I've been giving this some thought for a while.
Pressure point strikes and their effectiveness have been something of an issue in ken/mpo circles. I'm not talking about smacking somebody in the throat or naughty bits. I'm talking about the touch/sequenced knockouts that have become a signature part of some forms of Okinawan martial arts (or at least, those arts as they've been taught recently) and now, EPAK.
There's an old tradition in martial arts of fakir-style "magic" tricks and deliberate deception when it comes to demonstrating the merits of a technique. Some arts gave these as a matter of policy. Others simply seem to rediscover the tricks over time, or may be engaged in self-deception.
I recently downloaded a demonstration of an EPAK instructor (for the purposes of this post, it isn't important who) doing "knockouts," but in at least one case, slowing the video shows the "knockout" victim tuck and reach the floor to break the fall. Many of you might know that one of the most dangerous parts of a knockout comes from hitting your head on a hard surface without the body providing any brake, so I suppose this is a relief. But it's not a knockout.
Decsriptions of these techniques are invariably obscured by pseudoscientific or vague Chinese Medicine-related claims, and I'm starting to be of the opinion that these trendy techniques are becoming stagnant and their curriculums have not really been tested very well.
So I have an idea and a question: In the interests of martial "science," what protocols would you set up to test how well a technique works?
We need to remove:
* Observer bias
* Cooperation
* Cheating by any party
* The plecebo effect
Here are some ideas:
* We experiment with two groups of martial artists. Half of them will be downed by a knockout technique. Half of them will be downed by a "placebo" technique. Both groups will be told that they are going to xperience a "pressure point knockout." Test subjects wear something on their head that both blinds them and makes it difficult to apply force to the head (to avoid just slamming somebody in the head).
* The above, but we use a group of non-martial artists as well (determines by interview)
* The above, but we mix placebo and actual techniques with groups who have *not* been told what to expect.
Naturally we need injury waivers and competent medical professionals on hand. But would it be too dangerous? I argue that since pressure point advocates often demonstrate "knockouts" safely, it would not. The problems would include:
* Cheating by a martial artist striking the head or neck with with enough force that this would cause a knockout anyway, regardless of sequencing.
* A plant willing to take a fall
* Independent verification of knockouts
What are your thoughts?
Pressure point strikes and their effectiveness have been something of an issue in ken/mpo circles. I'm not talking about smacking somebody in the throat or naughty bits. I'm talking about the touch/sequenced knockouts that have become a signature part of some forms of Okinawan martial arts (or at least, those arts as they've been taught recently) and now, EPAK.
There's an old tradition in martial arts of fakir-style "magic" tricks and deliberate deception when it comes to demonstrating the merits of a technique. Some arts gave these as a matter of policy. Others simply seem to rediscover the tricks over time, or may be engaged in self-deception.
I recently downloaded a demonstration of an EPAK instructor (for the purposes of this post, it isn't important who) doing "knockouts," but in at least one case, slowing the video shows the "knockout" victim tuck and reach the floor to break the fall. Many of you might know that one of the most dangerous parts of a knockout comes from hitting your head on a hard surface without the body providing any brake, so I suppose this is a relief. But it's not a knockout.
Decsriptions of these techniques are invariably obscured by pseudoscientific or vague Chinese Medicine-related claims, and I'm starting to be of the opinion that these trendy techniques are becoming stagnant and their curriculums have not really been tested very well.
So I have an idea and a question: In the interests of martial "science," what protocols would you set up to test how well a technique works?
We need to remove:
* Observer bias
* Cooperation
* Cheating by any party
* The plecebo effect
Here are some ideas:
* We experiment with two groups of martial artists. Half of them will be downed by a knockout technique. Half of them will be downed by a "placebo" technique. Both groups will be told that they are going to xperience a "pressure point knockout." Test subjects wear something on their head that both blinds them and makes it difficult to apply force to the head (to avoid just slamming somebody in the head).
* The above, but we use a group of non-martial artists as well (determines by interview)
* The above, but we mix placebo and actual techniques with groups who have *not* been told what to expect.
Naturally we need injury waivers and competent medical professionals on hand. But would it be too dangerous? I argue that since pressure point advocates often demonstrate "knockouts" safely, it would not. The problems would include:
* Cheating by a martial artist striking the head or neck with with enough force that this would cause a knockout anyway, regardless of sequencing.
* A plant willing to take a fall
* Independent verification of knockouts
What are your thoughts?