Elliptical Motion

[KenpoEMT]

1) You can find out a lot of this stuff by searching for Sub Level 4. Also read the lineage section for Mr. Chapel ('Doc') on Kenpo Talk.

Doc (and many others) knows a heck of alot more about this than I ever will.

2) The statement of "motion on the x axis and any human motion on the y axis" doenst make sense. Are you actually assigning equations to motion and human motion? What is the difference between the two? I understand the vertical line test (after being in Calc II I have a basic idea of algebra ).

I knew I was going to get called onto the carpet for "motion" and "Human motion" .
Human motion was referring to a specific kick/punch/headbut whatever. Hmm...I sense the sharks are circling...

If you are talking about the path the kick takes and putting it on a graph (as in x represents inches on the horizontal plane from the point of origin, and y represents inches on the vertical) then I don't think the vertical line test is valid what so ever, unless you are stopping the graph when the kick reaches the target, discounting the path back to the ground (either back to initial position or planting into a new stance).


:idunno: I don't really follow

-Josh

No problem really. I just wanted to share something that I thought was interesting. It could be something that just makes sense to me. I found it valuable when considering wasted motion and point of origin.

 

[dubljay]

I knew I was going to get called onto the carpet for "motion" and "Human motion" .
Human motion was referring to a specific kick/punch/headbut whatever. Hmm...I sense the sharks are circling...


No problem really. I just wanted to share something that I thought was interesting. It could be something that just makes sense to me. I found it valuable when considering wasted motion and point of origin.

Well your definition of motion was a bit vague, don't think of me trying to pick at your logic. I see value in looking at human motion in a physics and mathematical sense. I'm just trying to get that eratic, misfiring hunk of junk i refer to as a brain, to understand what you are trying to present.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Well your definition of motion was a bit vague, don't think of me trying to pick at your logic.

You are absolutely correct. Perhaps the idea was not as clear in my mind as I thought it was. Both Mathematics and Movement require precision when attempting to explain or evaluate, and I don't think that I was as precise as I should have been.

I see value in looking at human motion in a physics and mathematical sense. I'm just trying to get that eratic, misfiring hunk of junk i refer to as a brain, to understand what you are trying to present.

I am enrolled for Physics next semester and look forward to trying to apply what I will learn to the better understanding of Kenpo. Until I complete the series, perhaps I should ease off of trying to evaluate motion .
I am certain that there is nothing wrong with your brain; I am not certain that I can fully explain what I am thinking yet.
I would absolutely love to get something more beneficial from our exchange, and I think that may be possible. Have you ever considered this area of Kenpo (Wasted Motion and Point of Orgin) from a Mathematical/Physics perspective? Sounds like you have a higher level of education than I have yet attained, and I would enjoy hearing what you have to say on this issue.
What I was saying before about functions really made sense to me. I am not to sure how to clarify further at this point.

Thank you very much for your responses! I enjoyed your posts, Sir!

 

[dubljay]

I'll be starting my 4th year of college in the fall...

I have tried applying some physics and mathematical stuff to Kenpo, but I lack enough education in both Kenpo and the academic stuff to have it be of any use.

In physics you will find the rotational motion and torque sections to be insightful when it comes to Kenpo, at least I did.


However this thread has gone off on a tangent and should return to the original topic of elliptical motion.



One thing I see that I do that is very elliptical is the way I punch. My jab has an upward curve to it; most of that curve is generated when I twist my hips into the jab. The rotation of my hips tends to make my lead leg straighten out a bit, causing that whole side of my body to rise up. The same with my 'straight' punch (or reverse punch). This punch has a downward curve to it, which again is partially generated by the pivot in my hips. The rotation in this strike generally makes my lead leg drop some, causing my punch to arc downward. I have noticed that when I strike someone with this downward arc it generally makes them 'sink' with the strike, this not only effects their depth (as a purely horizontal traveling punch would knock them back changing their depth) but it effects their height to a greater degree as well. The more I can do to alter their height, width, and depth the greater advantage to me.


I don't know if this is idiosyncratic just to me, if it's normal for everyone, or if it's even correct.



-Josh



ps: please don't address me as sir no need for formalities with me.

 

[KenpoEMT]

sorry that I didn't answer right away. Had to head out again.

I'll be starting my 4th year of college in the fall...

Congratulations!!

I have tried applying some physics and mathematical stuff to Kenpo, but I lack enough education in both Kenpo and the academic stuff to have it be of any use.

That seems to be the barrier that I keep ramming my thick skull into as well. Master Parker was a true genius.

In physics you will find the rotational motion and torque sections to be insightful when it comes to Kenpo, at least I did.

Thank you very much for the info. I will definately keep an eye out for these sections.

One thing I see that I do that is very elliptical is the way I punch. My jab has an upward curve to it; most of that curve is generated when I twist my hips into the jab. The rotation of my hips tends to make my lead leg straighten out a bit, causing that whole side of my body to rise up. The same with my 'straight' punch (or reverse punch). This punch has a downward curve to it, which again is partially generated by the pivot in my hips. The rotation in this strike generally makes my lead leg drop some, causing my punch to arc downward. I have noticed that when I strike someone with this downward arc it generally makes them 'sink' with the strike, this not only effects their depth (as a purely horizontal traveling punch would knock them back changing their depth) but it effects their height to a greater degree as well. The more I can do to alter their height, width, and depth the greater advantage to me.

Yes! One thing I've started to notice is a general tendency to strike on the downward angle while using the curve. I find the effects to be absolutely tremendous. Of course, I mean after the appex of the portion of elliptical motion into the slight downward curve. The effect does seem to drive the opponent back and down. Perhaps it is just me but it seems as if the opponent would have to absorb more of the energy of the strike because his/her body is not being driven directly backward. He/She is being driven back and down at an angle that requires his/her base to absorb more of the shock.

please don't address me as sir no need for formalities with me

Thank you for your courtesy!

 

[dubljay]

Yes! One thing I've started to notice is a general tendency to strike on the downward angle while using the curve. I find the effects to be absolutely tremendous. Of course, I mean after the appex of the portion of elliptical motion into the slight downward curve. The effect does seem to drive the opponent back and down. Perhaps it is just me but it seems as if the opponent would have to absorb more of the energy of the strike because his/her body is not being driven directly backward. He/She is being driven back and down at an angle that requires his/her base to absorb more of the shock.

I've also noticed that this downward arc is extremely effective when striking at the solar plexus and the liver. Hitting the liver straight on, or from underneath is not nearly as effective as striking it at a downward angle, there is very little protection for it from this angle.

 

[Bode]

I've also noticed that this downward arc is extremely effective when striking at the solar plexus and the liver. Hitting the liver straight on, or from underneath is not nearly as effective as striking it at a downward angle, there is very little protection for it from this angle.

How true.
Consider one more experiment. Have the person you are striking lean backwards so their shoulders are behind their hips almost as if the start of a back bend. (This posture is created, for instance, when you strike someone properly with a sandwich elbow).
Now, while they are in this body posture strike doward at a forty five degree angle with a hammer fist to the gallbladder/liver. Tell me how that feels compared to having the person stand upright. Of course, be gentle... it doesn't take much. (Key is the 45 degree angle, but keep in mind the angle changes depending on how far back the person is leaning)

 

[KenpoEMT]

Of course, be gentle... it doesn't take much. (Key is the 45 degree angle, but keep in mind the angle changes depending on how far back the person is leaning)

Does the requirement of 45 degrees have something to do with getting the opponent's muscles out of position so that the force of the strike can pass easily through? I think that I read a post somewhere on this board about how it is possible to alter muscle density by altering the position of the body.
Or, is it more a matter of angles that provide maximum delivery of kenetic energy?

 

[dubljay]

Does the requirement of 45 degrees have something to do with getting the opponent's muscles out of position so that the force of the strike can pass easily through? I think that I read a post somewhere on this board about how it is possible to alter muscle density by altering the position of the body.
Or, is it more a matter of angles that provide maximum delivery of kenetic energy?

The angle is about getting around the muscles. The same is true for the kidneys as well. A kidney strike is much more effective at a downward angle when the person is bent forward. Having the opponent bent forward exposes the kidney more by stretching the muscles around it.

 

[KenpoEMT]

The angle is about getting around the muscles. The same is true for the kidneys as well. A kidney strike is much more effective at a downward angle when the person is bent forward. Having the opponent bent forward exposes the kidney more by stretching the muscles around it.

I am no stranger to Anatomy, but I must confess that I rarely give thought to positioning my opponent for this purpose. Honestly, I spend far more time considering delivery and/or setting the opponent up for a good follow-up movement.
Well, you both have just exposed a weak area in my training. This is excellent food for thought.

As a side note, both of the positions described have the opponents center of gravity parilously off-centered. The downward tendency of our strikes would certainly plant in the dirt either of the opponents described (leaning forward/leaning backward) in addition to the internal damage caused to unprotected organs. I suppose that is fairly obvious though. Kenpo rocks!

 

[dubljay]

I am no stranger to Anatomy, but I must confess that I rarely give thought to positioning my opponent for this purpose. Honestly, I spend far more time considering delivery and/or setting the opponent up for a good follow-up movement.
Well, you both have just exposed a weak area in my training. This is excellent food for thought.

As a side note, both of the positions described have the opponents center of gravity parilously off-centered. The downward tendency of our strikes would certainly plant in the dirt either of the opponents described (leaning forward/leaning backward) in addition to the internal damage caused to unprotected organs. I suppose that is fairly obvious though. Kenpo rocks!

This is something found in all kenpo techniques. The best example I can think of to illustrate this are the techniques Thrusting Salute and Buckling Branch from the Orange Belt list (EPAK 24 tech ciruc.) Comparing these two techniques you can find a lot of things.

Thrusting Salute: Defense against a right front kick

After blocking the kick you deliver a front kick to the front of the groin, causing the opponent to bend forward, as you land you deliver the thrusting palm heal to the chin. This palm heal has a greater effect because you bent the opponent forward, and possibly still moving into your strike when you hit.

Buckling Branch: Defense against a left front kick

After blocking the kick you deliver a front kick to the underside of the groin. This causes the opponent to lift up (even just momentariliy) when you deliver the kife edge side kick to the back of the knee to bring them down.


So you see in Thrusting Salute you bring the opponent down to deliver an upward moving strike gaining mamimum effect, while in Buckling Branch you lift the opponent up only to drive them back down.

This is just one example, and the easiest for me to explain through text.

 

[Doc]

This is something found in all kenpo techniques. The best example I can think of to illustrate this are the techniques Thrusting Salute and Buckling Branch from the Orange Belt list (EPAK 24 tech ciruc.) Comparing these two techniques you can find a lot of things.

Thrusting Salute: Defense against a right front kick

After blocking the kick you deliver a front kick to the front of the groin, causing the opponent to bend forward, as you land you deliver the thrusting palm heal to the chin. This palm heal has a greater effect because you bent the opponent forward, and possibly still moving into your strike when you hit.

Buckling Branch: Defense against a left front kick

After blocking the kick you deliver a front kick to the underside of the groin. This causes the opponent to lift up (even just momentariliy) when you deliver the kife edge side kick to the back of the knee to bring them down.


So you see in Thrusting Salute you bring the opponent down to deliver an upward moving strike gaining mamimum effect, while in Buckling Branch you lift the opponent up only to drive them back down.

This is just one example, and the easiest for me to explain through text.

OK time to stir thigs up a bit. Nice thread, and smart people. Now consider this; when you kick someone in the front of, or in the "groin" they do not "bend forward" as the initial reaction to your strike.

 

[mj-hi-yah]

Now consider this; when you kick someone in the front of, or in the "groin" they do not "bend forward" as the initial reaction to your strike.

I think the key term here is “initial”.:asian: Initial refers to the beginning of an event or process. If you could slow the process down as in watching a film in super slow motion (or think flip card animation - where you can observe frame by frame), you would observe a finer distinction of movement that appear less subtlety to the eye that way than in real time. The front kick, depending on the accuracy of the kick, could cause an initial reaction to the kick to manifest first in terms of the destabilization of a person’s base affecting balance. The first obvious or initial movement you might observe is a weight drop or dip as the base weakens (at the knees). In between the initial reaction and final position there would be many position changes (or freeze frame movements) to observe.

If the force of the kick is a push through or disruption of your opponents hips, I think the next more obvious step in the slow motion process might reveal a possible backward step and then as a reaction to the pain of the kick the next more obvious step might be that the hands begin to come forward to protect the groin (hold what hurts) and in the final most obvious position you may see the person in a bent position.

It would be interesting to analyze film of different groin kicks and slow them down to actually be able to observe more accurately the outward manifestations of the reactionary process. Any takers? :btg:

 

[Kenpodoc]

OK time to stir thigs up a bit. Nice thread, and smart people. Now consider this; when you kick someone in the front of, or in the "groin" they do not "bend forward" as the initial reaction to your strike.

In my experience their knees buckle and they drop straight to the floor. Now, I live a very quiet boring personal life so my only experience with this, is kicking people with a cup, without a cup the reaction may be different but personally I don't want to study this. I have found that light taps or whips to the groin make most men pull their hips back slightly and drop their shoulders forward to counter balance. Most is the operative term because it doesn't always work.

Respectfully,

Jeff

 

[dubljay]

OK time to stir thigs up a bit. Nice thread, and smart people. Now consider this; when you kick someone in the front of, or in the "groin" they do not "bend forward" as the initial reaction to your strike.

Hmm, I suppose you are right, especially considering that striking at the front of the groin is not nearly as effective as coming up from underneath.

I suppose the inital reaction would be them being driven back from the kick.

So it's not really a reaction on the opponents part (ie them actually bending forward) but having their lower half being driven back and their upper half having to catch up?

:idunno:


Thank you sir, you're making me think about things in a differnt way... eventhough it makes my head hurt :whip:

-Josh

 

[Doc]

Hmm, I suppose you are right, especially considering that striking at the front of the groin is not nearly as effective as coming up from underneath.

Well that depends on what your objective. I suggest pain should not be the only factor. Everyone has a different pain threshold, and even that varies from moment to moment depending other fatctors. Blunt force trauma is the lowest form of martial application available to both "skilled" and "semi-skilled."

I suppose the inital reaction would be them being driven back from the kick.

Yes sir, you are gorrect.

So it's not really a reaction on the opponents part (ie them actually bending forward) but having their lower half being driven back and their upper half having to catch up?

Actually sir, you are on the right track. It is indeed a reaction that is however complimented by the action. Take any male student standing erect. Any sharp quick movement toward their groin will illicit a reaction even though there is no contact. By accessing the "startle reflex" mechanism, the individual will draw his pelvic bone rearward involuntarily. When told of the experiment, students will attempt to not move. However if the movement is aggressive enough, the reflex will occur even if it is not visible. Think of it as another startle reflex that is more common, "blink reflex." This is extremely important. The myth of, or at least the poorly defined reaction of "bending over" is incorrect, and has significant implications in applications beyond simplistic and neanderthal blunt force trauma and the advanced undersatnding of "Negative Posture."

Thank you sir, you're making me think about things in a differnt way... eventhough it makes my head hurt :whip:

Thank you sir, and a nod to KenpoDoc whose on th money, except because it is a reflex, it always happens to the conscious. Remember, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't happening. This should generate more questions and thought gentlemen.

 

[dubljay]

Okay, I'm beginning to see the light now. Strikes that don't connect, or that aren't deadly powerful aren't necessarily ineffective. If the intent for the strike is to get the opponent to react in some specific manner, then landing the strike with all the power your have is essentially irrelevant.


I'll have to ponder more on this...


Thank you again sir.

-Josh

 

[Kenpodoc]

Thank you sir, and a nod to KenpoDoc whose on th money, except because it is a reflex, it always happens to the conscious. Remember, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't happening. This should generate more questions and thought gentlemen.

This generates a couple of thought problems for me.
a. I've worked with a number of people with no apparent groin reflex. Are these people just so subtle in response that I miss the signals that they've responded and can still use the response? Are these people without a reflex. (I regularly see people with missing spinal reflexes because of neurological disease.) How do I tell the difference? Does it matter?

thanks,

Jeff

 

[Doc]

This generates a couple of thought problems for me.
a. I've worked with a number of people with no apparent groin reflex. Are these people just so subtle in response that I miss the signals that they've responded and can still use the response?

Absolutely correct. It's there even when you can't see it. The amount of movement to accomplish the goal is so subtle it can be invisible.

I regularly see people with missing spinal reflexes because of neurological disease.) How do I tell the difference? Does it matter?

As long as the senses are functioning, you can induce. Although sound is just as effective, if not more so in some cases, if the visual cortex is active then its there. The trick is to know what to do with it once its accessed, and what happens to the body when its in that negative posture even if you can't see it.

 

[mj-hi-yah]

except because it is a reflex, it always happens to the conscious. Remember, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't happening. This should generate more questions and thought

Interesting point Doc that the response may be there even if we don't see it, and it got me to metacognate or think about thinking. I would add that while the reponse happens to the conscious the reflex action results from subconscious prompts. This is because stimuli such as sudden movements or bright lights trigger our midbrain vision and hearing centers. These areas of the brain are responsible for our reflexive reactions or defensive postures such as crouching from loud noises, and focusing our attention on moving objects or other dangerous stimuli. The human brain developed both auditory and optic lobes through the evolutionary process and relates back to our amphibian ancestors. As amphibians became land dwelling creatures they developed both auditory and visual acuity as an adaptation to their new environment. These older areas of the human brain are responsible for our unconscious reflexive reactions to certain dangerous stimuli. They enable us to turn our eyes and ears on possible danger before our forebrain is even aware, on a conscious level, that danger may exist.

Take any male student standing erect. Any sharp quick movement toward their groin will illicit a reaction even though there is no contact. By accessing the "startle reflex" mechanism, the individual will draw his pelvic bone rearward involuntarily. When told of the experiment, students will attempt to not move. However if the movement is aggressive enough, the reflex will occur even if it is not visible.

This reflex will occur because the midbrain acts as our audiovisual processing center prompting us to unconsciously react - however subtle that reaction may be. It is difficult to control this response because it occurs in the unconscious mind and is a primal response to possible danger.

For further thought...if a groin strike is obscured (such as in the case of say a palm heel to the chin that is followed by an obscured kick to the groin) with the stimulus removed, would the initial response to the groin strike itself then be reactionary?