Charging Ram- Front Tackle

[JamesB]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

James

 

[JamesB]

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

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

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

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

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

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

Examples:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[MJS]

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

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

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

 

[pete]

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

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

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

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

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

pete

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

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

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

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

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

pete

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

 

[jasonearle]

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

 

[Hye Kenpo Nar]

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

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

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

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

 

[MJS]

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

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

Mike

 

[KenpoSterre]

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

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

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

4: Cross/cover to 2 o'clock


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

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

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

 

[Seabrook]

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

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

It works, big-time.