Final Stance in Twirling Wings

[psi_radar]

I beg to differ..... I think this is a very likely technique. As in any of the "scenarios" that we teach, it is a possibility and has many functions. How can anyone say that this technique or that technique is unlikely, or won't happen, fact is I have personally seen this attack on the street.

The technique I like, the attack in the ideal phase is what I question. All I can go with is my own experience and logic. I haven't and just don't see why it would be used as an attack. Since it's an asphyxiation attack, it would require a fair amount of time to work, so there's lots of time to escape--which wouldn't be difficult if the defender has full mobility--it's the full body against eight fingers. The attacker gives up all his weapons. It doesn't work well as a restraint either. The thumbs from the front, a la Blinding Sacrifice, I have seen and can understand, since the thumbs can provide more pressure on a smaller surface area on a better target between the clavicles. Putting myself in a criminal's shoes, I'd have to ask myself why not a blow to any number of targets on the back or back of the head instead, or a headlock?

Maybe I just don't have the right perspective. Would you mind explaining how you would or have seen this attack happening?

Keep in mind that this is only one option in a SYSTEM of self defense variations. It is in the system for a reason, actually several reasons. It all depends on where you are on the "ladder of knowledge" as to what you learn from it. To the beginner coordination is a main factor as well as starting the bank of knowledge variations and skill development. As Mr. Parker taught us.... "What is truth for one may not be truth for another"

I don't discount the ideal technique as a viable self-defense option--or as a lesson in movement. It's also quite fun. But I see it coming into practical use in the what-if. I'm not saying it shouldn't be trained as ideal first. I think it should.

While for you, that may be true, but something else may work better for another. We just don't know what will work for each different individual in any given circumstance so, in the beginning so we create these BASE or standardized "Point of Reference" techniques. See it has already served one of it's functions...... we are discussing and studying it!

True enough!

Originally Posted by psi_radar
The attack, as I recalled it, was a stiff double-handed choke from the rear. With the attack you described, my conclusions are the same. Most people can naturally work against the forces here with instincts, unless:

A) Someone was holding the defenders legs/have control of the body

B) There was another balance point for the person being attacked, like a wall

C) The attacked was on the ground (AH HAH!)

Wow, my goodness, you have brought up a lot of good points........ so ..... then...... where do we start at to learn to deal with all these different points?

I'm not sure if you're talking about a temporal point in training, or which scenario to address first. As for when in training, I think anytime after learning the base technique is fine. And both the ideal and the what if's can be revisited later and perspectives may change. Though you and others edit: may disagree, I think there is benefit from studying what ifs early in, since it stimulates thought about all ranges of the technique and the art in a more macro sense. That, for me, works. It may not work for others.

As for my points, I can provide a starting point. Simply put, in each of those scenarios the movement of the attacked is restricted, and therefore the choke is much more likely to be successful and therefore, attempted.

Again, a lot of good points to study, ponder and to TRY, particularly in the "what if" phase which follows the ideal phase or initial stage of learning any particular technique.


:asian:

Thanks! That means a lot coming from you. :asian:

 

[Doc]

May I suggest that a "stiff-arm choke" from the rear in itself as an attack is not possible. You may perform one of the actions or the other but not both simultaneously. If you stiffen your arms, strength will leave the hand and fingers. If you apply strength to the hands and fingers, the arms will bend. This anatomical fact may indicate a re-thinking of the technique in its entirety.

 

[Touch Of Death]

May I suggest that a "stiff-arm choke" from the rear in itself as an attack is not possible. You may perform one of the actions or the other but not both simultaneously. If you stiffen your arms, strength will leave the hand and fingers. If you apply strength to the hands and fingers, the arms will bend. This anatomical fact may indicate a re-thinking of the technique in its entirety.

I think the attack has and implied bending of the arms in the eventuality. As an attacker on the street, I would be reaching, cluching on to the kneck, and jercking him back to a possible blood choke with my arm; so, speed of action is crucial, which leads me to believe that inserting a pin might be risky, but done as a slap check it really sort of fits.
Sean

 

[Seabrook]

May I suggest that a "stiff-arm choke" from the rear in itself as an attack is not possible. You may perform one of the actions or the other but not both simultaneously. If you stiffen your arms, strength will leave the hand and fingers. If you apply strength to the hands and fingers, the arms will bend. This anatomical fact may indicate a re-thinking of the technique in its entirety.

Mr. Chapel,

I tried what you said while sitting at my computer....very true!

But isn't the point of the technique (at least ideally) to respond as soon as the stiff-arm grab occurs before the arms bend for a "deeper choke"? Also, if they grab and pull you back, to take the angle of least resistance by going with it?


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

 

[Doc]

Mr. Chapel,

I tried what you said while sitting at my computer....very true!

But isn't the point of the technique (at least ideally) to respond as soon as the stiff-arm grab occurs before the arms bend for a "deeper choke"? Also, if they grab and pull you back, to take the angle of least resistance by going with it?


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

Well sir, it depends on who taught you and their understanding of the technique. Although "choking" from the rear is a distinct "possibility," it is not as common as a front choking action. Even so, the one thing that some instructors seem to ignore in the formulation of base techniques is something that Parker and I discussed because of his, and my extensive street experience, and law enforcement background. This component is called "Psychology of Confrontation Theory," and is considered in everything taught.

Psychology of Confrontation Theory suggests you must look beyond the physical technique itself, and address the motivation and methodology of what occurs BEFORE the actual physical attack takes place. In that light, some techniques are specifically designed, (or should be) to address size and gender discrepancies because a great deal of these type "hands on" assaults are motivated by these factors first and other considerations secondarily. I’m sure many have had the experience of defending themselves in class against an unlikely size/gender attack that would occur on them, or attacking someone not likely to be attacked by some one of their size or gender.

The idea that an adult male would attempt to "choke" another adult male of similar size from the rear is not likely. Still the assault must be considered. More likely it will be a taller male against a shorter male or female that would be more easily overpowered by the size and strength disparity between the two individuals.

For me the answer proposed to this question is discussed and answered in other techniques like "Circling Wing" which addresses the "Survive the Initial Assault" component mandated by our curriculum for an "anchored arm choking assault from the rear." Our interpretation of this technique, (Twirling Wing, no “s”) is a precursor to a two man assault that suggest the person from the rear is not attempting a "choke" at all. Instead the attacker is attempting to restrict your movement by a twin "stiff-arm" action while also seizing your shoulders.

I do not personally teach techniques that address choking, or other "hands on" type assault as "attempts." These default techniques in our curriculum are designed to teach students to actually deal with the specified attack, with the assumption you will not always be capable of reacting or "moving first." Other actions in this assault are ludicrous in such scenarios where actions must be specified and not "implied' as some suggest.

 

[Seabrook]

Thanks Doc.



Jamie Seabrook

www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

 

[jaybacca72]

the final stance depends on what level you can deliver and your understanding of kenpo is. it seems to me that too many people use tapes and dvd's as the gospel of the techniques,and that most only train one dimensionally if that makes any sense? and i'm not referring to h,d,w, iether.
later
jay
ps love the post doc i train with anatomical alignment as my first priority and understanding of the response to the attack. artyon:

 

[Doc]

the final stance depends on what level you can deliver and your understanding of kenpo is. it seems to me that too many people use tapes and dvd's as the gospel of the techniques,and that most only train one dimensionally if that makes any sense? and i'm not referring to h,d,w, iether.
later
jay
ps love the post doc i train with anatomical alignment as my first priority and understanding of the response to the attack. artyon:

Thats why - udaman.