Delayed Sword

[Brenwulv]

Originally posted by Doc
I think I may be vaguely familiar with what is an incorrect and confusing use of the terminology. I was attempting to understand what "you" meant by the term. In our cuurriculum the ambiguous term "ball kick" doesn't exist.

How is it incorrect or confusing, Sir? Most all strikes are named in such a way to know exactly what strike is used, not which target is hit. An upward elbow can be used to strike the face, countless techniques, or the groin, as in Bowing to Buddha.

No one seemed to disagree that the kick in this tech goes to the groin, so how is a 'front ball kick' confusing terminology? It tells you what type of strike to use, namely, a front kick which uses the ball of the foot as the striking surface. I'm genuinely trying to understand this.

Moving the hips backwards does not equal "bendng over at the waist." Nor does it account for any significant strike to the lower body causing the feet to move rearward. The fallacy of being struck and suddenly "bending forward" is completely false.

It would only be a fallacy if I were speaking on the words of someone else. I've seen it happen, done it to people, and have had it done to me on many occasions.

I'll try to clear this up as I see it.

Someone is running along the street at a good pace. They run past me. I stick out my arm at their head level. Their head stops while the rest of their body will continue on the fact of momentum alone.

Now this person is running and instead of the face, I smack them with a bat in the hips/upper thigh area. You're telling me that they will stop dead and squat down from the pain? More than likely their shoulders will continue from momentum and they will tumble head first to the ground.

Now in the case of techniques I'll use Delayed Sword and Sword of Destruction. Both motions you step back and block as commonly taught (I can't fathom how stepping back or forward into the same exact stance causes misalignment one way and not the other, but that isn't the discussion at present.)

For Sword of Destruction they come at you with a left roundhouse punch. You step back with the block, then slide to the cat and throw the front kick to the groin. Their momentum is moving forward and you shove their hips back. Their shoulders will move forward, some more than others, but they still come forward. I'd call that bending at the waist -> hips move back, shoulders move forward, something is bending somewhere.

Now, Delayed Sword for a grab. Most likely the person will have a nice tight grip and a slightly bent and tense arm, possibly to pull you into a strike with the left. You step back to give them momentum toward you, block, slide to cat and throw the kick to the groin. Their hips stop moving forward and their shoulders keep coming. Bending at the waist to some extent.

This is how I see these techniques and I've explained it as best I can at present. It seems like you are saying that kicking a person on the horizontal plane makes them react in a vertical one (squatting down as you said, not talking buckling legs and their height drops).

If this is what you are saying, then it would seem that you are also saying all the techniques that say "strike them in the groin to bend them forward to follow with such and such a strike" are wrong. If that's the case then many of the techniques in EPAK are wrong and Mr. Parker was mistaken about human reactions.

I highly doubt that is what you are saying, Sir.

Respectfully,
Joel

 

[Brenwulv]

Originally posted by Doc

Anyway the term we use is a "front kick," to describe the action, then "with the ball of the foot," to describe the weapon. This is a more descriptive and appropriate use of the terminology. After all a front kick can utilize more than one weapon. Admittedly "ball kick" is slang and could be misconstrued as the action, target, or both. To avoid confusion I try to avoid slang in academic discussions without some clarifications.

Fair enough, I find it just descriptive of the weapon like any other name.
Front kick.
Front snap kick.
Front snap ball kick.

But I can see your point as it might be misconstrued(sp?) as a groin kick.

(and that answers the one question from my other post )
Respectfully,
Joel

 

[D.Cobb]

Originally posted by Doc
For the record: Ed Parker taught Delayed Sword both ways, initially as a punch, then later as the WOK solidified, as a lapel grab. Different schools still do it the way they were taught, althought the "punch version" seems to be the most popular because it's the easiest, I think, to teach. Neither way is wrong, but eventually if you are to address the suggestions of the WOK, the lapel grab must be addressed.

At the school where I studied, we were initially taught the tech against the punch. However we had some females enrole, that weren't really prepared for the level of contact that was prevalent at that stage. So for them to learn the tech effectively, without lowering our prefered level of contact, we changed it to the grab.

These days from what I have been told, it is taught only as a grab, even though, due to commercial considerations, the level of contact has dropped off considerably at the lower ranks.

Hey Doc, what about the nerve strike applications?

--Dave
:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by D.Cobb
At the school where I studied, we were initially taught the tech against the punch. However we had some females enrole, that weren't really prepared for the level of contact that was prevalent at that stage. So for them to learn the tech effectively, without lowering our prefered level of contact, we changed it to the grab.

These days from what I have been told, it is taught only as a grab, even though, due to commercial considerations, the level of contact has dropped off considerably at the lower ranks.

Hey Doc, what about the nerve strike applications?

--Dave
:asian:

Could you be specific please sir? :asian:

 

[D.Cobb]

Originally posted by Doc
Could you be specific please sir? :asian:

Ok, if we look at the grab technique. What would be the optimum area to strike?
Obviously you can't give indepth detail via this medium, but you could give specifics as to where we would strike on the grabbing arm, where we would benefit most from the kick, eg. the groin, or the pressure points in the lower or upper leg, etc.
And then I guess, which target point on the neck would most likely give us the best outcome with regards to stopping the attack, and doing minimal damage to our opponent?

I do have some of my own ideas, but I guess time served just doesn't allow me to express them as well as you do.

Also I thought it might bring a different perspective to the way some of the others reading this thread might look at things...

--Dave

:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by D.Cobb
Ok, if we look at the grab technique. What would be the optimum area to strike?

In our curriculum we do not focus on striking the wrist. That would be anatomical difficult and not accomplish our immediate perspective for this technique. Rather the hand is “pinned” so we have “control” of it, and a point on the head of the shoulder is struck to remove strength in the hand. This way the “pinned” hand is used to our advantage, but may be easily “removed” when we are ready.

Obviously you can't give in depth detail via this medium, but you could give specifics as to where we would strike on the grabbing arm, where we would benefit most from the kick, eg. the groin, or the pressure points in the lower or upper leg, etc.

We do not strike the arm in the technique.

And then I guess, which target point on the neck would most likely give us the best outcome with regards to stopping the attack, and doing minimal damage to our opponent?

Minimal damage to an opponent should not be your first consideration, unless you have sufficient skill to accomplish such a lofty goal. Control of the situation is first and foremost, with modulating the amount of destruction a secondary consideration for those who are capable of doing so.

Simply:

The hand is “pinned.”
The shoulder is struck.
The kick is a “Gauging Kick” to CV-1
The hand-sword strikes LI-18.

However none of these will work unless you set up the proper mechanisms, postures, weight distribution, angles, etc. The myth is "if I know the points, I can just add it to what I know." If it were that simple everybody would be doing it.

 

[D.Cobb]

Originally posted by Doc
In our curriculum we do not focus on striking the wrist. That would be anatomical difficult and not accomplish our immediate perspective for this technique. Rather the hand is “pinned” so we have “control” of it, and a point on the head of the shoulder is struck to remove strength in the hand. This way the “pinned” hand is used to our advantage, but may be easily “removed” when we are ready.

We do not strike the arm in the technique.

Minimal damage to an opponent should not be your first consideration, unless you have sufficient skill to accomplish such a lofty goal. Control of the situation is first and foremost, with modulating the amount of destruction a secondary consideration for those who are capable of doing so.

Simply:

The hand is “pinned.”
The shoulder is struck.
The kick is a “Gauging Kick” to CV-1
The hand-sword strikes LI-18.

However none of these will work unless you set up the proper mechanisms, postures, weight distribution, angles, etc. The myth is "if I know the points, I can just add it to what I know." If it were that simple everybody would be doing it.

I find more and more, that instaed of adding the points to what I know, I am adding what I know to the points.....

I hope that makes sense.

--Dave

:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by D.Cobb
I find more and more, that instaed of adding the points to what I know, I am adding what I know to the points.....

I hope that makes sense.

--Dave

:asian:

Are you kidding? You're preaching to the chior here. The points are a "minor" component when viewed from the totality of the information needed to be functional. Anybody can find a point and strike someone standing still. But to utilize it effectvely in "real time" situations requires rare information that very, very, very few have. So what happens to their "grip strength" when you strike L-1?

Hope you saw my message to contact the editor over at CFW regarding back issues and or comments about the magazine. Drop him an e-mail and tell him I "sent you." He'll take care of you. His name is Doug
[email protected]

 

[D.Cobb]

Originally posted by Doc
Are you kidding? You're preaching to the chior here. The points are a "minor" component when viewed from the totality of the information needed to be functional. Anybody can find a point and strike someone standing still. But to utilize it effectvely in "real time" situations requires rare information that very, very, very few have. So what happens to their "grip strength" when you strike L-1?

I think I understand what you mean here. I will quite often when learning new stuff regarding points, ask questions along the lines of, "but what happens if you do............?". I must admit, I like it when the answer starts with, "Good Question!"

Hope you saw my message to contact the editor over at CFW regarding back issues and or comments about the magazine. Drop him an e-mail and tell him I "sent you." He'll take care of you. His name is Doug
[email protected]

I did see that. Have you made other contributions to this mag?
I must admit, the issue with your stuff in it, was the first I have purchased. I am seriously considering subscribing, especially with the Aussie dollar, doing so well against the US one.

Actually, I was wondering what other mags you have contributed to.

--Dave



:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by D.Cobb
I think I understand what you mean here. I will quite often when learning new stuff regarding points, ask questions along the lines of, "but what happens if you do............?". I must admit, I like it when the answer starts with, "Good Question!"



I did see that. Have you made other contributions to this mag?
I must admit, the issue with your stuff in it, was the first I have purchased. I am seriously considering subscribing, especially with the Aussie dollar, doing so well against the US one.

Actually, I was wondering what other mags you have contributed to.

--Dave



:asian:

I am a regular contributor and writer for that magazine. I go way back with many of the people in the industry. CFW stands for "Curtis F. Wong." Brother of my old school mate now GM Douglas Wong and nephew to our first teacher GM Ark Wong.

I was in some of the first issues of Inside Kung fu, and was a centerfold when they were doing that for a while. I've written and been in black belt over the years, Official Karate, ISOK Magazine, and Karate Illustrated that I readily remember.

Drop Doug Jeffrey a line at the magazine and speak your mind and make him help you with those back issues. I have an article in next months issue as well.

 

[D.Cobb]

Originally posted by Doc
I am a regular contributor and writer for that magazine. I go way back with many of the people in the industry. CFW stands for "Curtis F. Wong." Brother of my old school mate now GM Douglas Wong and nephew to our first teacher GM Ark Wong.

I was in some of the first issues of Inside Kung fu, and was a centerfold when they were doing that for a while. I've written and been in black belt over the years, Official Karate, ISOK Magazine, and Karate Illustrated that I readily remember.

Drop Doug Jeffrey a line at the magazine and speak your mind and make him help you with those back issues. I have an article in next months issue as well.

Thank you sir, I'll do that. And I'll get next months issue as well.

--Dave

:asian: