques?


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> I worked this technique with my instructor's instructor, in a private lesson, this past weekend. I have not finished transcribing my notes from that lesson, but here are some thoughts we discussed.
> 
> Many beginners have a misunderstanding of the attack, because of the name; Charging does not mean to imply forward momentum on the part of the attacker, but rather the position the attacker. The attacker will be bent forward, in a similar body position of a Charging Ram. The attack, itself, consists of one step forward, and grab. Any forward momentum is halted by the attacker.
> 
> ...


 
I'm in agreement with all of this except the part about the attacker "taking one step and trying to grab".  If that is the ideal phase "as written" then that needs a new look in my opnion.  Any grappler (Ju Jitsu Wrestling or whatever) that knows how to use that "grab" knows he has to take at THE LEAST two steps.  One step to grab and the second step to either blow through for the drive down or get the hips underneath your hips for the lift.  Taking one step only is suicide.... If it is one step it's another example of training to fight the guy who doesn't know much.  But then again it is an orange belt technique and the first "official" tackle technique so it has to be relatively easy.  I just have a bias against spending training time learning to beat the inept.  Ok, this turned into a rant....LOL


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 13, 2006)

My conversation with my instructor's instructor was that only in the technique 'Intercepting the Ram' does the aggressor apply any forward momentum. In both Charging Ram and Broken Ram, he was very clear, the attack is that the aggressor takes a step in, and stops himself.

I do not speak to the technical term 'grab' as used by grapplers and grappling systems. It may have a specific meaning in other systems that I am unaware of, and therefore unable to comment on the definition as used.

As for training to "beat the inept", doesn't much of what we learn kind of mandate 'read time' - and isn't read time a symptom of an opponent being inept? If our opponent is using proper technique, is there really going to be any way to defend against it? Isn't 'action' faster than 'reaction'?


----------



## kenpoworks (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Rich,
> 
> I understand the first clause of this response -- move your left foot to 4:30.
> 
> ...


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 13, 2006)

For the first kick, many have posted they use a front ball snap kick to the ribs.  Curious as to that choice over an "punt" or instep kick.  I personally use both depending on the situation.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> My conversation with my instructor's instructor was that only in the technique 'Intercepting the Ram' does the aggressor apply any forward momentum. In both Charging Ram and Broken Ram, he was very clear, the attack is that the aggressor takes a step in, and stops himself.
> 
> I do not speak to the technical term 'grab' as used by grapplers and grappling systems. It may have a specific meaning in other systems that I am unaware of, and therefore unable to comment on the definition as used.
> 
> As for training to "beat the inept", doesn't much of what we learn kind of mandate 'read time' - and isn't read time a symptom of an opponent being inept? If our opponent is using proper technique, is there really going to be any way to defend against it? Isn't 'action' faster than 'reaction'?


 
Different strokes for different folks.  In my instruction the difference between the attacks has been Environment, arm positioning and opponent range the forward momentum was always there and Charging was not used ot mention body position as all of the Ram's have forward momentum behind the attack...even Bear and The Ram (Ram as in Battering Ram).  But different lines look at things different ways.  I'm a grappler so I know what a tackle is for from a grappling perspective and apply that to Kenpo.  A one step tackle is an idiot move and suicidal to say the least, it is never done by the experienced.  The lead leg is always followed by the "trail" leg (rear leg) whether it's a shoot or an attempted clinch.  Otherwise the attempt is just that an attempt with marginal chance at success due to lack of positioning, penetration and leverage.

By grab I meant the initial action of the tackle which is the arms engaging the opponent to either wrap up the legs, torso or hips or a combination there of.

NO read time is not indicative of the opponent being inept.  Read time is a "sliding scale" depending on differences in skill level.  The more skilled you are than the attacker the more read time you will have in relation to his moves.  It's a difference in reaction time in other words.  Also if you're skilled in reading body language and the attacker is unskilled in minimizing telegraphing you will again hav more read time.  Read time is often a perceptual skill instead of a physical one (remember the three speeds and the heirarchy there of) And action IS NOT always faster than reaction.  If that were the case Blocks, Parries, Bobs, Weaves, and Slips would NEVER be successful as they are reactionary defensive measures by nature.  Reaction often beats action as a matter of fact reation beats action at least 154 times in the Kenpo system or none of the stuff works..


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 13, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> For the first kick, many have posted they use a front ball snap kick to the ribs. Curious as to that choice over an "punt" or instep kick. I personally use both depending on the situation.


 
I only use the instep when I don't want to hurt something, or am kicking the back of the knee and don't want my toes getting bent backwards when their knee buckles.  Using the instep spreads the force over too wide of an area.  I'm trying to but my foot through their solar plexus or face depending on where I'm throwing the kick this particular time doing Charging Ram...


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 13, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> I only use the instep when I don't want to hurt something, or am kicking the back of the knee and don't want my toes getting bent backwards when their knee buckles. Using the instep spreads the force over too wide of an area. I'm trying to but my foot through their solar plexus or face depending on where I'm throwing the kick this particular time doing Charging Ram...


 
Thanks.  Most of the time when I practice this technique the person is bent to low to attack the solar plexus with the snap kick.  But I am also 6'7".  

But if going to the rib cage on the side, the front snap will do more damage.


----------



## DavidCC (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Many beginners have a misunderstanding of the attack, because of the name; Charging does not mean to imply forward momentum on the part of the attacker, but rather the position the attacker. The attacker will be bent forward, in a similar body position of a Charging Ram. The attack, itself, consists of one step forward, and grab. Any forward momentum is halted by the attacker.


 
Why would anyone EVER do that???  What is the attacker trying to accomplish by stopping their own momentum?


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 13, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> Thanks. Most of the time when I practice this technique the person is bent to low to attack the solar plexus with the snap kick. But I am also 6'7".
> 
> But if going to the rib cage on the side, the front snap will do more damage.


 
D**n!! you got me by a whole foot!  See for people like you I train Migun-Bigerdin-Urs an I recently started cross training in Aishu-Tibeta with Carol Kuar.  LOL


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 13, 2006)

DavidCC said:


> Why would anyone EVER do that??? What is the attacker trying to accomplish by stopping their own momentum?


 
Getting himself nailed with hard knees and elbows maybe???:idunno:


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 13, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> D**n!! you got me by a whole foot! See for people like you I train Migun-Bigerdin-Urs an I recently started cross training in Aishu-Tibeta with Carol Kuar.  LOL


 

Lol!!!


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 13, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> Reaction often beats action as a matter of fact reation beats action at least 154 times in the Kenpo system or none of the stuff works..


 
Many times I have heard the phrase, "If you can't read it, you can't defend against it". I believe that was attributed to Bruce Lee. I believe the American Kenpo techniques that I train have this as an underlying concept. I hold this belief, because it has this information has been shared with me by people far more experienced and far more skilled than me.


----------



## JamesB (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Many beginners have a misunderstanding of the attack, because of the name; Charging does not mean to imply forward momentum on the part of the attacker, but rather the position the attacker. The attacker will be bent forward, in a similar body position of a Charging Ram. The attack, itself, consists of one step forward, and grab. Any forward momentum is halted by the attacker.


 


			
				DavidCC said:
			
		

> Why would anyone EVER do that??? What is the attacker trying to accomplish by stopping their own momentum?


 
I'm agreement with DavidCC here. The attacker will not stop their own momentum if their intention is to tackle you to the ground. Only if they perceive a threat will they attempt to stop, but they will still have forward momentum when their body hits you. Even then they may just 'go for broke' and thump into you. This attack does not start 10 meters away either, it is a close-in, sudden lunge at your lower body, with *intent*.



michaeledward said:


> My conversation with my instructor's instructor was that only in the technique 'Intercepting the Ram' does the aggressor apply any forward momentum. In both Charging Ram and Broken Ram, he was very clear, the attack is that the aggressor takes a step in, and stops himself.


 
In my opinion, this kind of logic is typically applied when there are problems with the way the techniques are being trained. In the above scenario, the attacker *has *to stop otherwise the techniques would not work. But hold on, what if he keeps coming at you? You will not know ahead of time if the attacker will stop or not - if you happened to rear-twist and attempt Charging Ram and he doesn't stop, then its game over. Much better to assume the worst and have a technique that is robust enough to counter the attacker's forward momentum and provide a response once the initial attack has been absorbed.

I posted about these techniques a while ago: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36680

In my own tests, I found parrying the arm in Charging Ram a no-no. Even if you 'luck out' and get the parry (unlikely imo) the attacker will go sailing straight past you.

James


----------



## JamesB (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Many times I have heard the phrase, "If you can't read it, you can't defend against it". I believe that was attributed to Bruce Lee. I believe the American Kenpo techniques that I train have this as an underlying concept. I hold this belief, because it has this information has been shared with me by people far more experienced and far more skilled than me.


 
I agree in part - but only in the context of punch+kick defences. All other forms of attack cannot be anticipated and the corresponding kenpo techniques should be 100% functional even when the attacker makes contact and has taken you by surprise. This goes for pushes, grabs, chokes etc. For example, it is impossible to 'read' a rear-bearhug attack, or a choke/grab from the rear - but the defences always work as long as they are trained with the correct mindset.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 13, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Many times I have heard the phrase, "If you can't read it, you can't defend against it". I believe that was attributed to Bruce Lee. I believe the American Kenpo techniques that I train have this as an underlying concept. I hold this belief, because it has this information has been shared with me by people far more experienced and far more skilled than me.


 
And I'm not disagreeing with that.  But in reading it you are REACTING to it. You "read" the attack after it has been initaited, you "anticipate" the attack before it has been initiated.  The kenpo techniques don't train anticipation as this leads to falling for feints.  So by reading the attack and defending you are reacting to their action.  So in agreement with you we read the attack(action) and then defend (reaction) the attack.

My disagreement is that the opponent does something that's baseline stupid for us to have the time to make a read.  

Examples: 

1) Taking a one step tackle, no tackle is successful this way unless our footing is that bad.

2) Throwing punches from outside kicking range like many TKD schools do

3) Punching at the defender with the other hand chambered at the hip which opens targets that aren't actually present in a fight and makes their backup weapon take a longer time to get to us.

4) Attacking with a long range stick at a range where a hammer fist can land, hello it's a stick swing from further away.

5) advancing with a step on every attack which telegraphs the intentions...

In short train to fight the smart guy from day one.  A fool is going to tackle and stop his own momentum.  Answer this.  If a tackle defense is taught against a "tackle" where the oponent kills his own momentum then why don't we train other attacks in this fashion such as grabs that stop before they get to us, punches and kicks that retract before impact, bear hugs that don't apply pressure.....the reason I'm thinking of is because they (meaning the attacks) won't work.  Same as a tackle with no momentum...with no momentum a tackle is just a glorified Bear Hug and we have several techniques for that already...

I think Doc would classify this as changing attacks to mere attempts.....


----------



## MJS (Sep 14, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> That's because almost no one leads with the arms in class. They lead with the body first and arms spread out wide like in football. But an experienced grappler will often lead with the arms in a manner similar to diving in swimming. It's quicker to get the legs that way but inexperienced grapplers think it's a simple as "bowling someone over". Unfortunately the kenpoist's giving the attacks usually aren't experienced grapplers. Hense, you get variations of this technique such as the infamous left chop to the clavicle followed by the right chop.
> 
> D**n! did I just break your collarbone! That technique didn't work as written! This stuff sucks, LOL.


 
Yup, I see that all the time!  I guess all that talk that a certain Kenpoist does on cross referencing other arts, is something we should take into consideration.   I agree though, it is helpful to get an attack that from an experienced and inexperienced partner.


----------



## pete (Sep 14, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> And I'm not disagreeing with that. But in reading it you are REACTING to it. You "read" the attack after it has been initaited, you "anticipate" the attack before it has been initiated. The kenpo techniques don't train anticipation as this leads to falling for feints. So by reading the attack and defending you are reacting to their action. So in agreement with you we read the attack(action) and then defend (reaction) the attack


 
i like what you are saying, but i'd differentiate by using the terms RESPONDING vs REACTING. 

REACTING might include anticipating or imply a sequential defend/attack approach. it may also describe a preset hard-wired reflex pattern without conscious thought.

I like RESPONDING, where catalyst is identified, mind intent is activated, and the defense and attack are dispatched as one as a deliberate action based on all your training.

may just be words, but i see a BIG difference in the training needed to develop either approach.  i'd say ACTION beats REACTION, but not does not beat RESPONDING. 

pete


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 14, 2006)

pete said:


> i like what you are saying, but i'd differentiate by using the terms RESPONDING vs REACTING.
> 
> REACTING might include anticipating or imply a sequential defend/attack approach. it may also describe a preset hard-wired reflex pattern without conscious thought.
> 
> ...


 
I'm totally with you.  By reacting I mean that we are acting 2nd to a catalyst.  I like the term responding better.  It better captures more of the intention.


----------



## jasonearle (Sep 14, 2006)

my teacher thru a jujitsu into my learning and the funnest way I learned it was to throw.  Left leg C-steps back, left hand comes down on top of their head and right leg comes up into their armpit area, using opposing forces to throw them. the motion of your arms does not stop.  they flip because their energy is carrying them that way and you are just redirecting.  I learned the traditional way to, but this way was much funner.


----------



## Hye Kenpo Nar (Sep 15, 2006)

stepping off to 4:30 into a forward bow (bracing angle) and the left outward handsword to the neck is what is supposed to stop the attackers momentum. you can't step to 3 o clock bacaus you are still on the line of attack and it would be hard to be in a stable neutral bow so any small push or tap could make you lose your balance


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 15, 2006)

Hye Kenpo Nar said:


> *stepping off to 4:30 into a forward bow (bracing angle) and the left outward handsword to the neck is what is supposed to stop the attackers momentum.* you can't step to 3 o clock bacaus you are still on the line of attack and it would be hard to be in a stable neutral bow so any small push or tap could make you lose your balance


 
But often times it'll just ride an attackers force downard and turn a waist level tackle into lower shoot....well if it's an experienced grappler who knoes how to level change.  That's when things go to plan B which is already built in....


----------



## MJS (Sep 15, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> And I'm not disagreeing with that. But in reading it you are REACTING to it. You "read" the attack after it has been initaited, you "anticipate" the attack before it has been initiated. The kenpo techniques don't train anticipation as this leads to falling for feints. So by reading the attack and defending you are reacting to their action. So in agreement with you we read the attack(action) and then defend (reaction) the attack.


 
Agreed and this is the way I train my material.  Personally, I don't want to assume that they're going to throw one thing, start to react to it, only to find out that I was wrong.  

Mike


----------



## KenpoSterre (Sep 16, 2006)

MJS said:


> 1: Standing with feet together, shift by sliding your left foot to 3 o'clock, into a right neutral bow and have your left hand parry opponents left arm down and out.  Simultaneously deliver a right overhead, downward chop to opponents neck as your left hand guards at groin level.
> 
> 2: Immediately deliver a right snapping ball kick to opponents rib cage, kicking toward 9 o'clock.
> 
> ...



In my school when we do that technique we slide back to a right neatrul bow and  check their left shouldder with our left arm and shop their neck with our right hand. Then we swing our left leg in to a right neautral bow facing 9 0'clock. Then when they attempt to stand up by pushing themselves up with their arms we do a right flip wheel kick to their arm to they land back down on their jaw. We follow up with a left front snap kick to the ribs and cover out to two o'clock.

The technique will also work if they don't try to get up by changing the flip wheel to a front snap kick to the ribs and follow up as usual.


----------



## Seabrook (Sep 16, 2006)

MattJ said:


> Never cared for that one. Seemed unlikely one would be able to get past the opponent's arm in the first place.


 
The Ram techniques, including Charging Ram, worked awesome for me when I fought full-contact against an experienced kickboxer and jiu-jitsu black belt about a year ago. 

It works, big-time.


----------

