# Blocking vs. Evasion?



## Telfer (Dec 31, 2009)

A few weeks ago I posted a comment about Mike Tyson's training which involved the use of a 'slip bag'. 

This is a small sand bag suspended swinging back and forth above the boxer's shoulders, requiring him to bob and weave while doing his routines to avoid getting hit.

Western boxing places a lot of emphasis on BOTH evasion and passive blocking, wheres Asian styles focus less on evasion and more on *active* blocking.

Is this a fair generalization? 

And how do you choose between blocking and evading your opponent's strike?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 31, 2009)

Telfer said:


> A few weeks ago I posted a comment about Mike Tyson's training which involved the use of a 'slip bag'.
> 
> This is a small sand bag suspended swinging back and forth above the boxer's shoulders, requiring him to bob and weave while doing his routines to avoid getting hit.
> 
> ...



Isshin-Ryu has a number of techniques for slipping punches, including those encapsulated in the Wansu kata.

http://www.isshinryu.com/wansu.htm

I am still just a beginner, but in my dojo, we train at slipping punches all the time.  It does require speed and timing, both of which I lack in some degree, but I'm working on it.  It's definitely part of the art I study.

In some cases, we combine a slip with a block and counter-attack.  Common self-defense drill which we practice all the time.


----------



## Aiki Lee (Dec 31, 2009)

In aiki ninjutsu we don't block at all so the idea that Asian styles focus primarily on blocking is not well founded as our art is based on 12 Japanese martial traditions.

We mostly do evasion of attacks or we attack the limb that is sent at us, or we deflect it. In my mind this is different from blocking, because when I think of blocking I think of absorbing the impact of the attack.

Even among certain karateka I have heard that most "blocking" are either deflections or directly attacking the limbs of the opponent as tey attack you.


----------



## Telfer (Dec 31, 2009)

Himura Kenshin said:


> Even among certain karateka I have heard that most "blocking" are either deflections or directly attacking the limbs of the opponent as they attack you.


Yes, this is what I referred to in the OP as 'active blocking'.

I think Bruce Lee called it 'defensive offense'.


----------



## Xinglu (Dec 31, 2009)

Telfer said:


> Western boxing places a lot of emphasis on BOTH evasion and passive blocking, wheres Asian styles focus less on evasion and more on *active* blocking.
> 
> Is this a fair generalization?



I feel it is a hasty generalization without much foundation.  All MA have elements of both and the emphasis evade or intercept varies as much between the arts as it does within the various arts (from practitioner to practitioner).

For example Aikido is an entire MA built around evasion and redirection (not interception [force on force].  While they do teach interception, it is only done to further the evasion and/or redirection of energy).

Taijiquan teaches both equally however, practitioners seem to lean one way or the other.

Xingyiquan is almost entirely intercepting techniques to break your opponent down and jam him up. With that said, I have seen Xingyiquan practitioners use evasion (just never in retreat ) and even favor it.

Baguaquan heavily favors evasion but once again, I have seen practitioners focus on the arts interception qualities.

Kenpo/Kempo favors interception, yet there is that jujutsu element where evasion and redirection is taught.  In fact, I know a great many Kenpoka who  due to size and/or age prefer evasion.

The list goes on and on.  The point is that it depends on the individual practitioner.  If I were fighting a larger Karateka, I would expect to be met with intercepting techniques.  A smaller or older Karateka I would expect to see more evasion techniques.  If I were to just lump all Karateka into one or the other, I would find myself quite surprise and in a world of hurt if I squared off with one.

I mean, even in boxing you have a big difference, just look at the difference between Muhammad Ali and George Foreman.  Their fighting styles were almost polar opposites, yet they were both boxers. 



Telfer said:


> And how do you choose between blocking and evading your opponent's strike?



Knowledge of my opponent. In general: are they bigger and stronger then me? If so, evade and counter fiercely. If they are of equal size and strength, then maybe a bit of both, unless I am faster than they are.  Chances are I will never be attacked by someone smaller and weaker, unless they have superior numbers.  And being a small guy myself, I doubt that I will be jumped by leprechauns anytime soon.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 31, 2009)

I've been thinking about this thread today, and one thing that I think merits consideration is that in boxing, the hands are all that can be used for attacks.  No knees, no elbows, no kicks, no throws, etc.  Only the hands.

Therefore, if one were boxing, one would not want to use one's hands to block; it would take the tools of attack away.  Evasion would be key, so that the hands can continue to attack.

With most Eastern martial arts I am familiar with, there are no rules on what attacks may be employed.  Therefore, using the hands and arms to block, entangle, and otherwise tie up an adversary is not necessarily a bad thing - the knees, elbows, feet, and even the head are still available as weapons, not to mention throws and locks employed when blocking.

So perhaps that is why one might think boxing is more about evasion and Eastern martial arts more about blocking.  But in reality, evasion is taught as well - it's just that it is not necessarily a 'bad thing' to put the hands and arms in a position where they cannot strike for a moment, as it would be with boxing.

Hope that makes any kind of sense.


----------



## seasoned (Dec 31, 2009)

I will be 100% honest with you, I don't have a clue until it happens. We train a wide spectrum of technique, which should prepare us for what ever happens. I will say this, when I was younger, it was straight on, but if you are true to the kata, you will find each one contains taisabaki (body shifting) which is not only conducive to conflict as you get older, but preferred. I often ask myself, could the older me, have beaten the younger me. Well the younger me would probably say no chance old man, but, the older me says, we ain't going to be sparring. The older me needs to get things over a lot faster, with minimal effort. That is, I will have to save my energy for striking as apposed to blocking. I find myself talking more as I get older, as in this post  but when the talking stops, I am good for about a minute. I hope I enlighten someone with my last post for 2009, and with that, Happy New Year to all of my MT friends.  :asian:


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 31, 2009)

seasoned said:


> I find myself talking more as I get older, as in this post  but when the talking stops, I am good for about a minute.



My dad used to say_ "For sixy seconds, I'm as good as I ever was.  Want some?"_  I never wanted any.  Happy New Year to you too!


----------



## Jimi (Dec 31, 2009)

My opinion is that some peoples perception of what is evasion tends to differ. Boxers do not only consider bobbing or weaving evasions, but stepping, turning and swaying are evasions.

Not only does evasion understanding and practice differ from art to art , but from teacher to teacher. I have seen young students training in kickboxing (Eastern= Muay Thai, Lethwei, etc... and Western PKA, etc...) and when I put up a rope for slipping drills, the young ones jump under the rope, "I know this!" and they stand flat footed right under the rope only slipping the head repeatedly in a horsesheo shape. LOL. They think that is it, head slip only. Then when i show them to slip-n-step under the rope and tell them to move their whole body into a full body slip, They are confused and upset, "My Instructor never showed me this" as if that statement makes my principles moot, lol. they return to the slip, "See!?" feet flat neither moving forward, backward, or side to side, head slip, eyes dropping down, hands lower than shoulder level, no body movement.  I ask "Show me how that works" they say "You jab, I slip head slip out, you cross, I head slip out, you hook I head slip out, you can't hit me", LMAO!

So I say "Show me that again", as if he was teaching me a lesson, He says "OK" "You jab I head slip out, you cross I head slip"- by then I have stepped in from the jab and dug into his body w/ hooks, uppercuts and what some call upset punches (upward angled body hook/uppercuts on an approx. 45 degrees into the ribs." Hey you can not do that!" LOL, "Yes I can!, Your opponent will not just stand flat footed as you are just throwing jab cross hook for you to look cool slipping. If I can not find your head in 1 or 2 shots and you have not full body slipped or stepped, I will kill the body because your belly button never moves", "But, But, But" he stammered, lol. His Instructor stood there shaking his head because his student could not see beyond the 1 aspect of a drill he was given. One slip does not all evasion make.

Yes i know the story is breaking my own arm patting myself on the back, lol, but it also shows how many can see only 1 simple aspect of potentially more complex evasions. In the ABA there is a 9 count stepping drill which teaches evasion stepping, step, turn, sway all techniques for removing your targets. A very good set of skills for beginners of any art. The ABA Blocking drill was then taught after the Stepping drill was absorbed well, then the skills were to be merged so to speak, step, block/deflect and then counter offense. Good sequence of blending skills. 

I have seen many arts in commercial schools teach, Hi, side, Lo, block as intro then now you learn front punch reverse punch front kick side kick round kick hook kick back kick, inside cresent kick outside cresent kick, etc... and absolutly no evasion, or slipping or target removal what so ever, lol, my god my 1st Instructor is rolling over in his grave.

Many arts have their own techniques for some kind of evasion, an Aikido practioner will absolutely side step or slip a punch or kick in their own manner. Bagua practitions will evade in their own manner as well as will Tai Chi practioners etc...etc...etc...

Try not to judge another arts evasions for your systems prefered evasions, many ways to skin a cat, lol. I feel evasions are like mathmatical formulas, simple + simple + simple equals complex, this is just my analogy. If you only have 1 aspect of evasion, you are missing the rest of the world. Example- Mauy Boran & Bama Lethwei many many years ago never slipped and evaded the way they now do due to their introduction to western boxing evasion/slipping skills, now many MT practioners will slip , cross hook cross, slip hook cross hook etc..like never before seen in the ancient arts ways (Not saying MT etc... never slipped or evaded, just they never slipped like they do now like western boxers). Much to learn from many arts principles.

I just dislike an inexperienced youth in martial arts preach footwork and evasion, then all they do is either flat footed head slip or the TKD pogo jumping footwork (LOL) right in place neither advancing or retreating or side stepping and call it footwork when all they are doing is giving their opponent a steady rythum of "I am here, I am here, I am here", LOL.

Please forgive my self important opinions, but I am disappointed in these youth or half understanding instructors with less than a quarter of the playbook so to speak and feel they are full of knowledge, lol.

Now Blockiong is a different animal than evasion, it is all defensive skill sets as opposed to offensive skill sets like punching , kicking etc... In my opinion Blocking is not unlike a shield technique = force meets force head on. many hard syle systems profess, a block is a hit, a hit is a block. Stirke/Punish the hand or foot that dare attack you. This is common for many hard styles. Other defensive techniques are not quite as bull, boar or canine like, some are feline, like parrying and deflections. In some way similar to european fencing deflections, redirect energy rather than clash with it. These I find work very well along with sound evasions, like this formula of blended skills so to speak. Aikido and other soft or gentle arts tend to use these deflection w/ evasion and add a locking or throwing or repulsing counter, sometimes right into a wall or bar or floor, lol. LOVE IT. A good deflection typically (Not always) uses less effort or foce when apllied soundly.

I feel that evasion skills like steps, turns, etc... followed by sound blocking/shielding even deflection skills should be taught first off in most arts that are even defined as a strking art. Especially some commercial schools do not teach this way due to the fact that most families, children involved in some arts are bored or not interested by such skills and want to learn the helicopter kick or whatever jump kick is popular due to the kid martial arts movie (3Ninjas, Spy Kids, etc...)

EVASIONS & BLOCKING- LEARN IT, LIVE IT, LOVE IT!


----------



## K-man (Jan 1, 2010)

I am of the school that believes that 'blocks', as such have very little place in the martial arts. We will sometimes move in and jam but to actually block an attack signals the end of your opponent's first technique and the trigger to launch his next attack. 
Now, evasion can mean two things. Firstly, we move off the line of attack as in ashi tsabaki. That gets us out of the firing line, especially if someone is charging us. The disadvantage is that our opponent mostly retains control of his centre and can easily redirect his attack. Secondly, as _Seasoned_ pointed out is tai tsabaki where we intercept and redirect the opponent's attack, most often breaking his balance and creating the opportunity to strike or apply any other suitable technique.
The secret to all this is to go back to our basic 'blocks'. In Goju, almost without exception, they are two-handed. The first hand deflects the attack and the second hand is actually a strike. Unfortunately, very few instructors teach this application, prefering instead to teach the obvious application. My question to them is, "Would you ever use the blocks you teach in a bar or street situation?" The answer is inevitably "Well no ... but, ..... !!" The next question becomes, "Then why teach them at all if you wouldn't use them in real life?" :asian:


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 1, 2010)

Blocking and evasion go hand-in-hand; you can only meet force with force so far, unless you give yourself an advantage.  You just run into a variant of "unstoppable force vs unmovable barrier" otherwise.  You gain that advantage through evasion.

I read an interesting piece by Dave Lowry wherein he noted that the words we commonly traslate with block and the term uke really have more to do with "receiving" than stopping; it's a powerful concept when you start working with it.

Evasion can take many forms; it may be a small slip or turn or pull of the body, or an angular step or a huge leap.  Or it can be repositioning the attacker by moving the attack (aikido does this a lot).  It's pretty amazing how small a step or shift is needed to negate an attack -- and then how much you can do when you're out of immediate danger through evasion.


----------



## K-man (Jan 1, 2010)

jks9199 said:


> I read an interesting piece by Dave Lowry wherein he noted that the words we commonly traslate with block and the term uke really have more to do with "receiving" than stopping; it's a powerful concept when you start working with it.


'Uke' doesn't translate as 'block', period. It translates, 'receive'. To call 'uke' block is a carry-over from the karate introduced into the Japanese schools in the early 1900s and learnt by Westerners in postwar Japan.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 1, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I've been thinking about this thread today, and one thing that I think merits consideration is that in boxing, the hands are all that can be used for attacks.  No knees, no elbows, no kicks, no throws, etc.  Only the hands.
> 
> Therefore, if one were boxing, one would not want to use one's hands to block; it would take the tools of attack away.  Evasion would be key, so that the hands can continue to attack.
> 
> ...



It's a good thought, but take Muay Thai as an example........virtually no striking surface is off limits, but they move and evade like a boxer.

I suspect the commonality there is one of the heavy emphasis on actual competition.......Muay Thai is much like Boxing with all the body weapons, and it is performed in much that same manner.

What I suspect is that actual fighting between two opponents as it's done in Boxing and Muay Thai tends to result in one getting favored over the other.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jan 1, 2010)

K-man said:


> I am of the school that believes that 'blocks', as such have very little place in the martial arts. We will sometimes move in and jam but to actually block an attack signals the end of your opponent's first technique and the trigger to launch his next attack.
> Now, evasion can mean two things. Firstly, we move off the line of attack as in ashi tsabaki. That gets us out of the firing line, especially if someone is charging us. The disadvantage is that our opponent mostly retains control of his centre and can easily redirect his attack. Secondly, as _Seasoned_ pointed out is tai tsabaki where we intercept and redirect the opponent's attack, most often breaking his balance and creating the opportunity to strike or apply any other suitable technique.
> The secret to all this is to go back to our basic 'blocks'. In Goju, almost without exception, they are two-handed. The first hand deflects the attack and the second hand is actually a strike. Unfortunately, very few instructors teach this application, prefering instead to teach the obvious application. My question to them is, "Would you ever use the blocks you teach in a bar or street situation?" The answer is inevitably "Well no ... but, ..... !!" The next question becomes, "Then why teach them at all if you wouldn't use them in real life?" :asian:



Kind of what I was getting at in my previous post.......in a flowing combat between two fighters, some types of hard blocking i've seen tends to set up the blocker to be struck in a different direction, if you get my meaning.


----------



## MJS (Jan 1, 2010)

Telfer said:


> A few weeks ago I posted a comment about Mike Tyson's training which involved the use of a 'slip bag'.
> 
> This is a small sand bag suspended swinging back and forth above the boxer's shoulders, requiring him to bob and weave while doing his routines to avoid getting hit.
> 
> ...


 
While many traditional arts may opt to block, there are many people who crosstrain and add in those boxing concepts to their art.  I feel that alot comes down to having good footwork as well...being loose and fluid and not stiff and rigid.  

How do I choose what to do?  I don't.  I just do what feels more natural.  In other words, when I'm sparring or doing techniques, I'm not sitting there thinking, "Ok, the next time this guy throws a punch I'm going to slip is rather than block."


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 1, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> It's a good thought, but take Muay Thai as an example........virtually no striking surface is off limits, but they move and evade like a boxer.
> 
> I suspect the commonality there is one of the heavy emphasis on actual competition.......Muay Thai is much like Boxing with all the body weapons, and it is performed in much that same manner.
> 
> What I suspect is that actual fighting between two opponents as it's done in Boxing and Muay Thai tends to result in one getting favored over the other.


 
Modern sport Muay Thai looks and acts very much like modern boxing, the older style of Muay Boran has more techniques were you are blocking and breaking the opponent's limbs and using the elbows and knees for limb desctruction.  Also, look at how many boxers fight in the ring almost completely bent over at the waist probing for an opening, or bending over at the waist to avoid a series of punches, agiain very effective when the targets are all limited to the front of the body and nothing below the naval.  Whatever style you study will evolve for what you train it for.

This is one of the big differences in looking at boxing vs. a TMA.  Boxing is the best at what it does for unarmed combat in a ring with no blows below the naval (not saying that there isn't carry over to self-defense). But, look at old school boxing when you had foot stomps and throws.  Also, look at how many boxers fight in the ring almost completely bent over at the waist probing for an opening, or bending over at the waist to avoid a series of punches, agiain very effective when the targets are all limited to the front of the body and nothing below the naval.  Whatever style you study will evolve for what you train it for.The guard and approach was very different because you had different strategies and while certain tools can be effectively used, there will need to be others that are modified or discarded.  No matter what approach you take.

As someone else pointed out "uke" means to receive and not block as how most people think of it.  Secondly, the parry and redirection is built into the basic kihon training of the techniques.  You cross your hands in front before performing the block with the other hand.  This is a minor move and then you train the major move.  Other body movements are in the kata, but also remember that arts like karate are based on the idea of civilian self defense.  In this case you aren't squaring off with an opponent and assuming a guard position looking for an opening like you do when you spar.  The attack is already there and you are doing your best to survive the initial assault and take control/escape.  If you knew you were going to be in a fight you would take the initiative with a first strike and still would not be as concerned with a guard position and looking for openings etc.

In the end, they are all tools in your tool box that you will need and need to be able to respond with the appropriate technique.


----------



## khand50 (Jan 1, 2010)

when i trained in tae kwon do many years ago we were taught formal blocking techniques.  "if" a block was designed to stop a blow from coming in,  then one would really have to condition their arms to receive the blow properly. 
when i trained in isshin ryu last year,  they told me that the blocks werent really designed to stop the blow but to damage the oncoming attacking tool.  if you front kick me,  i sidestep and my "downward block" is aimed at your leg to injure you.  i liked that interperatation.
bruce lee said,  no passive blocks.  he would rather lin sil die dar,  which is simultaneous block and strike,  or he would cut into the blow and hit,  which was taken from fencing,  or evade and hit the body directly.  these are the three main ideas i have gotten from his progression in self discovery we know as jkd.  he went from the wing chun concept of blocking and redirecting blows, to the fencing example of cutting,  to an open, more evasive,  boxer-like structure of moving and hitting.  using distance to control the fight.  not everyone can move well enough so it is good to learn all applications.  the opponents action will become your action.  whatever energy he gives you, you will respond accordingly.   train it all and be prepared for anything and everything.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 23, 2013)

K-man said:


> I am of the school that believes that 'blocks', as such have very little place in the martial arts.
> 
> My question to them is, "Would you ever use the blocks you teach in a bar or street situation?" The answer is inevitably "Well no ... but, ..... !!" The next question becomes, "Then why teach them at all if you wouldn't use them in real life?" :asian:



I was always taught blocking in any martial arts that I have done. I was also taught evasion, when I first heard that some martial arts do not teach blocking at all I was quite surprised, I mean why would you not block. Many arts such as Muay Thai and boxing et al get along quite well without doing much blocking but one thing I have noticed is that the fighters in these martial arts tend to get hit a lot so they rely on being able to take a hit. In a street self defence situation you cannot afford to get hit even once, there have been many one punch deaths in recent years. Evasion is much easier on your body than blocking but requires more time and energy and after the strike is evaded the opponents momentum and direction of movement remains largely unchanged. The great thing about blocking is that you can redirect the attack wherever you want it to go. A good block will not only redirect the attack but will also damage the attacking tool, even to the point of breaking the attacking arm. You can also strike at the same time as you block. The are some techniques however that you should only block as a last resort, such as a hooking kick or crescent kick and it is better to evade.

Would I ever use the blocks I teach in a bar or street situation? Most definitely YES, otherwise why learn and teach them.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 23, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I was always taught blocking in any martial arts that I have done. I was also taught evasion, when I first heard that some martial arts do not teach blocking at all I was quite surprised, I mean why would you not block. Many arts such as Muay Thai and boxing et al get along quite well without doing much blocking but one thing I have noticed is that the fighters in these martial arts tend to get hit a lot so they rely on being able to take a hit. In a street self defence situation you cannot afford to get hit even once, there have been many one punch deaths in recent years. Evasion is much easier on your body than blocking but requires more time and energy and after the strike is evaded the opponents momentum and direction of movement remains largely unchanged. The great thing about blocking is that you can redirect the attack wherever you want it to go. A good block will not only redirect the attack but will also damage the attacking tool, even to the point of breaking the attacking arm. You can also strike at the same time as you block. The are some techniques however that you should only block as a last resort, such as a hooking kick or crescent kick and it is better to evade.
> 
> Would I ever use the blocks I teach in a bar or street situation? Most definitely YES, otherwise why learn and teach them.



Boxers and such do block, alot. Using guards. Why? Because boxing happens right up close, as does muay thai. And identifying every individual strike is alot harder than it sounds when they stop making sense. Blocks are good for the first strike, sometimes the second if you ignored the first. After that, have fun trying.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 23, 2013)

Telfer said:


> A few weeks ago I posted a comment about Mike Tyson's training which involved the use of a 'slip bag'.
> 
> This is a small sand bag suspended swinging back and forth above the boxer's shoulders, requiring him to bob and weave while doing his routines to avoid getting hit.
> 
> ...



Depends on the scenario: type of attack, anatomical position (relation of my place in space theirs), what my follow up is going to be (what weapon is going to be used in relation to the best target available), and factors of timing (how quickly did I recognize the attack for instance) 

There are times where a block is appropriate and times when a parry is appropriate.


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I was always taught blocking in any martial arts that I have done. I was also taught evasion, when I first heard that some martial arts do not teach blocking at all I was quite surprised, I mean why would you not block. Many arts such as Muay Thai and boxing et al get along quite well without doing much blocking but one thing I have noticed is that the fighters in these martial arts tend to get hit a lot so they rely on being able to take a hit. In a street self defence situation you cannot afford to get hit even once, there have been many one punch deaths in recent years. Evasion is much easier on your body than blocking but requires more time and energy and after the strike is evaded the opponents momentum and direction of movement remains largely unchanged. The great thing about blocking is that you can redirect the attack wherever you want it to go. A good block will not only redirect the attack but will also damage the attacking tool, even to the point of breaking the attacking arm. You can also strike at the same time as you block. The are some techniques however that you should only block as a last resort, such as a hooking kick or crescent kick and it is better to evade.
> 
> Would I ever use the blocks I teach in a bar or street situation? Most definitely YES, otherwise why learn and teach them.


Actually, what you have been shown has been taught as a 'block' and demonstrated as a block and indeed in some instances might even be used as a block.

Why would you not block? I have no idea why you would not block. I mean, in play, threaten to hit a three year old child with a noodle and they will throw their hands up to protect their head. I play 'karate' with my grandchild. He must be smarter than most because he can block any attack without being shown.    I have never said you don't block. But blocks are based on reflex. We call it the 'Oh, s#1t' reaction. If you need to block you will do it by reflex. How many 'blocks' do you know to protect your head? There must be at least half a dozen. If I go to hit you in the face hard and fast, which one will you use? I will guarantee that you won't use anything you were taught. You will protect by reflex action the same way as every other fighting system does.  So, for me, the only time I would actually block an attack, that is stop the attack, is when I have been caught off guard by surprise and the survival instinct kicks in. Now I am at a disadvantage because by stopping the first attack I have precipitated the next.

So, I contend that the 'blocks' we are all taught are not blocks at all but techniques to deal with attacks that you see coming. This normally will involve deflection and may involve tsabaki.

Your analogy of Muay Thai is quite good. They do get hit a lot and the chances are in an all in brawl you will too. Not protecting yourself in a fight gets you killed. Muay Thai fighters spend a lot of time trying to protect their heads with their arms, particularly against elbows.

One punch deaths caused by the punch are extremely rare. I have never actually come across one. Hitting the head on concrete after one punch is unfortunately quite common. 



> The great thing about blocking is that you can redirect the attack wherever you want it to go. A good block will not only redirect the attack but will also damage the attacking tool, even to the point of breaking the attacking arm. You can also strike at the same time as you block.



Let's define 'block'.  





> "b : a_n obstruction of an opponent's play in sports; especially : a halting or impeding of the progress or movement of an opponent in football by use of the body_".



So after you stop an attack, redirecting is difficult and you will most likely have a second attack on the way to contend with. A good *defence *&#8203;will not only redirect the attack but *may* also damage the attacking tool, *if we choose that option as part of our response.
*


> Would I ever use the blocks I teach in a bar or street situation? Most definitely YES, otherwise why learn and teach them.


 I doubt very much that you would. 

Why would you learn them and teach them? I really think you need to think about that yourself. For me, I learn them and teach them as the kihon or basic form of _*receiving* _an attack. But what we are teaching is an *Uke*, not a block.    :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 23, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Boxers and such do block, alot. Using guards. Why? Because boxing happens right up close, as does muay thai. And identifying every individual strike is alot harder than it sounds when they stop making sense. Blocks are good for the first strike, sometimes the second if you ignored the first. After that, have fun trying.



I often hear that argument from those who do not practice blocking as part of their regular training. The gloves that boxers wear offer a lot of protection from strikes when they are in their guard. Good blocks come from the guard and one must avoid large rangy movements, I often have to tell beginners not to 'swat' away with the blocks,there is also an element of evasion to them. To be able to block effectively you have to be faster than your opponent's strike so you must be able to anticipate the opponents actions, this significantly increases your chances of blocking. After 25 years I can block 90-95% of the strikes aimed at me from someone of similar skill and when I use evasion only the percentage is significantly lower and once in a fight a former kickboxer tried to kick me in the groin 3 times and failed every time due to my use of low section blocks. Basically if you do not train with blocks every day you will never be any good at them, in other words use it or lose it.


----------



## chinto (Jan 23, 2013)

ok at least in Okinawan arts it is generally true that every block is a strike at the attacking limb, and the best block is not to be there. that said there are times where you can not evade for what ever reason, and a block is better suited and or the block is redirecting the limb and turns into a lock, throw or grapple or even brake.  Most techniques have several uses, and each martial artist will find ways that work better for them. also a newer practitioner may not see a use for something in but one or two ways, and when he has trained for several more years see more possibility's for that same technique..


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 23, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I often hear that argument from those who do not practice blocking as part of their regular training. The gloves that boxers wear offer a lot of protection from strikes when they are in their guard. Good blocks come from the guard and one must avoid large rangy movements, I often have to tell beginners not to 'swat' away with the blocks,there is also an element of evasion to them. To be able to block effectively you have to be faster than your opponent's strike so you must be able to anticipate the opponents actions, this significantly increases your chances of blocking. After 25 years I can block 90-95% of the strikes aimed at me from someone of similar skill and when I use evasion only the percentage is significantly lower and once in a fight a former kickboxer tried to kick me in the groin 3 times and failed every time due to my use of low section blocks. Basically if you do not train with blocks every day you will never be any good at them, in other words use it or lose it.



Ill take that in order.
1: I used to do blocking as a very regular part of training. Two months of contact sparring later, i decided to let that be a thing of the past. Basically i decided to scrap two years worth of training based around blocks. The hard part was getting rid of the mentality.
2: The gloves factor in to an extent, however helmet guards function based on compression, as does raising one arm. You dont get hit in the glove when you guard the side of your head, or when you use a helmet guard. Why? Because your gloves are on your forehead. If you feel like punching me in the forehead with a bare knuckle, be my guest. Punch me in the back of the hand and i now have a chance to attack you whilst youre busy not really doing much significant damage. People can and have fought on (street fighting) with broken hands, fingers, and all sorts.
3: Kickboxing uses low blocks as well. But im unsure why he would repeatedly attempt kicks to the groin - Was this in a sparring setting or mutual combat? I already know it wasnt the other option, good sir.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 23, 2013)

_If you need to block you will do it by reflex. How many 'blocks' do you  know to protect your head? There must be at least half a dozen. If I go  to hit you in the face hard and fast, which one will you use? I will  guarantee that you won't use anything you were taught. You will protect  by reflex action the same way as every other fighting system does. 
_
I  probably know about a dozen blocks for a head attack. The instinctive  ones that I do by reflex are the outer block, inward palm block, outer  forearm block and raising block, if I am just standing around with my  hands down and someone on the street attacks me the inner forearm block  is the reflex. The other blocks that I know such as the X-block require a  little forethought. With the practice of free sparring, one and 3 step  sparring, blocking and attacking drills and patterns the blocks become  instinctive after a while. In the 25 years that I have been training I  have estimated that I have performed blocking techniques somewhere  between 75 000 and 200 000 times, based on an average of 3 training  sessions a week for 50 weeks of the year, so blocking has become  instinctive when getting attacked.

_So, I contend that the 'blocks' we are all taught are not blocks at all  but techniques to deal with attacks that you see coming. _

You also have to see an attack coming in order to evade it, a well  trained martial artist paying attention will see most attacks coming at  them that just comes with training.

_Hitting the head on concrete after one punch is unfortunately quite common. _

That was what I was referring to.


_
Let's define 'block'.  

So after you stop an attack, redirecting is difficult and you will most  likely have a second attack on the way to contend with. A good *defence *&#8203;will not only redirect the attack but *may* also damage the attacking tool, *if we choose that option as part of our response.
*
 I doubt very much that you would. 
_
damaging the attacking tool  is not so much as a conscious and separate effort as it is a byproduct of  forearm conditioning and power in the blocks. I can block quite hard so  I have to think in order to not block too hard on the younger/beginner  students.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 23, 2013)

Telfer said:


> wheres Asian styles focus less on evasion and more on *active* blocking.
> 
> Is this a fair generalization?


You are talking about the beginner level trainning of the Asian style. In the intermediate level, you should only see the body move and you should not see the arms move. You should use your body to push/pull your arms/legs. Whether your arm can block your opponent's punch or not, you have to move your body to be outside of your opponent's striking path first.

In the intermediate level, your blocking  should be a "body rotation".


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I  probably know about a dozen blocks for a head attack. The instinctive  ones that I do by reflex are the outer block, inward palm block, outer  forearm block and raising block, if I am just standing around with my  hands down and someone on the street attacks me the inner forearm block  is the reflex.
> 
> I would argue that your inner forearm block is reflex and you think it is what you have learned when in fact it is innate. That is exactly what I described but it dies't take 25 years to perfect. I would like to see you do the others, as you teach them, in a real situation.
> 
> ...



I couldn't care less how long and how many hours you train.  I probably train more hours a week and have trained for more years. What you are describing is what a top karate colleague in the US calls an _advanced beginner_. Regardless of rank and time in training, you are what you train. If you train kihon you perform kihon. (That is not meant to be personal, it is a general observation.) The fact is TKD is for sport mainly and it is conducted at kicking distance.  Our training is conducted at grappling range normally so the dynamic is totally different. For example, someone coming in might get one shot at the groin ...  but to give him three chances? That means that I am moving out of range, not entering. 

You can highly develop muscle memory so you can perform under adrenal dump but although that might make things instinctive, they are not reflex.



> Reflex actions are loosely defined as any action that the body performs unconsciously. There are several different kinds of reflex actions, including some that are responses to external stimuli and others that regulate body organs and functions. There is also a theoretical class of reflex actions that can be learned, but the existence of these and the mechanism behind them is debated
> 
> Some scientists have theorized about another kind of reflex action called a conditioned reflex. These involve a learning process where people experience something enough times and eventually develop a reflexive response to it. Unlike most reflexes involving external stimulation, *these would involve the brain directly.* The idea for this came from a Russian scientist named Ivan Pavlov who figured out that it was possible to make a dog salivate when it hears the sound of a bell by consistently ringing a bell right before feeding it. Scientists are generally in agreement that these sorts of reactions exist, but there is some debate about whether or not they should be called reflexes.
> http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-reflex-actions.htm



Have a look at this video. It is labelled Superior Blocking but in reality there are only a handful of blocks. These are reflex blocks and they only occur when he has lost contact with his partner. After each of his blocks he goes back to his instinctive responses.  I know this is not karate but karate came from Gung fu and the Okinawans practised Te.  This is a good example of using the hands and arms to deflect an attack without stopping it.






(I'm not sure if this will play as I'm posting from my iPad. If it doesn't work, I'll repost.)
:asian:


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 23, 2013)

K-man said:


> The fact is TKD is for sport mainly and it is conducted at kicking distance.  Our training is conducted at grappling range normally so the dynamic is totally different. For example, someone coming in might get one shot at the groin ...  but to give him three chances? That means that I am moving out of range, not entering.



It also means the other person isnt entering, which communicates a clear lack of aggression, and/or violent intent. Stuff happens up close. 

Some people have trouble grasping that because in training, it might not be that way. Why? Because in training, youre doing what youve been shown to do. If youve been conditioned to maintain a certain range, that range will become your go-to. Even if it means retreating to it, which is more often than not a self defeating practice. Its hard to self defeatingly retreat by moving forward.



K-man said:


> You can highly develop muscle memory *so you can perform under adrenal dump* but although that might make things instinctive, they are not reflex.



And thats assuming you dont freeze.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 23, 2013)

K-man said:


> I couldn't care less how long and how many hours you train.  I probably train more hours a week and have trained for more years.



Really? ...really. 

All bow down before the mighty K man! 

The all knowing omnipotent master of all martial arts! 

Of course, yours is the only approach that works. Right? ... right. Because you have such a keen insight into martial arts and self defense. 

Pardon us peons for doubting you, Oh ominpotent karate-god!


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Really? ...really.
> 
> All bow down before the mighty K man!
> 
> ...


Thank you for your informative post. I'm sorry you feel that way. I actually thanked you for your previous contribution to this thread. 

you must have misread my posts as I have always said there are many ways, many applications and all MAs are different. The secret is finding the similarities and the things in one MA that might enhance our understanding of our own. But seeing that you are now into the swing, perhaps you could show me some video of a real continuous fight where people are using karate blocks, or karate stances for that matter.   :asian:


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 23, 2013)

K-man said:


> Thank you for your informative post. I'm sorry you feel that way. I actually thanked you for your previous contribution to this thread.
> 
> you must have misread my posts as I have always said there are many ways, many applications and all MAs are different. The secret is finding the similarities and the things in one MA that might enhance our understanding of our own. But seeing that you are now into the swing, perhaps you could show me some video of a real continuous fight where people are using karate blocks, or karate stances for that matter.   :asian:



Once I figure out how to edit MP4 in Window's Movie Maker I will. LOL 

Um... don't suppose you know anything about that? 

I have an altered American Kenpo technique, Thundering Hammer, that does just that. If I could figure out how to edit MP4 in Movie Maker I would glady post it.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 23, 2013)

_ATTENTION ALL USERS:

_Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy [url]http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71377[/URL]. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

Mark Cochran
MT Moderator


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Once I figure out how to edit MP4 in Window's Movie Maker I will. LOL
> 
> Um... don't suppose you know anything about that?
> 
> I have an altered American Kenpo technique, Thundering Hammer, that does just that. If I could figure out how to edit MP4 in Movie Maker I would glady post it.


Sorry, my computer skills are declining with age, not improving.  But I'll look forward with interest to seeing your technique.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 23, 2013)

Dang... I saw a new post was made and thought somebody could help me with the MP4 issue.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 23, 2013)

K-man said:


> Sorry, my computer skills are declining with age, not improving.  But I'll look forward with interest to seeing your technique.



Eh.. I'll figure it out. 

The technique addresses a "fighting" scenario where both combatents are poised for a "fight". 

It is widely accepted that action is faster than reaction, and the scenario involves your opponent slipping past your lead hand with a jab. 

If your hands are in the game, your rear hand pads the punch. The contact triggers you to adjust your stance into what we call a reverse lunge (similar to a reverse bow in standard kenpo) simultaneously with an inward block. 

The purpose is to postion you opponent so that a follow up uppercut to their kidney is easily accessible. 

Once I figure it out, I will post it for ya.


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Eh.. I'll figure it out.
> 
> The technique addresses a "fighting" scenario where both combatents are poised for a "fight".
> 
> ...


But isn't that exactly what I am saying?  You are not blocking but deflecting. By the time your attacker realises his attack has failed you have hit him.  :asian:


----------



## chinto (Jan 23, 2013)

a lot of blocks are actually traps to control the one who attacked you. there are a lot of controls in Karate that come from the 'block' where you trap the wrist and pull them in or lock them or brake that arm or even leg. 

As to use of Karate stances, I have seen a street altercation where the stances were used by one combatant. he won, and stopped the attacker cold.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 23, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Once I figure out how to edit MP4 in Window's Movie Maker I will. LOL
> 
> Um... don't suppose you know anything about that?
> 
> I have an altered American Kenpo technique, Thundering Hammer, that does just that. If I could figure out how to edit MP4 in Movie Maker I would glady post it.



Download Windows Live Movie Maker. Its free and its basically the same thing. It edits MP4 files (I believe). If that doesnt work, you can use one of many online converters to change it into WMV. I eagerly await your video of a real continuous fight with karate blocks and stances.

If you need any further assistance i can provide 
I have an Adobe program for file conversion. If all else fails, youre welcome to send it to me, ill convert it and send it back to you.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 23, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Ill take that in order.
> 
> 3: Kickboxing uses low blocks as well. But im unsure why he would repeatedly attempt kicks to the groin - Was this in a sparring setting or mutual combat? I already know it wasnt the other option, good sir.


It was about 20 years ago in an actual street fight, he was trying to hurt me, I could have beaten him in the first few seconds but I made the mistake of not wanting to hurt him and letting it go on too long, a mistake I would never make again.


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

Here is an interesting article and it has a decent example of jiyu kumite. Let me know if you find a 'block'. Evasion yes. Deflection yes. Blocks?



> Dojo training, specifically Karate fighting, can be real tough. The physical rewards are; we become stronger and faster, our reflexes sharpen, we build endurance and improve our one-on-one sparring ability.
> Thousands, maybe millions of repetitions of Karate moves, over years of training to a point where they are hard-wired is one thing, but that may not be enough in the event of a sudden violent assault.
> 
> Exceptional Karate Technique does not automatically equip you with the reflex skills needed in chaotic situations where there is no time to think.
> ...


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 23, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> It was about 20 years ago in an actual street fight, he was trying to hurt me, I could have beaten him in the first few seconds but I made the mistake of not wanting to hurt him and letting it go on too long, a mistake I would never make again.


That, good sir, is mutual combat. If hed wanted to hurt you, it wouldnt have been a fight.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 23, 2013)

K-man said:


> The fact is TKD is for sport mainly and it is conducted at kicking distance.  Our training is conducted at grappling range normally so the dynamic is totally different. For example, someone coming in might get one shot at the groin ...  but to give him three chances? That means that I am moving out of range, not entering.
> :asian:



Just to be perfectly clear the style of TKD I do and teach is a martial art of self defence. It has no sporting aspects whatsoever, we do not compete or wear protective gear of any kind. I suspect the TKD you are thinking of is the Olympic style where it is 90-95% kicks. We teach TKD as it was originally taught in the beginning. It is probably about 30-60% kicking and has a full range of grappling techniques, weapon defences and ground fighting for a striking art. We are probably closer to Shotokan Karate than we are to other TKD styles. 

I am not usually the most calm person but in the times that I have been in self defence situations I have always been calm and able to think clearly, even when I was approached one night by about 20 people carrying chains, baseball bats and iron bars (some sort of extreme neighborhood watch) so I have never had an issue with adrenalin dump. By forethought I am referring to the time it takes from where I see the attack coming to the time where I overide my first instinct and block it, maybe 1/10th of a second. I didn't see anything 'superior' in the blocking video.


----------



## K-man (Jan 23, 2013)

Lyota Machida is a Shotokan karateka who did well in the UFC.   This clip shows different things including using the deep stance in attack, but most interesting is the quite long segment showing him being attacked.  He dodges, evades and parries but not one block.  If blocks are so good why is a top karate fighter not using them to effect against his opponent in a pretty intense situation? You could even say as *Cyriacus* said in the previous post, this is mutual combat. A street fight with no quarter is even more intense because there is no ref to stop the fight. 

Skip to 3.17 and watch to 6.30


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Just to be perfectly clear the style of TKD I do and teach is a martial art of self defence. It has no sporting aspects whatsoever, we do not compete or wear protective gear of any kind. I suspect the TKD you are thinking of is the Olympic style where it is 90-95% kicks. We teach TKD as it was originally taught in the beginning. It is probably about 30-60% kicking and has a full range of grappling techniques, weapon defences and ground fighting for a striking art. We are probably closer to Shotokan Karate than we are to other TKD styles.
> 
> I am not usually the most calm person but in the times that I have been in self defence situations I have always been calm and able to think clearly, even when I was approached one night by about 20 people carrying chains, baseball bats and iron bars (some sort of extreme neighborhood watch) so I have never had an issue with adrenalin dump. By forethought I am referring to the time it takes from where I see the attack coming to the time where I overide my first instinct and block it, maybe 1/10th of a second. I didn't see anything 'superior' in the blocking video.



First, from what ive seen of Rhee Taekwondo, they spar from kicking distance, much like the ITF and WTF and GTF. So do most non-contact systems, and some contact systems. Thats fair enough. As an experiment, next time youre sparring, get to a distance where you can just reach someones torso with your heel (with contact. just judge the range), then charge in throwing punches toward their head and just keep moving forward, even if your body collides with theirs. No stance, no technique. All speed and power and linear movement. Youll find that your definition of non-contact will change from range, to pulling every single one of your strikes short of contact. They wont fend you off with a kick because youll have gotten too close in your first step. They might freak out and start punching at you. Or they might stand there trying to block whilst backpeddaling back to 'their' range. If they freak out and start punching at you, theyre forgetting all their training and defaulting to reflex. Its just a suggestion, but it isnt baseless or theoretical.

Second, if you saw a group of people like that, why didnt you just call the police? Also, if those 20 people blitzed you, good luck staying calm.

PS: If he hits you in this experiment, ignore it and keep going. Striking doesnt do much damage, especially once youre used to it. And throw a minimum of 20 punches, or until your arms are exhausted. Whichever comes first.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

K-man said:


> Lyota Machida is a Shotokan karateka who did well in the UFC.   This clip shows different things including using the deep stance in attack, but most interesting is the quite long segment showing him being attacked.  He dodges, evades and parries but not one block.  If blocks are so good why is a top karate fighter not using them to effect against his opponent in a pretty intense situation? You could even say as *Cyriacus* said in the previous post, this is mutual combat. A street fight with no quarter is even more intense because there is no ref to stop the fight.
> 
> Skip to 3.17 and watch to 6.30



What i see is Machida not wanting to stand and brawl. Another good point would be that in a street fight, thered be more obstacles to stop him from doing that.
I can find a denizen videos of fighters who prefer stand and brawl over out-fighting (outside, as in range, for any who arent aware)


----------



## K-man (Jan 24, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> What i see is Machida not wanting to stand and brawl. Another good point would be that in a street fight, thered be more obstacles to stop him from doing that.
> I can find a denizen videos of fighters who prefer stand and brawl over out-fighting (outside, as in range, for any who arent aware)


It is just that it is a whole heap of clips demonstrating evasion rather than clashing. Post some of the brawling ones and we'll see if there are any traditional karate blocks in evidence. I posted Machida because he is Shotokan karate. If blocking is such a big thing, why doesn't he just block and come in?  When I get back to the computer I'll post a real favourite of mine, Bas Ruten. Now he's TKD but is totally reality based and one of the top SD guys around. I actually have some of his DVDs to try and see how he incorporates his martial art into his RBSD.   :asian:


----------



## supernix (Jan 24, 2013)

Blocking is okay, but you have to be very careful with it. 
It also is a situation where you have to consider the environment as well.
Blocking would work great against a equal or smaller assailant, but if the person is stronger or bigger than you then you will get pounded maybe into the ground even or could end up with a broken limb.
I learned from studying Hakko Ryu Jujutsu that you should get out of the way of the direction of the attack and block/parry the punch so that you have avoided the impact and yet are close enough to grab the assailant and take them down.


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 24, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Just to be perfectly clear the style of TKD I do and teach is a martial art of self defence. It has no sporting aspects whatsoever, we do not compete or wear protective gear of any kind. I suspect the TKD you are thinking of is the Olympic style where it is 90-95% kicks. We teach TKD as it was originally taught in the beginning. It is probably about 30-60% kicking and has a full range of grappling techniques, weapon defences and ground fighting for a striking art. We are probably closer to Shotokan Karate than we are to other TKD styles.
> 
> I am not usually the most calm person but in the times that I have been in self defence situations I have always been calm and able to think clearly, even when I was approached one night by about 20 people carrying chains, baseball bats and iron bars (some sort of extreme neighborhood watch) so I have never had an issue with adrenalin dump. By forethought I am referring to the time it takes from where I see the attack coming to the time where I overide my first instinct and block it, maybe 1/10th of a second._* I didn't see anything 'superior' in the blocking video*_.



Really , probably because you don't know what your looking at.
They are practicing Chi Sau , the close range combat exercise of Wing Chun.

Further into the video they start trapping and trying to find gaps in the partners defence to hit through , this is called Chi Sau sparring.
The older man on the right is Sifu Augustine Fong if I'm not mistaken , and he is doing a damn fine job of nullifying and dissolving all of his opponents attempted attacks.

Most fights will involve some sort of contact with the opponents arms , at this close range there is no time to think and your eyes become virtually useless.
Contact reflexes honed by hours of Chi Sau training enable a persons arms to be on a type of Auto Pilot , each arm will almost have a mind of its own.

Constant "Forward Force" generated from the elbows means that if there is a gap in the opponents defence , the arms will automatically spring forward and strike without conscious thought.

Once in contact with the opponents arms , changes in pressure or the direction of force from the opponent can be felt and will signal an impending attack.
An appropriate response will then be selected according to the type of force it is and the direction it is going.

This response will invariably take advantage of the opponents committed force , and put the opponent in a bad position with targets opened up on his head or body.
These techniques are independent of thought and happen in nano seconds.

It's not as easy as it looks and can be quite difficult controlling someone and stopping them from hitting you in Chi Sau range , it takes many , many years of proper Chi Sau training under a genuine Master before the techniques become "hard wired" into the nervous system.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

K-man said:


> It is just that it is a whole heap of clips demonstrating evasion rather than clashing. Post some of the brawling ones and we'll see if there are any traditional karate blocks in evidence. I posted Machida because he is Shotokan karate. If blocking is such a big thing, why doesn't he just block and come in?  When I get back to the computer I'll post a real favourite of mine, Bas Ruten. Now he's TKD but is totally reality based and one of the top SD guys around. I actually have some of his DVDs to try and see how he incorporates his martial art into his RBSD.   :asian:


Ill find some videos if you like, but the fact that theres no blocking involved is exactly my point. Unless thats what you were saying.
Here:









Also, if im not mistaken Bas Rutten first trained TKD growing up, shortly after getting over a skin condition. Hes a good man.

Edit: My first sentence is word jelly. So more detail! You posted a video that demonstrated the lack of blocking by a skilled karateka in a system which uses blocks. I reinforced your standpoint. Im unsure if you know thats what i was doing, so i answered in such a way that worked for both possibilities


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

supernix said:


> Blocking is okay, but you have to be very careful with it.
> It also is a situation where you have to consider the environment as well.
> Blocking would work great against a equal or smaller assailant, but if the person is stronger or bigger than you then you will get pounded maybe into the ground even or could end up with a broken limb.
> I learned from studying Hakko Ryu Jujutsu that you should get out of the way of the direction of the attack and block/parry the punch so that you have avoided the impact and yet are close enough to grab the assailant and take them down.



Incidentally, in a tight space, outward moving blocks dont work so good against hooks/haymakers if they cant generate any force - Proper (Take that with a pinch of salt, but i can back it up) haymakers are thrown from headbutting range. Blocking dont work so good from there unless you can grab or shove something. If you see it coming. If the persons bigger and stronger, multiply the effect.

Edit: I seem to be forgetting to explain why i say stuff today. Anyway - My reason in saying that is because the best solution is to move your head, in that situation. Perhaps towards them.


----------



## K-man (Jan 24, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Ill find some videos if you like, but the fact that theres no blocking involved is exactly my point. Unless thats what you were saying.
> 
> Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying. The only thing is, I was trying to showcase fighters who trained primarily in karate or TKD because you would think that if they trained 'blocks' they would use blocks and the fact is they don't.
> 
> ...


Bas is TKD and he is a no BS martial artist.
Here is one of his fights 




So, here we have a top TKD man competing in MMA and not a block in sight. WTF!   :asian:


----------



## oaktree (Jan 24, 2013)

In bagua zhang we prefer evasion over blocking.
 Blocking symbolizes stop movement.  In bagua zhang
We deal with constant movement and change. We do not block
We evade, parry,redirect anything that keeps moving and change


----------



## K-man (Jan 24, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> Really , probably because you don't know what your looking at.
> They are practicing Chi Sau , the close range combat exercise of Wing Chun.
> 
> Further into the video they start trapping and trying to find gaps in the partners defence to hit through , this is called Chi Sau sparring.
> ...


*Mook*, I thank you for your insight.  Although I train and teach a type of Chi Sau it is very basic (I call mine Tegumi so that there is no confusion with the real thing but it is unashamedly stolen from WC.). But in practice it works beautifully in a close karate setting. I think what people don't understand that you don't stand round doing Chi Sau for five minutes. You meet and absorb an attack, redirect their energy and hit them. It is over in a second.  :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 24, 2013)

There was no TKD or Karate shown in that video it was MMA that's why there was not a block in sight.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 24, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> Really , probably because you don't know what your looking at.
> They are practicing Chi Sau , the close range combat exercise of Wing Chun.
> 
> Further into the video they start trapping and trying to find gaps in the partners defence to hit through , this is called Chi Sau sparring.
> ...



The blocking was not superior or inferior it was just different, it was good though, the practitioner shown there are quite good. When I am in that range with my opponent I try to incorporate sticky hands (yes I know the term for Chi Sau) kinds of movements, I find Wing Chun to be one of the better styles of Kung Fu. In sparring or self defence I try not to let my opponent get that close, they would have to have gotten past 2 or 3 lines of defence.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> There was no TKD or Karate shown in that video it was MMA that's why there was not a block in sight.


That was the format of competition, yes. But Machida is a karate guy. Who uses karate in the MMA format of competition.
To showcase this, here, have some videos of karate sparring instead.













Blocking can also make it easy for someone to grab your blocking limb.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 24, 2013)

So there seems to be some difference in how a "block" is defined...okay, now I'm getting a clearer picture. 

Well, if your definition involves just stopping the strike, what's the argument against using a "block" vs a haymaker? Several examples are available on youtube of untrained individuals fighting in the street and throwing nothing but haymakers.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> So there seems to be some difference in how a "block" is defined...okay, now I'm getting a clearer picture.
> 
> Well, if your definition involves just stopping the strike, what's the argument against using a "block" vs a haymaker? Several examples are available on youtube of untrained individuals fighting in the street and throwing nothing but haymakers.



There is none, albeit a few things:
1; It depends on the haymaker. A haymaker thrown with a nearly locked out arm at long range? The person deserves it. A haymaker from headbutt range? Try it with a partner whos willing to hit you if you dont block them.
2; Haymakers actually work, and they can be thrown in rapid succession very quickly. Some fighters use them professionally. Google Zambidis. This relates back to point 1.
3; Fights arent static. If someone rushes at you throwing haymakers, they wont throw the first one unless its close enough to hit, unless theyre really silly. The chances of you outright stopping their momentum arent too good, so chances are, just like alot of videos of untrained individuals, youll end up tangled up rolling around on the ground trying to hit each other because you didnt move. Optionally, you can move toward them and take advantage of that fact.
4; Much like how a haymaker can be blocked outward, a straight can be blocked inward. If it were that easy, straight punches would have an even lower reputation than haymakers because you could physically cross the persons arms over each other if they tried to use them in fast succession. With haymakers, you block one, and the only way to stop them repeating the strike whilst they throw their other hand is to stand there with both your hands up on their forearms. If you try and immediately counter with your right hand, if they use their left hand, itll go straight over the top of your arm and hit you alot harder than your shorter faster strike, particularly if theyre used to and dont care about being hit.

I dont take issue to blocking, i take issue to relying on it for anything more than the first strike, assuming you can identify the strike and react before its in front of your face, since you wont always know its coming, and thats assuming its coming from in front of you. After that, attempting to block is more likely to get you hit than just moving your physical mass does. Blocking is also largely a static practice. If you can block a right haymaker with your left hand, couldnt you have punched them in the face with your left hand, then gotten to work using your superior fitness to barrage them back as hard as they were about to try and barrage you back? Yes. Of course. Blocking works too, but what about the second haymaker? And the third? And what about when they end up with their arms wrapped around you, or you run out of room to backpedal (which you will be, unless you want them too close to possibly block, or close enough to wrap their arms around you), or they get annoyed and try to kick you or headbutt you instead? It all works. But some things happen to be more reliable than others. Giving them the chance to build up momentum cant possibly be a good thing. 

And i really hope noone has a fantasy of squaring up and thwating all of someones strikes with skillful blocking until they give up and leave.
To demonstrate this, imagine yourself as the attacker instead of as the defender, then tell me how youd make a haymaker work. When youre done, think about the fact that the other guy could have thought about that as well, and come to similar conclusions. Even better if you have a partner to experiment with.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 24, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> So there seems to be some difference in how a "block" is defined...okay, now I'm getting a clearer picture.
> 
> Well, if your definition involves just stopping the strike, what's the argument against using a "block" vs a haymaker? Several examples are available on youtube of untrained individuals fighting in the street and throwing nothing but haymakers.


Relatively speaking hay makers are among the easiest punches to block, they are slow and easy to spot as you can see the whole arm long before it gets anywhere near you. If you block to the outside there is not much physical effort required. If you do not block or move out of the way they can still hurt you though. My instructor was attacked by a guy once who threw a haymaker, he just blocked it and punched him back once and it was all over. To him the guys punch felt like it was in slow motion because he was used to punches coming at him from trained martial artists nice and fast in free sparring. Another option is to just kick the guy before he gets close to you.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 24, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> There is none, albeit a few things:
> 1; It depends on the haymaker. A haymaker thrown with a nearly locked out arm at long range? The person deserves it. A haymaker from headbutt range? Try it with a partner whos willing to hit you if you dont block them.



LOL... I'm a kenpo-guy, we hit each other all the time. But in all seriousness, a haymaker at such close range could be ignored as the apex of the swing would occur well past the intended target. 



Cyriacus said:


> 2; Haymakers actually work, and they can be thrown in rapid succession very quickly. Some fighters use them professionally. Google Zambidis. This relates back to point 1.



Granted. There's a lot of momentum generated with a haymaker and if you connect with one it's gonna hurt. I personally don't use them because they're way too easy to telegraph. 



Cyriacus said:


> 3; Fights arent static. If someone rushes at you throwing haymakers, they wont throw the first one unless its close enough to hit, unless theyre really silly. The chances of you outright stopping their momentum arent too good, so chances are, just like alot of videos of untrained individuals, youll end up tangled up rolling around on the ground trying to hit each other because you didnt move. Optionally, you can move toward them and take advantage of that fact.



Real fights are dynamic, agreed. And I have been personally been rushed with them and not only was the first one out of range, so was the second. LOL It was quite silly. I can only imagine what it looked like from a 3rd person perspective. 

A block vs a hamaker coupled with a shoulder check goes a long way to separating a shoulder. Especially if the attacker really is intent on taking your head off. 

I think we may also define "haymakers" differently. What a trained fighter would throw would be what I would call a "cross". Or maybe you call an overhand punch a haymaker? I'm not certain, but what I call a "haymaker" we sometimes refer to as the "Budweiser Punch" down in the Dirty South. LOL 



Cyriacus said:


> 4; Much like how a haymaker can be blocked outward, a straight can be blocked inward. If it were that easy, straight punches would have an even lower reputation than haymakers because you could physically cross the persons arms over each other if they tried to use them in fast succession. With haymakers, you block one, and the only way to stop them repeating the strike whilst they throw their other hand is to stand there with both your hands up on their forearms. If you try and immediately counter with your right hand, if they use their left hand, itll go straight over the top of your arm and hit you alot harder than your shorter faster strike, particularly if theyre used to and dont care about being hit.



Personally, I prefer parries for straight punches. Again, as I posted originally, it depends on the scenario as to what weapons one uses for defense. That being said, an inward block can be quite effective in creating the circumstances you state above against a push and cross the attackers arms cancelling them and creating an angle of disturbance. 



Cyriacus said:


> I dont take issue to blocking, i take issue to relying on it for anything more than the first strike, assuming you can identify the strike and react before its in front of your face, since you wont always know its coming, and thats assuming its coming from in front of you. After that, attempting to block is more likely to get you hit than just moving your physical mass does. Blocking is also largely a static practice. If you can block a right haymaker with your left hand, couldnt you have punched them in the face with your left hand, then gotten to work using your superior fitness to barrage them back as hard as they were about to try and barrage you back? Yes. Of course. Blocking works too, but what about the second haymaker? And the third? And what about when they end up with their arms wrapped around you, or you run out of room to backpedal (which you will be, unless you want them too close to possibly block, or close enough to wrap their arms around you), or they get annoyed and try to kick you or headbutt you instead? It all works. But some things happen to be more reliable than others. Giving them the chance to build up momentum cant possibly be a good thing.
> 
> And i really hope noone has a fantasy of squaring up and thwating all of someones strikes with skillful blocking until they give up and leave.
> To demonstrate this, imagine yourself as the attacker instead of as the defender, then tell me how youd make a haymaker work. When youre done, think about the fact that the other guy could have thought about that as well, and come to similar conclusions. Even better if you have a partner to experiment with.



I agree that relying soley on traditional blocks is a flawed strategy. You need to have many tools in your tool box because you never know what the job will call for. 

There is no one way to be attacked and no one way to defend yourself. We live in a three dimensional world where every individual is different. No two people will throw a haymaker the same way for example. While learning, there are times where you have to break the material down and train in a static envirnment in order to ingrain the technical side of things but I agree that once understood you've gained an understanding what you've learned should be applied in a more dynamic training environment. I encourage everyone to keep an open mind and explore all avenues of defense for themselves, take what they find useful, and discard the rest... I've heard that somewhere before. LOL


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 24, 2013)

K-man said:


> *Mook*, I thank you for your insight.  Although I train and teach a type of Chi Sau it is very basic (I call mine Tegumi so that there is no confusion with the real thing but it is unashamedly stolen from WC.). But in practice it works beautifully in a close karate setting. _*I think what people don't understand that you don't stand round doing Chi Sau for five minutes. You meet and absorb an attack, redirect their energy and hit them. It is over in a second.*_  :asian:



Chi Sau is a means to an end , we spend years training in Chi Sau for that one split second in time when we make contact with the opponents arms.

If the opponents center line is open then Chi Sau is not needed , you just move in and hit him.
But if the opponent attempts to block or in anyway resist our striking , then the sensitivity developed by Chi Sau will immediately be brought into play to give us the upper hand , sometimes quite literally.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> LOL... I'm a kenpo-guy, we hit each other all the time. But in all seriousness, a haymaker at such close range could be ignored as the apex of the swing would occur well past the intended target.



Id beg to differ. As an experiment, go stand within elbows reach of a wall, then throw a haymaker as hard as you can without hitting the wall. Now tell me how youd block it at that range.



> Granted. There's a lot of momentum generated with a haymaker and if you connect with one it's gonna hurt. I personally don't use them because they're way too easy to telegraph.



Which is why you do them from up close. If you dont wind it up and you just throw it, it isnt any more telegraphed than a hook.



> Real fights are dynamic, agreed. And I have been personally been rushed with them and not only was the first one out of range, so was the second. LOL It was quite silly. I can only imagine what it looked like from a 3rd person perspective.



Which is a glowing example of someone pretty much going 'i have no idea what im doing ive never done this before!'.
Now, take this scenario, and adjust it so they arent out of range. I dont doubt you can simulate it.



> A block vs a hamaker coupled with a shoulder check goes a long way to separating a shoulder. Especially if the attacker really is intent on taking your head off.



And a block vs a straight can cross someones arms over each other.



> I think we may also define "haymakers" differently. What a trained fighter would throw would be what I would call a "cross". Or maybe you call an overhand punch a haymaker? I'm not certain, but what I call a "haymaker" we sometimes refer to as the "Budweiser Punch" down in the Dirty South. LOL



I call a haymaker a punch were you swing horizontally, slightly upward, or slightly downward with a partially bent to 90 degree or so bent arm with your whole body committed to the strike. As oppose to a hook, which is tight and crisp, it comes from a wider angle. We may still be referring to different things though. I hope that helps to clarify.



> Personally, I prefer parries for straight punches. Again, as I posted originally, it depends on the scenario as to what weapons one uses for defense. That being said, an inward block can be quite effective in creating the circumstances you state above against a push and cross the attackers arms cancelling them and creating an angle of disturbance.



Therefore a push is ineffective because theres a way to stop someone with it? Im not saying you said that, but its similar reasoning. People are conditioned to underestimate haymakers. Then visualise them as being a big long range punch with a big telegraphed windup. Thats just a silly swing of the arm.



> I agree that relying soley on traditional blocks is a flawed strategy. You need to have many tools in your tool box because you never know what the job will call for.



Perhaps - But if you have too much to choose from, that also means you need to be able to idenfity every possible attack and angle, then deduce the correct block.



> There is no one way to be attacked and no one way to defend yourself. We live in a three dimensional world where every individual is different. No two people will throw a haymaker the same way for example. While learning, there are times where you have to break the material down and train in a static envirnment in order to ingrain the technical side of things but I agree that once understood you've gained an understanding what you've learned should be applied in a more dynamic training environment. I encourage everyone to keep an open mind and explore all avenues of defense for themselves, take what they find useful, and discard the rest... I've heard that somewhere before. LOL



I absolutely agree. And alot of the people who cant throw a decent haymaker arent the types of people who use violence as a regular part of their lives. There are criminals who train to hurt other people. Is it really inconceivable that a mugger things about how hes going to mug you? Or that someone who decides hes going to randomly attack you doesnt think about how? When its just some guy who gets angry, thats different. Its easier. They arent the people you should be worried about. If someone cant make a haymaker work, they probably cant make anything else work either. Worry about the ones who can. If youre just training for slobs, you dont even need training.

PS: Im enjoying this discussion. Your points lead me to have to think about my points. Its been months i think, since ive had a proper back and forth discussion on the forum rather than just trying to explain one thing in many different ways whilst everything is slowly derailed no matter what evidence or points are given or made. Its great. Ive missed this.


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 24, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> The blocking was not superior or inferior it was just different, it was good though, the practitioner shown there are quite good. When I am in that range with my opponent I try to incorporate sticky hands (yes I know the term for Chi Sau) kinds of movements, I find Wing Chun to be one of the better styles of Kung Fu. In sparring or self defence _*I try not to let my opponent get that close, they would have to have gotten past 2 or 3 lines of defence.*_


_*

*_Trouble with that is , you don't always get to make that choice.
Sometimes circumstances and the opponent will make that choice for you.

Real violence can kick off at normal conversation distance and  in the blink of an eye that gap will be bridged and you will have the attacker right up in your face .
Or "All up in your grill " as our American friends like to say.


----------



## Guy Preston (Jan 24, 2013)

Coming into this conversation late.....

Why choose Blocking over Evasion or vica versa??

If you evade, why not throw an arm up to protect yourself?? 

Likewise, if you are blocking, wouldn't you also move into a better position to evade the attack at the same time??

I don't train any hard style blocks in general, but anything I do train contains both elements, moving off their attack line is always key, along with striking a bicep, or deflecting, capturing, etc...

If you leave out either, you have nothing if anything goes wrong...

If you try to block without evading, and your block is broken through, or misses, etc, you're going to get hit!!!

If you try to evade without blocking, and they track your movement, you're not as fast as they are, or they pre empt your movement, you're going to get hit!!!

A combination of the 2 is essential in my opinion...


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 24, 2013)

Ninniku Dojo said:


> Coming into this conversation late.....
> 
> Why choose Blocking over Evasion or vica versa??
> 
> ...



I agree totaly.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 24, 2013)

Like I said...depends on the conditions of the scenario. 

I finally figured out MP4s and will soon post "Thundering Hammer". 

In the meantime, here's a link to an American Kenpo classic, "Aggressive Twins", a defense vs a two hand push/shove which utilizes an inward block.

I realize before posting the link that it is more likely to be ripped apart not unlike a bunch of rabid jackles would rip apart newly discovered carion;however, it does show that a traditional inward block can be used effectively against certain attacks. 

Let the flaming begin! LOL


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Like I said...depends on the conditions of the scenario.
> 
> I finally figured out MP4s and will soon post "Thundering Hammer".
> 
> ...



Blood is delicious.

In all seriousness, i was more interesting in this being one of the more functional ways ive seen someone use a kick to the groin, rather then starting with it like its a cure all.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> [/B][/I]Trouble with that is , you don't always get to make that choice.
> Sometimes circumstances and the opponent will make that choice for you.
> 
> Real violence can kick off at normal conversation distance and  in the blink of an eye that gap will be bridged and you will have the attacker right up in your face .
> Or "All up in your grill " as our American friends like to say.



When I say that they would have to have gotten past 2 or 3 lines of defence I don't just mean that he has fought his way past I also mean that he could have bypassed them, which he would have if he only became a threat after he was already "All up in my grill " basically if someone is close enough to strike then you are close enough to block. The first line of defence is always avoid a confrontation, escape or talk your way out it.


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> When I say that they would have to have gotten past 2 or 3 lines of defence I don't just mean that he has fought his way past I also mean that he could have bypassed them, which he would have if he only became a threat after he was already "All up in my grill "_* basically if someone is close enough to strike then you are close enough to block. The first line of defence is always avoid a confrontation, escape or talk your way out it*_.



Doesn't work that way unfortunately.
You need a certain amount of time and distance to react and mount your defence.
If he is close enough to hit you and he decides to initiate the attack , then there is not a damn thing you can do about it , you are going to be hit.

This is the reason control measures such as the "Fence" were developed , to control the potential attacker and keep him at a distance where you can either hit him with a pre emptive strike or at least have half a chance of stopping his pre emptive strike.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Like I said...depends on the conditions of the scenario.
> 
> I finally figured out MP4s and will soon post "Thundering Hammer".
> 
> ...


I might be a bit rabid at times   but I'm not at all critical of your video. But then, I don't class what he did as a block. A block stops an attack. In this instance the move was more a deflection and the way it was performed was quite soft. If he had been more forceful I would have termed it a forearm strike and even then it would not stop the attack. 

No flaming.    :asian:


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 25, 2013)

Ah... okay. 

In American Kenpo a *"block"* can be defined as any defensive maneuver used to check or hinder an opponent. But I think it's finally clicked what you guys are saying. 

I can only think of a handful of scenarios where meeting force with force in order to stop, quite literally, an attack would be the be desirable. In many cases, deflection would be the best strategy IMHO. 

Deflection allows you utilize *"borrowed force"; *the force behind your opponent's attack. Either by adding to the effectiveness of your counter or by creating and *"angle of disturbance" *where the attacker is forced to switch their focus from you to keeping their balance which affords you the opportunity to get in more strikes; as in the video example I posted.

Been a while since I had a good martials arts conversation... thanks guys!


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> Doesn't work that way unfortunately.
> You need a certain amount of time and distance to react and mount your defence.
> If he is close enough to hit you and he decides to initiate the attack , then there is not a damn thing you can do about it , you are going to be hit.



So then that must be the ultimate form of attack that has no possible defence, just be close enough to hit someone and then initiate an attack and you will get them every time is that what you are saying?

There is not a damn thing you can do about it when:
a) If you have insufficient defensive skills.
b) You are not paying attention
c) You are not faster than they are

There is no such thing as a no win scenario, an undefendable strike or inescapable hold.

Never heard of the fence until your post but after seeing it on YouTube it reminds me a little of a guarding block with the palms we use in my school. It looks like a compliant posture that suggests "no no I don't want any trouble" but actually has all the elements of a guarding block without looking like a guarding block.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Ah... okay.
> 
> In American Kenpo a *"block"* can be defined as any defensive maneuver used to check or hinder an opponent. But I think it's finally clicked what you guys are saying.
> 
> ...


Welcome to the dark side bro!   :cheers:


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> So then that must be the ultimate form of attack that has no possible defence, just be close enough to hit someone and then initiate an attack and you will get them every time is that what you are saying?
> 
> There is not a damn thing you can do about it when:
> a) If you have insufficient defensive skills.
> ...



No there are a few attacks from close in where if I choose to initiate you won't have time to register or in some cases you won't even see it to be able to defend it. Even an interview stance which keeps your hands nearby will only give you a small chance (assuming I'm using one of the strikes where you can see it coming) because:
A. I've been practicing these skills a long time so I'm very, very fast at them
B. Even if we were the exact same speed (and we're not) my action will be faster than your reaction
C. I can initiate movement for most of them without telegraphing


----------



## geezer (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> So then that must be the ultimate form of attack that has no possible defence, just be close enough to hit someone and then initiate an attack and you will get them every time is that what you are saying?
> 
> There is not a damn thing you can do about it when:
> a) If you have insufficient defensive skills.
> ...



I sense that you intended sarcasm, but _yeah_, that actually _does_ sum it up pretty nicely. If you have your guard down and you let some violent nutter get right up in your face, he can very easily sucker-punch you or head-butt you "real good" before you can react. Funny thing is, this is exactly how a lot of male-dominance or "monkey dance" type fights start. 

I see you actually did check out Geoff Thompson's "Fence" on Youtube. I totally susbscribe to that approach. Very solid strategy. Also, I'd think real hard about what Mook's posted. If you do Rhee TKD, you probably aren't real familiar with tight infighting such as favored by good Wing Chunner's. My source for this belief is one of my training partners in Texas, an older gent pushing 70 who was (many decades ago) on Jhoon Rhee's demo team. Now, in his "mature" years, after a hard, active life and a couple of knee replacement surgeries he's a Ving Tsun instructor. The man is well informed on this matter.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> So then that must be the ultimate form of attack that has no possible defence, just be close enough to hit someone and then initiate an attack and you will get them every time is that what you are saying?
> 
> There is not a damn thing you can do about it when:
> a) If you have insufficient defensive skills.
> ...


To a certain extent yes. Having seen what some guys can do to a makiwara from a couple of inches. But even then you still have the options shown in every video posted, deflection or evasion. 



> There is no such thing as a no win scenario, an undefendable strike or inescapable hold.


 Mmm! Looks like a lot of UFC fights must end by mutual consent after one of the guys taps out or passes out.  I must remember to tell that to my guys next time someone has them in a submission hold.     

The 'fence' is not really the same as pushing your hands out in a compiiant way. It is based on the aikido 'unbendable' arm and can include swapping arms. When one of my friends teaches it, he teaches it as 'outside 90'. That is you must keep the angle of the arm, at the elbow, outside 90 degrees for strength. Under 90 it will collapse under pressure. It is really only used when you are trying to avoid a conflict. That is when you are trying to cool a situation.  :asian:


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 25, 2013)

I think it's important to keep in mind some simple truths in regards to Physiology & Physics before making an assertion.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> So then that must be the ultimate form of attack that has no possible defence, just be close enough to hit someone and then initiate an attack and you will get them every time is that what you are saying?



Thats pretty much what happens. It works even better off an ambush.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

K-man said:


> Mmm! Looks like a lot of UFC fights must end by mutual consent after one of the guys taps out or passes out.  I must remember to tell that to my guys next time someone has them in a submission hold.       :asian:



Its true that once some holds are properly applied they are extremely difficult to get out of. Most of the holds that UFC fighters have submitted to or passed out from have been gotten out of by other UFC fighters. The rules of the Octagon prevent a lot of escapes from occurring, if you look closely at a fight where someone was submitted and ignore the rules you can sometimes see that there were a number of opportunities where a well placed elbow, kick, stomp, poke, small knuckle strike and finger or wrist break could have gotten them out of it but would have been illegal. For example many fighters have submitted to, I think it's called, a flying arm-bar where the person jumps on his opponent, puts him in an arm-bar and hangs on the guy upside down. From this position it would not be too difficult to stomp on the guys head. But since the guy performing the arm-bar is not trying to actually break the arm or permanently disable/kill the guy such drastic action is not necessary.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Its true that once some holds are properly applied they are extremely difficult to get out of. Most of the holds that UFC fighters have submitted to or passed out from have been gotten out of by other UFC fighters. The rules of the Octagon prevent a lot of escapes from occurring, if you look closely at a fight where someone was submitted and ignore the rules you can *sometimes* see that there were a number of opportunities where a well placed elbow, kick, stomp, poke, small knuckle strike and finger or wrist break could have gotten them out of it but would have been illegal. For example many fighters have submitted to, I think it's called, a flying arm-bar where the person jumps on his opponent, puts him in an arm-bar and hangs on the guy upside down. From this position it would not be too difficult to stomp on the guys head. But since the guy performing the arm-bar is not trying to actually break the arm or permanently disable/kill the guy such drastic action is not necessary.


Once holds are applied *properly* they are virtually impossible to get out of. If you don't submit you will experience joint damage or lack of conciousness.  There are ways of reversing holds but normally the reversals in aikido (kaeshi waza) are not taught until around 3rd dan level. Even then, it is not that the reversals will always work but they expose any weaknesses in the primary technique. At UFC level the guys are highly skilled in applying submission holds and despite the fact that there are rules that may prevent a competitor escaping, those opportunities are few and far between.  Body size also may well limit the effectiveness of a technique. 

A smaller person may have difficulty restraining a bigger, stronger opponent but given two people of similar strength and build, the person in a properly applied lock or choke will not have much chance of escape.  :asian:


----------



## chinto (Jan 25, 2013)

look blocks and evasions both have their place. you may block as an actual block to set up a hold or grapple  or simply evade and counter or both.  as far as holds, there are several that once set your are really in trouble at best.  so, you try and make sure they do not get set.  for every strike there is a block or evasion and for every lock or hold a counter.


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 28, 2013)

This thread reminds me of the women's gold-medal Olympic sparring matches, which I was (re)watching last week.  These ladies are so good at evasion that they didn't even bother keeping their hands up most of the time.

Personally, I think evasion > redirection > blocking > getting hit.  If you block a strike, you're risking an injury to your arm or hand.  That's better than an injury to your head/neck/ribs/kidneys, but avoiding the strike entirely would be preferable.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2013)

The evasion, redirection, and blocking are not the best solution. The best solution is to wrap your opponent's arms so he can't punch you any more.


http://imageshack.us/a/img444/5471/octopus.jpg


----------



## K-man (Jan 28, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The evasion, redirection, and blocking are not the best solution. The best solution is to wrap your opponent's arms so he can't punch you any more.
> 
> http://imageshack.us/a/img444/5471/octopus.jpg


Not as silly as it first may seem or that the cartoon may suggest. But I would question whether clinching is the preferred option especially when there is considerable difference in weight or height. But in the scenario that you are bigger and stronger than your opponent, or even the same size, tying him up until you decide what you can may well be an option.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 28, 2013)

K-man said:


> Not as silly as it first may seem or that the cartoon may suggest. But I would question whether clinching is the preferred option especially when there is considerable difference in weight or height. But in the scenario that you are bigger and stronger than your opponent, or even the same size, tying him up until you decide what you can may well be an option.


Step 1: Wrap your arms around their arms
Step 2: Headbutt
Step 3: Repeat until satisfied

Hey, itll either work or it wont.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Feb 2, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The evasion, redirection, and blocking are not the best solution. The best solution is to wrap your opponent's arms so he can't punch you any more.
> 
> 
> http://imageshack.us/a/img444/5471/octopus.jpg


The octopus is lucky, he can wrap his arms (tentacles) around multiple opponents, human beings, not so much.


----------



## GaryR (Feb 7, 2013)

Telfer said:


> And how do you choose between blocking and evading your opponent's strike?



Blocking/evading and striking/re-attacking should not be a two step process.  Ideally one should be able to avoid an attack by one of several options, some acting in concert-while taking the balance of the other, and striking back at the same time you block and/or evade.  I like to call this "counter offensive tactics".  

One method is to connect, blend, and re-direct whilst re-attacking
Another is to evade without making contact and re-attack whilst evading
Another is to Jam / smash through the attack with an attack of your own (less desirable much of the time)
Plus, any combination of above.  

Any "block" that is only a block, and involves a two-count/beat re-attack is far from optimal and should be avoided.

Hope that helps...

G


----------



## K-man (Feb 7, 2013)

GaryR said:


> Blocking/evading and striking/re-attacking should not be a two step process.  Ideally one should be able to avoid an attack by one of several options, some acting in concert-while taking the balance of the other, and striking back at the same time you block and/or evade.  I like to call this "counter offensive tactics".
> 
> One method is to connect, blend, and re-direct whilst re-attacking
> Another is to evade without making contact and re-attack whilst evading
> ...


Good to see you back *Gary* and we pretty much agree.  However, this is an old thread. *Telfer* hasn't been around for three years.

The current discussion has evolved from *RTKDCM*'s response to my post.



> *K-man
> *_
> I am of the school that believes that 'blocks', as such have very little place in the martial arts. We will sometimes move in and jam but to actually block an attack signals the end of your opponent's first technique and the trigger to launch his next attack. _
> _Now, evasion can mean two things. Firstly, we move off the line of attack as in ashi tsabaki. That gets us out of the firing line, especially if someone is charging us. The disadvantage is that our opponent mostly retains control of his centre and can easily redirect his attack. Secondly, as Seasoned pointed out is tai tsabaki where we intercept and redirect the opponent's attack, most often breaking his balance and creating the opportunity to strike or apply any other suitable technique._
> _The secret to all this is to go back to our basic 'blocks'. In Goju, almost without exception, they are two-handed. The first hand deflects the attack and the second hand is actually a strike. Unfortunately, very few instructors teach this application, prefering instead to teach the obvious application. My question to them is, "Would you ever use the blocks you teach in a bar or street situation?" The answer is inevitably "Well no ... but, ..... !!" The next question becomes, "Then why teach them at all if you wouldn't use them in real life?" _





> *RTKDCMB
> *
> I was always taught blocking in any martial arts that I have done. I was also taught evasion, when I first heard that some martial arts do not teach blocking at all I was quite surprised, I mean why would you not block. Many arts such as Muay Thai and boxing et al get along quite well without doing much blocking but one thing I have noticed is that the fighters in these martial arts tend to get hit a lot so they rely on being able to take a hit. In a street self defence situation you cannot afford to get hit even once, there have been many one punch deaths in recent years. Evasion is much easier on your body than blocking but requires more time and energy and after the strike is evaded the opponents momentum and direction of movement remains largely unchanged. The great thing about blocking is that you can redirect the attack wherever you want it to go. A good block will not only redirect the attack but will also damage the attacking tool, even to the point of breaking the attacking arm. You can also strike at the same time as you block. The are some techniques however that you should only block as a last resort, such as a hooking kick or crescent kick and it is better to evade.
> 
> ...



So, your post pretty much sums up what I posted.  :asian:


----------



## Prostar (Feb 9, 2013)

Some years ago, (early to mid seventies) I was at a tournament in Baltimore.  I was paired with Furman Marshall for the first bout.  Every time I threw a kick he not only blocked it but blocked it with a snap of the forearm.  By the end of the match my right leg was purple from my knee to toes.  I did end up winning the match, using my worst technique, a left hand, over the top, reverse punch.  I won the match but he beat me up.   I learned so much from him in the span of those three minutes.  A good punishing block took me out of the tournament.


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 9, 2013)

Prostar said:


> Some years ago, (early to mid seventies) I was at a tournament in Baltimore.  I was paired with Furman Marshall for the first bout.  Every time I threw a kick he not only blocked it but blocked it with a snap of the forearm.  By the end of the match my right leg was purple from my knee to toes.  I did end up winning the match, using my worst technique, a left hand, over the top, reverse punch.  I won the match but he beat me up.   I learned so much from him in the span of those three minutes.  A good punishing block took me out of the tournament.



It doesnt sound like it did him much good, other than that.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 10, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Step 1: Wrap your arms around their arms
> Step 2: Headbutt
> Step 3: Repeat until satisfied
> 
> Hey, itll either work or it wont.


At 2.10 - 2.13.








K-man said:


> tying him up until you decide what you can may well be an option.


Clinching is to force a striker to play the grappling game.

http://imageshack.us/a/img859/982/deadlock.png


----------



## K-man (Feb 10, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Clinching is to force a striker to play the grappling game.


In a MMA context perhaps.  Boxers clinch to stop the blows while they catch breath.  In a surprise attack situation (close), I can envisage grabbing hold any way I can until I can assess the situation. I don't want to necessarily grapple and I definitely don't want to go to the ground. I'm surviving the first few seconds of the attack before I can hopefully disengage and do whatever is necessary to get away.   :asian:


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 10, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> At 2.10 - 2.13.



But he wasnt close enough! He was holding him at arms reach


----------



## Curlykarateka (Feb 15, 2013)

I personally think that both at the same time is always preferable. For example, my opponent punches at my head. I step around his outside whilst simultaneously performing a block (specifically jodan age uke for other karate practitioners) this places me in a position to strike at various targets ie: floating ribs, carotid arteries  temples, base of the skull with relative impunity, particularly if  trapped his near hand, so he can't strike me. his far hand will be a while away and he will have to shuffle and telegraph his actions to use it against me. However, I've only been training 6 years and am far from an expert


----------



## K-man (Feb 15, 2013)

Curlykarateka said:


> I personally think that both at the same time is always preferable. For example, my opponent punches at my head. I step around his outside whilst simultaneously performing a block (specifically jodan age uke for other karate practitioners) this places me in a position to strike at various targets ie: floating ribs, carotid arteries  temples, base of the skull with relative impunity, particularly if  trapped his near hand, so he can't strike me. his far hand will be a while away and he will have to shuffle and telegraph his actions to use it against me. However, I've only been training 6 years and am far from an expert


How far away is your opponent to enable you to move to the side and block with Jodan Uke? Do you know in advance what hand he is punching with? Is he performing a 'traditional' karate punch?  At training the other night we tested this 'block' theory.  I invited the guys to use any 'block' that they had been taught as a 'block' against an attack to the chest. (Chest was targeted rather than head for safety) The proviso was that the block had to be a proper block, as we have all been taught, not a deflection.  I proceeded to throw three punches, from close (not sparring) range, most of which landed. On several occasions they got a hand in front of the punch but not one could 'block' the punch. The other two punches landed. Then we did it again in the way that we normally train, without blocks and almost no strikes got through. 'Uke' does not mean block.     :asian:


----------



## mook jong man (Feb 15, 2013)

If evasion at close range was a viable tactic , Wing Chun would already be using it.


----------



## GaryR (Feb 15, 2013)

K-man said:


> Good to see you back *Gary* and we pretty much agree.  However, this is an old thread. *Telfer* hasn't been around for three years.
> 
> The current discussion has evolved from *RTKDCM*'s response to my post.
> 
> ...



HA! Thanks for the welcome K-Man,

Guess I should read the thread more carefully before posting!  Glad we agree.  

You said "_We will sometimes move in and jam but to actually block an attack  signals the end of your opponent's first technique and the trigger to  launch his next attack."

_I definitely agree here. The more you can blend and re-attack without a hard-block type tactile signal to your opponent the better.  Even untrained people can sense this and it becomes a tit-for-tat.  I like to liken a fight to having your opponent sucked into a tornado, sucked in a spit out damaged/broken--or another analogy--fighting a ghost with a sledgehammer.

Best,

G


----------



## K-man (Feb 15, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> If evasion at close range was a viable tactic , Wing Chun would already be using it.


And seeing that karate comes from Kung fu, if 'blocks' were blocks, Wing Chun would be doing them too.


----------

