# open hands



## matsu (Jun 7, 2008)

sorry if been asked b4.....

why are open hands like slaps wirst strikes used in mma?
especially from the clinch.

there are a few wing chun strikes very applicable here... are they illegal in mma rules?

thanks in advance

matsu


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 8, 2008)

I'm assuming you're asking why they AREN'T used in MMA more often?  

From a standing clinch position: they don't cause enough damage or pain to a conditioned fighter to be worthwhile for them to use when they have other options like elbows, knees and uppercuts available to them and can be thrown in the same amount of space.

From a longer range standing position: you are allowed to wrap your hands (some places) and wear gloves, making it safer to punch with your knuckles which do cause more damage, and can flow into combinations more easily, hence fighters using punches.  

Back in the early NHB days, the Pancrase organization allowed only open hand strikes to the head, while allowing punches to the body.  They had very few knockouts, which was the point, they wanted to showcase the grappling skills of their fighters.  Only the absolute top strikers were able to produce KO's under those rules (Bas Rutten was one of the few), and even he didn't get any KO's with his hands, mostly using his knees from the clinch to put people away.


----------



## Nolerama (Jun 9, 2008)

I saw a kung-fu exhibition match this weekend in an MMA competition format. They wore the MMA gloves (no handwraps/tape though) and fought three three -minute rounds.

While I think there are certainly situations where you can throw an open-handed strike, from what I saw in these fights, the guys throwing the open hands got knocked out/down with one well-placed punch.


----------



## markyboy (Jun 9, 2008)

Hi guys, (new to this forum)

Open handed strikes are considerably much more powerful than closed fist strikes,and kinder to your hands.
The force generated by open palms,chops are much more likely to cause knockout or death,because your palms are sitting right on your forearm bone and the transfer of power to deliver or absorb is incredible.

A way to prove this is slam your palm as hard as you can against a brick wall.
it might hurt slightly,but if you used the same power with your fist,you're are going to do a lot of damage to your hands,although unless you're drunk or something your brain would'nt allow you to do it anyway.
Plus punching is not natural to us,it is a trained responce.


----------



## matsu (Jun 9, 2008)

ok big fanx guys,some great info there. x

matsu


----------



## 7starmarc (Jun 9, 2008)

Nolerama said:


> I saw a kung-fu exhibition match this weekend in an MMA competition format. They wore the MMA gloves (no handwraps/tape though) and fought three three -minute rounds.
> 
> While I think there are certainly situations where you can throw an open-handed strike, from what I saw in these fights, the guys throwing the open hands got knocked out/down with one well-placed punch.


 
What does it mean that "the guys throwing the open hands got knocked out/down"? 

Throwing an open hand strike has very little to do with whether or not you get struck, or whether or not you can take a punch. Actually, if the fighter is well trained, the open hand strike can lead to more defensive reactions than the closed fist strike.

Effective palm strikes need to be trained just as much as an effective punch. Palm strikes become much more effective with body conditioning such a Iron Palm Training.

I've never used MMA gloves, however, so I can't really comment on the effect that this equipment has on a palm strike or knife edge strike.


----------



## Nolerama (Jun 9, 2008)

7starmarc said:


> What does it mean that "the guys throwing the open hands got knocked out/down"?
> 
> Throwing an open hand strike has very little to do with whether or not you get struck, or whether or not you can take a punch. Actually, if the fighter is well trained, the open hand strike can lead to more defensive reactions than the closed fist strike.
> 
> ...



This was from my point of view. The people in the fights that threw numerous "open palm" strikes ended up not connecting properly. In fact, I saw a lot of useless-looking things that didn't need to be in there, like placing a palm on a chest, or double-hitting an arm when there was clearly (very clearly) a way to hit the opponent's chin.

Those guys took their sweet time trying to make the fight look good. That got them knocked out by the guy who understood what they were doing in terms of technique, but essentially looking for the one opening to create the most damage with his fists.

What I also saw was this guy who kept dropping his head and burying it in the armpit of his opponent. When I asked him what that was all about afterwards, he looked visibly angry and said that was part of his technique. I told him it wasn't my fault his face was all bruised up.

I did see two fighters using a lot of blocks, parries, but I don't know why they were so surprised when they got hit in the face, too.

There was a karateka that was more into his hair than remembering to wear a cup as well. The tears streaming down a grown man's face after getting taken down a few times. Then he roared. In anger. I'm serious.

I guess it wasn't the best exhibition ever, but I did notice some things wrong in terms of logic and was super happy to find out that they were working on a "progressive fighting system" to tune into competition fighting. Those were the guys who knocked the open-handed strikers out cold.

I don't think the gloves mattered much anyway. They all used crappy $10 Ringside MMA gloves (I bought a pair; they ARE crappy). 

Ultimately, I think there was a breakdown in objective: some people were looking for a knockout. Other people were there to showcase their style. Some knocked people out. Other's made their art look great.

Still, others made me laugh.


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 9, 2008)

I would have to respectfully disagree on the impact power from a palm heel strike being more than a punch.  Like I said before, you had top notch strikers fight in Pancrase (Maurice Smith, Bas Rutten and a few others) fight under open palm striking rules and I can't recall a single KO from palm strikes, these were strikes coming from people with world class power and experience as well as skill.  After the transition to "standard" mma rules with closed fist punches, their KO rate from punches went up to levels on par with the UFC and Pride.  

I recall bas rutten saying that palm heel strikes weren't as effective as punches and took a lot more hits to have the same effect as a punch and he fought most of his career with open palm strikes.  

Safer, absolutely.  A palm heel strike is a lot safer to throw than a bare knuckle punch for the person throwing it.  There's a lot less chance of getting a boxers fracture if you miss, however, I've seen people get sprained wrists from throwing a palm heel that was blocked or just missed.  One was badly sprained enough to stop the fight.  

I would also have to point out that throwing a palm heel strike isn't a natural act either, it's also a trained response.  Where as punching is also a trained response, clenching your fists and hitting someone with them is so ingrained into people that young children do it with no training all the time.  

I think palm heels work well for self defense skills, especially against untrained fighter.  The damage caused by a palm heel strike (called a chin jab by most RBSD and WW2 combatives people) isn't from the impact of the strike, but from the follow through jerking the head back or to the side.  I know I got my neck injured from a student putting his palm on my chin and just pushing it back once during a drill.  

When you are squaring off against someone in a cage, they typically have skills and don't leave the kind of openings that you get from someone with no training.  The palm heel strikes also have too large an area to fit through a tight defense versus a punch and get deflected a lot easier.  

Just my observations


----------



## markyboy (Jun 9, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> I would have to respectfully disagree on the impact power from a palm heel strike being more than a punch.  Like I said before, you had top notch strikers fight in Pancrase (Maurice Smith, Bas Rutten and a few others) fight under open palm striking rules and I can't recall a single KO from palm strikes, these were strikes coming from people with world class power and experience as well as skill.  After the transition to "standard" mma rules with closed fist punches, their KO rate from punches went up to levels on par with the UFC and Pride.
> 
> I recall bas rutten saying that palm heel strikes weren't as effective as punches and took a lot more hits to have the same effect as a punch and he fought most of his career with open palm strikes.
> 
> ...



Hi, It is obvious you have "with respect" little knowlege on this subject.
To fight with open palms ,even with little training can be devastating,don't believe what you here from other sources,they are wrong.Big time.

When you trip and can't stop yourself from falling,you don't clench your fists,what you do,do is open your palms before contact with the ground.

This is natural and that is my whole point,if it ain't natural it is unlikely to work.

Remember man defended himself,for over four million years before kung fu came about,and obviously very successfuly.


----------



## Brian S (Jun 10, 2008)

markyboy said:


> Hi guys, (new to this forum)
> 
> Open handed strikes are considerably much more powerful than closed fist strikes,and kinder to your hands.
> The force generated by open palms,chops are much more likely to cause knockout or death,because your palms are sitting right on your forearm bone and the transfer of power to deliver or absorb is incredible.
> ...


 
 Your assumptions about open handed strikes are unfounded. It is better to hit a hard target like the skull with the palm,but that's why they wear gloves.

 I'm not sure where to go with the "more likely to cause death" statement. there is no way to prove that other than your own assumptions.

 With palm strikes you lose inches in reach advantage, not smart in an mma setting.

 BTW, punching is a natural response, striking with the palm is not.

 and if someone doesn't agree with you it doesn't mean they are inexperienced or of little knowledge, that's just an insult.


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 10, 2008)

I guess my experience being a rabid fan of pancrase and other fighting venues that allowed punches doesn't count for anything.  Neither does my actual experience competing in amateur pancrase rules, as well as MMA rules.  

Let's ignore the fact that EVERY fighter that fought under pancrase rules says the same thing, that punches hurt more and do more damage than palm heel strikes.  Let's also ignore that Masa Funkai, the founder of pancrase, said the reason for using palm strikes instead of punches was to stop people from getting KO'ed and allow for more fast paced grappling. 

Also ignore the fact that when pancrase changed it's rules to allow punching, that their KO rates rose to match the UFC and pride.  

Falling down isnt' the same thing as fighting someone.  One is a reaction to falling, the other a reaction to an attack.  

I have NEVER seen anyone throw a palm heel strike that wasn't trained to do so.  I have seen countless fights in the county jail (where I help teach defensive tactics to local LEO's), bars, parties and other places, and I have NEVER seen a palm heel strike.  Every person clenched their fists and hit each other with them.  Even little old ladies clench their fists when they are angry and hit someone (see youtube for some funny videos).  In fact, of hte people actually trained to throw palm heel strikes, most do not when they are in a physical confrontation.  

If you do much research into actual application of palm heel strikes, you'll find that the effective use of them comes from close range, and from striking upward, forcing the neck back and damaging it (see Applegate's WW2 combatives book Kill or Get Killed).  This is hard to do against anybody who knows anything about actual fighting who keeps their chin tucked to prevent a hit like that.  Hence the lack of them being used in modern MMA competition.  Against some schmuck in an alley, it will most likely work to the devestating results you are thinking of.  MMA competition is different though.


----------



## matsu (Jun 10, 2008)

oops .... opened that can of worms hee hee!!

my original question was, with my fairly limtited knowledge of mma rules and only as an avid ufc observer, was that in the dirty boxing situation certain very powerful wing chun technoques were not utilised.
 the palm strikes we use are concussive from very short range and can be quite devasstating. so i just wondered.

i think that all of us esp only those of US that train in limited styles tend to dismiss other techniques from other styles even tho we dont know how they are taught or used.

nolerama- when you observe there are always lots of useless stuff being done.for me i cant beleive how many people drop their arms as they kick and therefore telegraph the incoming technique or/and leave themseves open to counter.think that why few people try to kick the iceman...??

turning into a cool thread .....:knight2:

matsu


----------



## markyboy (Jun 10, 2008)

Brian S said:


> Your assumptions about open handed strikes are unfounded. It is better to hit a hard target like the skull with the palm,but that's why they wear gloves.
> 
> I'm not sure where to go with the "more likely to cause death" statement. there is no way to prove that other than your own assumptions.
> 
> ...




No not unfounded as history dos'nt lie, all world war 2 combat was open hands,so british close comat as taught to the American,Canadian,and Austrailian troops,has the highest number of kills than any other art.

So open hands do reign supreme-Fact.

As to insults -I am not giving you my opinion,I am giving you facts which cannot be disputed. So disagreeing with facts is not like disagreeing with
opinions which can be challenged.

Apes who resemble us the most,fight extremely well,no posing,no x blocks
forms,or jab cross hook.

its either palms or hammerfists.


----------



## meth18au (Jun 10, 2008)

markyboy said:


> So open hands do reign supreme-Fact.
> 
> As to insults -I am not giving you my opinion,I am giving you facts which cannot be disputed. So disagreeing with facts is not like disagreeing with
> opinions which can be challenged.




Why can't your facts be disputed?  Skoptamus just gave you a whole bunch of real facts, some of it even based on first hand experience- and you have disputed it.  Isn't that a little hypocritical?

On top of that- your facts aren't from first hand experience (from what you are saying). You're talking about slamming your palm against a wall, WW2 combatatives, Apes and falling on the fall!!!  Think about it dude?

:idunno:


----------



## markyboy (Jun 10, 2008)

meth18au said:


> Why can't your facts be disputed?  Skoptamus just gave you a whole bunch of real facts, some of it even based on first hand experience- and you have disputed it.  Isn't that a little hypocritical?
> 
> On top of that- your facts aren't from first hand experience (from what you are saying). You're talking about slamming your palm against a wall, WW2 combatatives, Apes and falling on the fall!!!  Think about it dude?
> 
> :idunno:



Hi,
I think you're missing the point-Natural movements are faster and more powerfull than trained responses.

Ring fighting is not the same as fighting in the street.
All these top fighters as you call it,would be good whatever art they did (good genes).

In the ring you can win by points but in real fights you have to knock people out-Jack Dempsey.

Oh and by the way my experiences are real and they work.


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 10, 2008)

Open handed weapons (such as palm strikes) can be useful in very short range situations where a closed fist might not give you a good angle for strike, or where the angle required makes hitting with a closed fist impossible.  For example if the other guy's face is very close to yours, punching with a properly aligned fist requires an angle in your arm that will rob you of most of the power, whereas using a palm heel you can have a different shoulder/elbow angle that does not.  Using a fist with that same arm angle will make it more likely to hurt your wrist.

There's also the old nugget about "hard target/soft weapon - soft target/hard weapon" although sporting gear can blur the line between soft and hard weapons.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 10, 2008)

I'm sorry but I have to agree with skpotamus here (hope I spelled that right). I have a four year old boy who  has not been "trained" in any way to fight, but when he goes to hit his brother it is always with a clenched fist, unless he slaps him but that is a slap, not an open palm or ridgehand strike. It's just logical...one of the first natural human responses when one is angry is to clench the fists, even if one has no intention of striking anyone...kind of like clecnhing the jaw.

Bas Rutten is one of the most powerful strikers out there and when he wasn't fighting in Pancrase he wasn't using open palms. I think he knows what he is doing. Although I did see him knock out or at least knock down opponents with palm strikes, but he also got warned in his Pancrase fight against Frank Shamrock because he started punching with a closed fist at one point, and I think that shows that he favors a closed fist. 

Are you sure that ALL WW2 combat was with open palms? How many of those fights did you witness? How many fights do you think there were that were never put into reports? I am sorry but that is tough to use as a basis for this type of argument. 

I have seen training for many different styles of MA, and most of them use a punch as they're primary empty hand attack. It is not about questioning what we do not know, it is about what our experience tells us.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 10, 2008)

markyboy said:


> No not unfounded as history dos'nt lie, all world war 2 combat was open hands,so british close comat as taught to the American,Canadian,and Austrailian troops,has the highest number of kills than any other art.
> 
> So open hands do reign supreme-Fact.


Not really...  I haven't had time to read it closely, but I do have a copy of Col. Applegate's *Kill or Be Killed*.  He endorses the CHOP as the most powerful strike, not the palm.  In his opinion and research, he determined that it was the preferred weapon for a number of reasons.  Feel free to look them up yourself.  Incidentally, he goes far from saying that fists are useless; instead he suggests that the require more training than was practical to provide in the limited time available for hand to hand combat.  


> _Hand blows can be delivered by using the fists, edge of the hand, palm, or knuckle.  To use the fists effectively, a knowledge of baoxing is a prerequisite.  Experts state that it takes up to six months to learn to deliver a knockout blow with either fist.  The ability to box is very desirable and the other principles boxing teaches, such as the use of body balance, should not be underestimated.  However, there are other means of using the hands which the layman can learn and use more swiftly, and at times more effectively._


  (Applegate, *Kill or Be Killed*)





> As to insults -I am not giving you my opinion,I am giving you facts which cannot be disputed. So disagreeing with facts is not like disagreeing with
> opinions which can be challenged.
> 
> Apes who resemble us the most,fight extremely well,no posing,no x blocks
> ...



The "best strike" is an opinion, not a fact.  Because the best strike will vary for different people based on their training, the targets involved, the precise circumstances (range, hand condition, and more), and other factors.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 10, 2008)

markyboy said:


> Hi,
> I think you're missing the point-Natural movements are faster and more powerfull than trained responses.
> 
> Ring fighting is not the same as fighting in the street.
> ...


No one is disputing your personal experiences, though you seem perhaps to discount the possibility that anyone else's experience may be difference.

I suspect that your own experiences and training have shaped your opinions, and I rather suspect that you're not particularly interested in hearing anyone else's opinions.  I don't see the point of going further, unless you convince me that you're open to actually discussing, rather than beating opinions against each other.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each body weapon; none is superior to all in  every situation.


----------



## 7starmarc (Jun 10, 2008)

DavidCC said:


> Open handed weapons (such as palm strikes) can be useful in very short range situations where a closed fist might not give you a good angle for strike, or where the angle required makes hitting with a closed fist impossible.  For example if the other guy's face is very close to yours, punching with a properly aligned fist requires an angle in your arm that will rob you of most of the power, whereas using a palm heel you can have a different shoulder/elbow angle that does not.  Using a fist with that same arm angle will make it more likely to hurt your wrist.
> 
> There's also the old nugget about "hard target/soft weapon - soft target/hard weapon" although sporting gear can blur the line between soft and hard weapons.



I agree. This is not a one-size-fits-all, one-strike-rules-all argument. Palm strikes, knife hands, fists, backfists, etc. all have their place in fighting techniques, and are all effective in different applications.

The real question, however, is how any of this fits into typical MMA rules and engagement. As I said, I'm not sure the effect of 4 oz gloves on a palm strike.

From my experience, palm strikes are good for some targets and situations. I am not convinced, however, that they are highly applicable in the typical MMA bout.


----------



## markyboy (Jun 10, 2008)

applegate was taught by fairbairn himself,chop or palm comes under open hands-it is a natural strike.
Ever tried pushing a car with your fists?
1 -its not going very far.
2 - it hurts.Unless you're wearing your boxing gloves!!(unlikely)

Under extreme stress, techniques go out the window.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 10, 2008)

7starmarc said:


> I agree. This is not a one-size-fits-all, one-strike-rules-all argument. Palm strikes, knife hands, fists, backfists, etc. all have their place in fighting techniques, and are all effective in different applications.
> 
> The real question, however, is how any of this fits into typical MMA rules and engagement. As I said, I'm not sure the effect of 4 oz gloves on a palm strike.
> 
> From my experience, palm strikes are good for some targets and situations. I am not convinced, however, that they are highly applicable in the typical MMA bout.


 
Very good points


----------



## Brian S (Jun 10, 2008)

markyboy said:


> applegate was taught by fairbairn himself,chop or palm comes under open hands-it is a natural strike.
> Ever tried pushing a car with your fists?
> 1 -its not going very far.
> 2 - it hurts.Unless you're wearing your boxing gloves!!(unlikely)
> ...


 
You are comparing apples and oranges. 

Pushing is naturally done with the palm. Hitting is naturally done with the clinched fist. When falling it is natural to catch yourself with an open hand.

Quit stating your opinions as facts without anything to back it up.

There are very experienced people here that disagree if you care to read and address their posts.

Bas Rutten use to ko people with palm strikes,but on Fight Science his punches put out more force. 

Ko's are more frequent with punches, but that all depends on the target, not the hand formation.


----------



## Nolerama (Jun 10, 2008)

matsu said:


> nolerama- when you observe there are always lots of useless stuff being done.for me i cant beleive how many people drop their arms as they kick and therefore telegraph the incoming technique or/and leave themseves open to counter.think that why few people try to kick the iceman...??
> matsu



I think kicking is effective if you can pull it off. But you're mentioning Chuck Liddell, right? There's been a few fights where a slower kicker has been caught by Chuck, only to realize his entire face is open to one of Chuck's nasty straight punches.

And he smelled that a mile away. You're right.

It's all about the two people in the ring, so that's just an isolated example.

About the open handed argument here, I think the body's more inclined (and therefore your mechanics are more available) to throw a fist than an open hand. Although I doubt a huge difference in striking power, I do throw my lot into being able to strike from a more dominant position, rather than winging a hard slap.

But getting slapped in the face is pretty angering, and demoralizing. So that might work.

I'm just saying I saw what I saw. And what I saw from "hardened veterans" was two guys playing patty cake.


----------



## matsu (Jun 11, 2008)

thanks again for the "lively" debate hee hee.
there has been some very good arguements over a valid point.

i do believe that open hand palm strikes as david c stated,have a place in a clinch where the body angles determine where the strike can come from.
and i wonder,STILL< if it it becuse the fighters are not taught that particular option or wether they feel it isnt effective enough to use.
which is why i asked in the 1st place.

thanks again.. matsu


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 11, 2008)

Even the fighters that fought under open hand rules and were comfortable with them don't throw them when they have other options (punching, elbowing)

The gloves help protect the hands so punching is safer.  A trained fighter doesn't leave as big an opening as an untrained one, palm heel strikes force your hand into a position where it needs a much larger gap to get through vs a punch in a clinch.  The palm heel works best on an opponent with their chin up, standing more upright in a close range position.  Fighters typically tuck their chins to avoid being KO'ed, making it hard to land a good palm heel strike to the chin.


----------



## Odin (Jun 11, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> Even the fighters that fought under open hand rules and were comfortable with them don't throw them when they have other options (punching, elbowing)
> 
> The gloves help protect the hands so punching is safer. A trained fighter doesn't leave as big an opening as an untrained one, palm heel strikes force your hand into a position where it needs a much larger gap to get through vs a punch in a clinch. The palm heel works best on an opponent with their chin up, standing more upright in a close range position. Fighters typically tuck their chins to avoid being KO'ed, making it hard to land a good palm heel strike to the chin.


 
Very good point, look at the stance of any trained fighter and you'll see a palm strike is very difficult to land.....unless you want to palm strike the forehead.


----------



## markyboy (Jun 11, 2008)

Brian S said:


> You are comparing apples and oranges.
> 
> Pushing is naturally done with the palm. Hitting is naturally done with the clinched fist. When falling it is natural to catch yourself with an open hand.
> 
> ...


Stop backing your own arguments with other people's opinions -have your own,thats what "opinion" means!!

You are stating there are very experienced people here-do you include yourself in that statement?or riding off the back of their knowledge?


----------



## MJS (Jun 11, 2008)

Interesting thread.  One thing to keep in mind, is that everyone is going to have their own opinions, and while we may not agree with them, we still should try to respect them and have a civil discussion. 

So...that being said...IMHO, I think that the strikes used should fit the situation.  In other words, if you enter a submission only match, then no need to worry about strikes or kicks.  In a MMA setting, closed hand striking is probably the best way to go, although there are some cases, where a palm to the side of the head may work.  We've seen Royce do this many times, when attempting a choke.  He's hit the persons head in an effort to move it to aid in sinking in the choke.  

Interestingly enough, a few nights ago, when I got home from work, I flipped on the tv, and saw a Fight Science episode.  They were talking about the effect certain strikes had on the body.  One of the strikes was an open palm.  They hit the dummy or whatever device they were using and it had some pretty good results.  

MMA and real world SD are 2 different animals.  A pre-emptive hit to the face, chin or ear, with an open palm, while maintaining a submissive, but yet defensive hand posture, can be very effective.  

Mike


----------



## markyboy (Jun 11, 2008)

A good palm strike can kill very easy I know this.!!!.
I think they are still on the falkland islands somewhere and some out to sea.
The cliffs were very dangerous when the Parachute Regiment came out to play.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 11, 2008)

markyboy said:


> A good palm strike can kill very easy I know this.!!!.
> I think they are still on the falkland islands somewhere and some out to sea.
> The cliffs were very dangerous when the Parachute Regiment came out to play.


 
Huh???

did anyone else miss the meaning of this or am I the only idiot here?


----------



## Nolerama (Jun 11, 2008)

markyboy said:


> A good palm strike can kill very easy I know this.!!!.
> I think they are still on the falkland islands somewhere and some out to sea.
> The cliffs were very dangerous when the Parachute Regiment came out to play.



Your anger amuses me.

Bottom line: fists are seen more than open hands in an MMA fight because they are more effective.

But I'd rather pound fists than high-five. Thats' just me.


----------



## Brian S (Jun 11, 2008)

markyboy said:


> A good palm strike can kill very easy I know this.!!!.
> I think they are still on the falkland islands somewhere and some out to sea.
> The cliffs were very dangerous when the Parachute Regiment came out to play.


 

 How do you "know" this? Are you reading the responses here? 

 I do have my own opinion and I count myself as quite experienced,thanks.


----------



## Brian S (Jun 11, 2008)

allenjp said:


> Huh???
> 
> did anyone else miss the meaning of this or am I the only idiot here?


 

 Count me in. That was completely random. :coocoo:

 ??????? Markyboy, Why are you so upset with me about my opinions???????


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 12, 2008)

Don't feel bad, I couldn't understand that last post either.  

It's almost like three seperate sentences from different posts, or maybe it's some form of haiku....


----------



## meth18au (Jun 12, 2008)

markyboy said:


> applegate was taught by fairbairn himself,chop or palm comes under open hands-it is a natural strike.
> Ever tried pushing a car with your fists?
> 1 -its not going very far.
> 2 - it hurts.Unless you're wearing your boxing gloves!!(unlikely)
> ...




Now we add to the Apes, WW2, falling over and slamming the palm on the wall!!!  

In the end we're still debating the effectiveness of palm strikes vs closed fist strikes- and why they aren't used in MMA more often.  Or are we?  How does pushing a car with your fists vs pushing it with your open hands facilitate your argument?  I'm curious- and I put it to you to clarify what you mean and how this applies to the topic of palm strikes vs open hand strikes in MMA?!?!

If you explain why you have such opinions- and you backup your argument- I'm sure you'll find people here to be very open to friendly debate where both parties can learn from each other.


----------

