Parting Wings

[Doc]

Doc,

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I keep looking for the magic but it seems to be mostly just hard work. Sometimes, however, when everything clicks, it feels a little like magic. My instructor has done a good job of teaching me some of the magic and when Mr. Wedlake comes, I always find he has remarkable suggestions that make things easier and more effective.


Jeff

Yes, it does seem like 'magic' when everything is anatomically 'right.' Lee is a really good guy and will keep you on track for sure.

 

[Dan G]

If we vary the technique by stepping in what additional measures are needed to prevent a clash of heads?
I can see how attacking the head in the manner of Thrusting Wedge before parting the arms would help prevent the attacker's head dropping forward, but I wonder if there is a better method... does Parting Wings with the step forward resemble Circles of Protection performed on the inside line even more closely?
Is a strike to, or induced flinch reaction from, the attackers head an extra component required to make Parting Wings work against a fully formed attack?

Lots of questions from me, no answers... any pointers very welcome!

respectfully,

Dan

 

[Doc]

If we vary the technique by stepping in what additional measures are needed to prevent a clash of heads?
I can see how attacking the head in the manner of Thrusting Wedge before parting the arms would help prevent the attacker's head dropping forward, but I wonder if there is a better method... does Parting Wings with the step forward resemble Circles of Protection performed on the inside line even more closely?
Is a strike to, or induced flinch reaction from, the attackers head an extra component required to make Parting Wings work against a fully formed attack?

Lots of questions from me, no answers... any pointers very welcome!

respectfully,

Dan

Well sir, changing the attack of the technique means the aggressor must try to encircle you with his arms, and he will try to bring them together to close on you. This anatomical action itself will allow you to 'brace' and stop his arms IF you proceed with your move forward, and attack his arm(s) at a 45-degree angle. And because of what he physically attempting to do, he will unwitingly becuase of your response limit his own depth, and set himself up for the initial retaliation move. Everything up to this point would be considered Surviving The Initial Assault.

Keep in mind what I have shared in only the beginning and we do the technique differently from there, but the motion 'ideas' will function to an extent after the attack and initial move modification.

Check it out Dan and let me know what you find.

 

[Flying Crane]

OK, thinking out loud here. If we do the technique against an attempted front bearhug and step forward with the left foot instead of back with the right, then the defensive splitting of the arms becomes more of a jam against his encircling upper arms to prevent the bearhug. Proceeding now to the first retaliatory strike, the right knifehand to his left ribs/underarm or side of the neck, is it realistic to assume there is time to get in this strike before his arms simply continue with the bearhug, or some other attack, once we are no longer jamming his arms open. I suppose the right hand simply slips off his arm, either above or below, and follows his arm right into the target, either the underarm or the neck. But could he also get in a strike once we slip the hand off his arm? Might we just be trading blows at this point? Or is there a thought on securing his arm somehow before proceeding to the strike? Thoughts?

 

[Doc]

OK, thinking out loud here. If we do the technique against an attempted front bearhug and step forward with the left foot instead of back with the right, then the defensive splitting of the arms becomes more of a jam against his encircling upper arms to prevent the bearhug. Proceeding now to the first retaliatory strike, the right knifehand to his left ribs/underarm or side of the neck, is it realistic to assume there is time to get in this strike before his arms simply continue with the bearhug, or some other attack, once we are no longer jamming his arms open. I suppose the right hand simply slips off his arm, either above or below, and follows his arm right into the target, either the underarm or the neck. But could he also get in a strike once we slip the hand off his arm? Might we just be trading blows at this point? Or is there a thought on securing his arm somehow before proceeding to the strike? Thoughts?

Executed properly forward at a 45 degree angle and aggressively, he will LITERALLY BOUNCE OF YOUR HANDS AND STOP.

Let me know what you find out sir.

 

[Flying Crane]

Executed properly forward at a 45 degree angle and aggressively, he will LITERALLY BOUNCE OF YOUR HANDS AND STOP.

Let me know what you find out sir.

Ah, that "aggressively" factor. That would help.

I was still typing my previous post when you posted your response to Dan G. I was pleased to see that my thinking actually lined up with what you described in that post. I didn't label the angles and such as precisely but the overall picture in my head, I think was close.

 

[Dan G]

Well sir, changing the attack of the technique means the aggressor must try to encircle you with his arms, and he will try to bring them together to close on you. This anatomical action itself will allow you to 'brace' and stop his arms IF you proceed with your move forward, and attack his arm(s) at a 45-degree angle. And because of what he physically attempting to do, he will unwitingly becuase of your response limit his own depth, and set himself up for the initial retaliation move. Everything up to this point would be considered Surviving The Initial Assault.

Keep in mind what I have shared in only the beginning and we do the technique differently from there, but the motion 'ideas' will function to an extent after the attack and initial move modification.

Check it out Dan and let me know what you find.

Many Thanks! I'm visualising a double outward extended block from a forward bow stepping forward (maybe settling into a neutral on completion?)... I'll try it out carefully Friday or Saturday, but I have a feeling I might owe my training partner a beer afterwards...

Thanks Again,

Dan

 

[Carol]

Well sir, changing the attack of the technique means the aggressor must try to encircle you with his arms, and he will try to bring them together to close on you. This anatomical action itself will allow you to 'brace' and stop his arms IF you proceed with your move forward, and attack his arm(s) at a 45-degree angle. And because of what he physically attempting to do, he will unwitingly becuase of your response limit his own depth, and set himself up for the initial retaliation move. Everything up to this point would be considered Surviving The Initial Assault.

Doc, I tried the assingment.

When my instructor was actively resisting me, I was able to move his arms. I can relate your reasons above as to why...but I'd apreciate your feedback sir.

I was very hard on myself with this technique...I kept wanting to step forward into it (now I understand why). When I trained myself to step backwards, my execution suffered or failed.

My remedy was to begin much closer to my partner than I do with other techniques. I'm 5'2".

My instructor and I began with trying the technique. I situated myself in my closer-than usual position, as I did upon graduation. When my instructor gave the attack, his arms were not straight at all. I was too close to him. His arms were bent, with his elbows pointing out to the side. I asked him to try to resist my strikes when he pushed me, he could not.

If I asked him to freeze in the pushing position and resist me...my forearms snapping hard against his was enough to bend his forearms back towards his elbow, thus separating his arms.

When he pushed me this way, most of the force seemed to be from his forearms. There was not much support coming from his upper arms and back. Moreover, in the motion of the push, his arms were trying to straighten. My impact was simply facilitating the straightening motion.

My instructor concurred that Parting Wings was originally a defense against a high grab, and not a push.

Had his arms been straight, or sligthly bent with the elbows pointing downwards, my forearm strikes would have had little effect. I would not be able to straighten his arms as I did before, they are already straight. Plus, with his arms straight, he would have his back in to the push. That would force me to resist against his most of weight using only my forearms. That is not a move that works to my advantage

Based on what I've learned, I'm concluding that the technique worked for me becuase I took his depth away before he could attack.
As a result, the only way that he could push me was with crooked arms...a position not unlike arms that are encircled.

Your thoughts?

On a side note, your comments relating to legal consequences are greatly appreciated.

 

[Doc]

Doc, I tried the assingment.

When my instructor was actively resisting me, I was able to move his arms. I can relate your reasons above as to why...but I'd apreciate your feedback sir.

I was very hard on myself with this technique...I kept wanting to step forward into it (now I understand why). When I trained myself to step backwards, my execution suffered or failed.

My remedy was to begin much closer to my partner than I do with other techniques. I'm 5'2".

My instructor and I began with trying the technique. I situated myself in my closer-than usual position, as I did upon graduation. When my instructor gave the attack, his arms were not straight at all. I was too close to him. His arms were bent, with his elbows pointing out to the side. I asked him to try to resist my strikes when he pushed me, he could not.

If I asked him to freeze in the pushing position and resist me...my forearms snapping hard against his was enough to bend his forearms back towards his elbow, thus separating his arms.

When he pushed me this way, most of the force seemed to be from his forearms. There was not much support coming from his upper arms and back. Moreover, in the motion of the push, his arms were trying to straighten. My impact was simply facilitating the straightening motion.

My instructor concurred that Parting Wings was originally a defense against a high grab, and not a push.

Had his arms been straight, or sligthly bent with the elbows pointing downwards, my forearm strikes would have had little effect. I would not be able to straighten his arms as I did before, they are already straight. Plus, with his arms straight, he would have his back in to the push. That would force me to resist against his most of weight using only my forearms. That is not a move that works to my advantage

Based on what I've learned, I'm concluding that the technique worked for me becuase I took his depth away before he could attack.
As a result, the only way that he could push me was with crooked arms...a position not unlike arms that are encircled.

Your thoughts?

On a side note, your comments relating to legal consequences are greatly appreciated.

A+

 

[Doc]

Many Thanks! I'm visualising a double outward extended block from a forward bow stepping forward (maybe settling into a neutral on completion?)... I'll try it out carefully Friday or Saturday, but I have a feeling I might owe my training partner a beer afterwards...

Thanks Again,

Dan

Change those handswords to hammer-fists, and you will definitely owe him a beer or two.

 

[Dan G]

Change those handswords to hammer-fists, and you will definitely owe him a beer or two.

Ouch!:erg: :waah: :cheers:

Will do, and thankyou sir!

Dan

 

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Well sir, changing the attack of the technique means the aggressor must try to encircle you with his arms, and he will try to bring them together to close on you. This anatomical action itself will allow you to 'brace' and stop his arms IF you proceed with your move forward, and attack his arm(s) at a 45-degree angle. And because of what he physically attempting to do, he will unwitingly becuase of your response limit his own depth, and set himself up for the initial retaliation move. Everything up to this point would be considered Surviving The Initial Assault.

Keep in mind what I have shared in only the beginning and we do the technique differently from there, but the motion 'ideas' will function to an extent after the attack and initial move modification.

Check it out Dan and let me know what you find.

Let me get this straight, you've changed the Attack, you've changed the stances, and you don't do the same things most of the rest of us do for this tech.? If this is the case, why are you calling it Parting Wings? We've got other techniques for the attack you described that work much better.

I did give it the benefit of the doubt last night in class, nearly got headbutted and taken down by an aggresive Brown Belt who I didn't inform what I would be doing, I just told him to attack.

DarK LorD

 

[Carol]

I don't intent do subvert your question, Dark Lord, but has the attack really changed? Or has it just been clarified?

If bent elbows are the key...a bent elbow push is still possible. It may not be the most efficient way to push, but it is possible.

Or...from my perspective...whether it is a push, a grab, a bearhug...that is irrelevant. If a guy is going to make an unwanted move towards my breasts...that move is likely to resemble my instructor's bent-elbow push. The depth is likely to be shallow.

I am admittedly timid about using my skills, but not here. If I see two hands coming towards me at chest height, I'll protect myself against a potential sexual assault.

 

[MJS]

Well first sir, the technique was never designed for a push, attempted or otherwise. Mr. Parker and I often discussed how techniques develop a life of their own when people began to interpret what they 'think' is happening and how to counter it. Much of the written material on techniques is like a 'starter kit' to get you moving and thinking. Unfortunately, they got people moving but many never got to the thinking part.

The way I do the technique would be difficult to describe however sir, this could be fixed rather easy, and stay pretty close to what people are already doing.

First change the attack to an attempted high bear hug.

Hmm..thats interesting, and it brings me to a question Doc. If this technique was never designed for a push, but instead a bearhug, just like DS a flank attack rather than a lapel grab or punch, why is this not a standard across the board? I mean, I can understand a change in strikes, as everyone may have their own variation, but changing the whole nature of the attack? Does anyone else do PW for an attempted bearhug? What about the others that have trained with Parker such as Tatum, Palanzo, Planas?

For those that consider what I teach as 'magic,' I suggest that the 'magic' comes from those who think they can say words like 'structural integrity,' 'bracing angle,' etc and it will just happen. As much as people use these terms, I hear no solutions to 'how' they can be achieved even in general terms.

Lastly, I suggest for all those who are quite satisfied with their own methodology and uninterested in others thoughts, to keep doing what they are doing and ignor the 'magic,' and let those who are interested have their say. After all, I and those who understand the material are at least committed to the disseminating of 'real' information over 'wiscracks' and 'me too's.' It doesn't take much intellect or skill to do either of those.

I think what it comes down to, is people reading certain things, and start to feel like what they're doing is wrong. I know what I can make work. I'm happy with my Kenpo and my teachers. I'm starting to get the impression that unless its done the way you say, then its wrong. If thats the case, then there must be alot of people out there doing it wrong. I'm thinking though that the others are still making it work.

Mike

 

[MJS]

I did give it the benefit of the doubt last night in class, nearly got headbutted and taken down by an aggresive Brown Belt who I didn't inform what I would be doing, I just told him to attack.

DarK LorD

Just for clarification. Which way are you talking about? The old way or the new way?

 

[Doc]

Hmm..thats interesting, and it brings me to a question Doc. If this technique was never designed for a push, but instead a bearhug, just like DS a flank attack rather than a lapel grab or punch, why is this not a standard across the board? I mean, I can understand a change in strikes, as everyone may have their own variation, but changing the whole nature of the attack?

That's kind of an interesting question considering I was talking about physical principles of what will or won't work. You can call it whatever you want. The general idea of 'parting wings' is the model. I don't know what you mean about 'DS.'

Does anyone else do PW for an attempted bearhug? What about the others that have trained with Parker such as Tatum, Palanzo, Planas?

Don't know, and if it's about what will or won't work, who really should care? I offered an experiment to test the efficacy of what some were doing and make an honest comparison. We never established that everyone was doing it that way. I just took was was said, and offered an opinion and possible solution. Some find value, some don't. I would thought you would do the experiment and comment on your experiences and testing. What if you found that the 'standard way' doesn't work?

As for the gentlemen you mentioned, I have no kenpo in common with those who started after Parker created the motion model and neither do any of my Kenpo contemporaries. Besides, I thought we had established in these forums years ago, there is no 'standard way' beyond simple conceptual ideas in motion based or commercial kenpo. From reading here, I thought everybody did techniques differently. Some a little , some completely different. That isn't news.

However if you feel a personal neeed to have what you do validated by what someone else is doing, than please follow their model, and if it works for you than I'm pleased. I strongly urge you ultimately to do what is comfortable for you and hope you are correct when and if you need it.

I never advised anyone to do things my way, or suggest my way is the only way. There are a lot of ways to everything and still be correct. I have proven what I was taught is valid and reaches another level, but I also know I can't teach you or anyone over the net by words and video. I make suggestions and nudge you to think. That is a purely a voluntary endeavor.

So please, please, don't ask me about what someon else does or doesn't do, because it is really irrelevant. Participate or choose not to. I am only responsible for what Parker taught me, not for what he did or didn't teach others.

I know what I can make work. I'm happy with my Kenpo and my teachers.

Then I don't understand why we are having this discussion. I can understand curiosity, but if you don't find value in what I have to say, your time would be better spent in ignoring me and working on what you have faith in. Why would you be concerned by another perspective. (rhetorical please)

I'm starting to get the impression that unless its done the way you say, then its wrong.

Well now you're not making sense. If what you do works for you, obviously it couldn't be wrong from your perspective, and my perspective shouldn't matter.

If that's the case, then there must be alot of people out there doing it wrong. I'm thinking though that the others are still making it work.

I prefer to not think of these things as 'right or wrong.' I think it terms of what will or will not work. Effective or ineffective, and there are degrees to both. You would seem to be protective of what you do, and that is understandable. But when I give you an experiment to prove the efficacy of certain things, and you talk about what others are doing, and how happy you are with what you're doing, it's makes me wonder why you are having this discussion.

Either way, the impact I have on you is up to you. Join in and benefit from the discussion, or ignore it. Either way I wish you the best in what you choose to follow. After all, it is your butt and you must do what you feel is best to protect it, as I do mine sir. To use a colloquialism common on the hard ghetto streets I work, "I ain't mad at you."

 

[Maltair]

One of the things I learned that really helped me was after the parting part, step 1, think of the second strike to the ribs as the one that is going to stop their forward momentum. Get a good hip turn as you go into the forward bow.

 

[Doc]

One of the things I learned that really helped me was after the parting part, step 1, think of the second strike to the ribs as the one that is going to stop their forward momentum. Get a good hip turn as you go into the forward bow.

Well I won't comment on whether that will stop a couple of hundred pounds coming forward aggressively, but your statement suggests you're 'blocking' from a neutral bow. Correct?

 

[MJS]

That's kind of an interesting question considering I was talking about physical principles of what will or won't work. You can call it whatever you want. The general idea of 'parting wings' is the model. I don't know what you mean about 'DS.'

When you said this:

Well first sir, the technique was never designed for a push, attempted or otherwise.

it leads one to believe that the tech. Parting Wings, was not designed for a push, but instead something else. DS= Delayed Sword. In the pin vs. check thread, you made mention of this tech. being for a flank attack. Here is what you said:

No one has addressed the attack coming from the flank, which is where it is supposed to be.

Post 49 in this thread
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30549&page=4

Again, it appears that the nature of the attack is very different from what 99% of the people out there are doing. My question is: Why are you doing it one way, while the others are all doing it the same? Did Parker have 2 versions of his art? Did he teach certain people certain things and leave others in the dark?

Don't know, and if it's about what will or won't work, who really should care? I offered an experiment to test the efficacy of what some were doing and make an honest comparison. We never established that everyone was doing it that way. I just took was was said, and offered an opinion and possible solution. Some find value, some don't. I would thought you would do the experiment and comment on your experiences and testing. What if you found that the 'standard way' doesn't work?

Well, looking at the posts in a few different threads, I'd say that it is about what works and what does not, and IMHO, it seems like we should care. As for the experiment, I never said that I would not try it. I plan on experimenting next time I'm in class.

As for the gentlemen you mentioned, I have no kenpo in common with those who started after Parker created the motion model and neither do any of my Kenpo contemporaries. Besides, I thought we had established in these forums years ago, there is no 'standard way' beyond simple conceptual ideas in motion based or commercial kenpo. From reading here, I thought everybody did techniques differently. Some a little , some completely different. That isn't news.

Reading this, I'm getting the impression that you're saying that there is a difference between the way you were taught and the way others were taught. This goes back to my question: Why was there a difference? I'm not talking about doing the techniques different. That would be for example, one person doing a swordhand and one doing a hammerfist. Same tech. just different moves. No, I'm talking about the nature of the attack.

So please, please, don't ask me about what someon else does or doesn't do, because it is really irrelevant. Participate or choose not to. I am only responsible for what Parker taught me, not for what he did or didn't teach others.

Actually, it is relevant, because again, it seems like there is a difference.

I prefer to not think of these things as 'right or wrong.' I think it terms of what will or will not work. Effective or ineffective, and there are degrees to both. You would seem to be protective of what you do, and that is understandable. But when I give you an experiment to prove the efficacy of certain things, and you talk about what others are doing, and how happy you are with what you're doing, it's makes me wonder why you are having this discussion.

Why am I having this discussion? Well, when someone posts a description of a technique, how they do it, etc., and then someone states that A) the nature of the attack is wrong or B) moves are not going to work unless they are done this way, it certainly raises some questions. I'll say again, it appears that there is a difference in the way things were done.

Mike

 

[Maltair]

Well I won't comment on whether that will stop a couple of hundred pounds coming forward aggressively, but your statement suggests you're 'blocking' from a neutral bow. Correct?

Yea, I didn't feel that the shot to the ribs will stop the attackers momentum, but it will give them something to take their mind off their original intent

Correct. But I think of it as more, I'm deflecting there arms as I'm stepping back, as soon as my back foot hits the ground I'm rotating into the frwd bow. The neutral bow is there, but not for long.
We train it as a push from a bully that is saying "punk, what are you going to do about it? Cry to mommy?" It is not an aggressive, push you down type of push. More of a push from a jock whose friends are around and he feels the need to strut around, so he starts pushing you around. Of course the girl you like is also around and she is yelling "Stop it Tommy, your such a jerk!", which really doesn't help your situation, but you can't believe she is sticking up for you... but I digress