I've worked a heavy bag quite a bit and I still feel that I get more power and drive with a palm strike. When I competed full contact, I used palms strikes to hit very hard and drive my opponent away. Hmmm, interesting...
LOL, even a simple "I use these knuckles" post turns into a battle of tangents... that's what keeps me coming back for more.... WAR MONGOR!
I don't know the history since I jumped in late, but there is much support, biomechanically for the power/safety of open palm striking over fist striking.
The basic problem is that, with a punching position, the wrist is held in place with muscle tension and not structural support. Because of that any flex in the joint, and any joints between your heel all the way to the knuckle, will 'disperse' energy out and away from the intended force line through the knuckle into the target.
The heel hand strike wrist position is 'locked' in place because of structural support and will allow for more force to stay on the intended powerline.
A good weapon analogy is trying to thrust with a staff vs. a nunchuka/flexible weapon. With a stiff weapon, the force line goes down the shaft with little or no dispursion away. With the flexible weapon the thrust will dispurse the energy away at the flexible points, taking the force away from the target penetration.
The trade off is that a knuckle punch has less surface area for the contact point, so the pounds per square inch of pressure 'feels' more powerful sometimes than a well trained palm strike.
I prefer palm strike training myself. General rule: Palm strike on hard targets, punch strikes on soft targets. I train to use this general tactic.
Paul M
I don't know the history since I jumped in late, but there is much support, biomechanically for the power/safety of open palm striking over fist striking.
The basic problem is that, with a punching position, the wrist is held in place with muscle tension and not structural support. Because of that any flex in the joint, and any joints between your heel all the way to the knuckle, will 'disperse' energy out and away from the intended force line through the knuckle into the target.
The heel hand strike wrist position is 'locked' in place because of structural support and will allow for more force to stay on the intended powerline.
A good weapon analogy is trying to thrust with a staff vs. a nunchuka/flexible weapon. With a stiff weapon, the force line goes down the shaft with little or no dispursion away. With the flexible weapon the thrust will dispurse the energy away at the flexible points, taking the force away from the target penetration.
The trade off is that a knuckle punch has less surface area for the contact point, so the pounds per square inch of pressure 'feels' more powerful sometimes than a well trained palm strike.
I prefer palm strike training myself. General rule: Palm strike on hard targets, punch strikes on soft targets. I train to use this general tactic.
Paul M
artyon:
S
Shinzu
Guest
palm strikes rock!!
Since I have the floor
this same type of force dispersion idea is why basic self defense courses usually emphasis, at least in my experience, palm strikes, elbows, knees and low line kicks. Easy to teach, generates alot of force with very few technical subtleties and the contact/striking surfaces are already partially desensitied through everyday wear and tear.
An analogy would be the shift in pistolcraft circles from the classic 'Weaver Stance' to the 'modified weaver' which looks more like a martial arts front stance. Advantages seem to be it is simpler to maintain and more flexible movement/target traversing and aquisition. The simplicity is partly because it is not as reliant on small mechanical/structural subtleties. I like it because it creates a continuity between empty hand and firearms training. Conceptual translation in effect again.
Paul M
this same type of force dispersion idea is why basic self defense courses usually emphasis, at least in my experience, palm strikes, elbows, knees and low line kicks. Easy to teach, generates alot of force with very few technical subtleties and the contact/striking surfaces are already partially desensitied through everyday wear and tear. An analogy would be the shift in pistolcraft circles from the classic 'Weaver Stance' to the 'modified weaver' which looks more like a martial arts front stance. Advantages seem to be it is simpler to maintain and more flexible movement/target traversing and aquisition. The simplicity is partly because it is not as reliant on small mechanical/structural subtleties. I like it because it creates a continuity between empty hand and firearms training. Conceptual translation in effect again.
Paul M
Similar threads
- Deleted member 39746
- General Martial Arts Talk
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
-
éåæ ZhĆ²ngxÄ«n center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
