Proper Punching

[Doc]

Thank you, I appreciate your opinions. I must repeat myself: "It gives me something to play with, and this is fun."

Likewise sir.

 

[Empty Hands]

"Chaining that acceleration into torque from rotation", help me out with that ...

I'm quickly running out of vocabulary to express myself! I see that Mr. Chapel has laid it all out in a much more cogent way than myself, so I would refer to him. For my part, I would just say that when I throw a cross/reverse punch, I start from the ground. I push off with my rear foot to accelerate my body forward. This acceleration is then used to help "throw" my foot and hip into their rotation. Thus, you have added the linear acceleration to your foot/hip/shoulder rotation.

Have fun playing!

 

[Doc]

I'm quickly running out of vocabulary to express myself! I see that Mr. Chapel has laid it all out in a much more cogent way than myself, so I would refer to him. For my part, I would just say that when I throw a cross/reverse punch, I start from the ground. I push off with my rear foot to accelerate my body forward. This acceleration is then used to help "throw" my foot and hip into their rotation. Thus, you have added the linear acceleration to your foot/hip/shoulder rotation.

Hey, that's what I said.

 

[Doc]

Does it then follow that when punching without forward movement the rear heel should stay down?

For most martial artist, yes. Boxing as a sport spends countless hours working on upper body power because they have the luxury of training for a very small number of "attacks." When all you have to do is execute and defend basically against a jab, cross, hook, and uppercut, then you have lots of time to do that and maximize upper body punching potential. They do not train for street self-defense attacks or kicks, so they are free to concentrate their efforts on other things that serve them well within the rules of engagement in the ring.

 

[Ray]

For most martial artist, yes. Boxing as a sport spends countless hours working on upper body power because they have the luxury of training for a very small number of "attacks." When all you have to do is execute and defend basically against a jab, cross, hook, and uppercut, then you have lots of time to do that and maximize upper body punching potential. They do not train for street self-defense attacks or kicks, so they are free to concentrate their efforts on other things that serve them well within the rules of engagement in the ring.

I generally agree with what you say (I gave up disagreeing when you showed me how wrong I was) and I generally agree with what you're saying about boxers. A half-way decent boxer can sure be real tough in a street encounter though.

 

[Doc]

I generally agree with what you say (I gave up disagreeing when you showed me how wrong I was)

It was only one time, and I'm old enough to get it right at least once.

and I generally agree with what you're saying about boxers. A half-way decent boxer can sure be real tough in a street encounter though.

Well I agree with you. The same can be said of any of the physical contact sports, because they train to deliver and take punishment, as a part of the rules of the game. However their "toughness" lies within the rules of the game for which they train. Nobody tackles as hard as an NFL Linebacker, but attack them with a choke, or kick at their legs and they freak. You know kinda like biting a boxer on his ear during a fight, they freak too in spite of all their toughness, even though biting is good old street fight country.

 

[kidswarrior]

The proper method is predicated upon the type of punch thrown, as well as the amount of body momentum utilized. However, all of the movements are part and parcel of the same anatomical action that employs both linear and circular movements.

Or as Mr. parker would say, "Where the linear ends, the circular begins, and where the circular ends, the linear begins."

If the rotation of the hips and shoulders were to be "extended," the punching arm would begin to circle, and the rotating foot would begin to "turn inward" on its axis as well.

The proper methodology utilizes an understanding of depth zones in dimensional stages of action, on an anatomical level. Therefore, in a primarily "torquing principle," as the punching action is initiated it will cause the rotation of the shoulder and hip to follow, culminating in the rotation of the foot in the torquing scenario. This would be anatomically proper.

In a scenario that utilizes body momentum and inertial impact as primary principles, the actions reverse themselves. This time beginning with the rotation of the foot, which will drive the hips, followed by the shoulder, which drives the arm forward. This too, would be proper.

One exerts a pulling action anatomically, the other a pushing anatomical action. Keep in mind it is possible to utilize a combination of the two principles predicated on the intent inherent in the various dimensional stages of movement of the chosen action.

Further, neither of these scenarios takes into consideration inherent strategy in initiating a potentially successful strike on an aware opponent. Also consider, deceptive body movements such as feints of various body parts, as well as deceptive footwork all become factors with various levels of anatomical efficient tradeoffs, versus successful applications.

OMG, I actually understand what Doc is saying even in full scientific mode. Maybe I just got more sleep last night or sumthin'. Anyway, Doc, keep helpin us peasants. Evidently there's hope.

 

[Doc]

OMG, I actually understand what Doc is saying even in full scientific mode. Maybe I just got more sleep last night or sumthin'. Anyway, Doc, keep helpin us peasants. Evidently there's hope.

I need sleep. Did I write that? Anyway, we're all peasants sir.

 

[MarkC]

I was going to ask about intitiating the punch first, as someone famous used to advocate, in order to avoid telegraphing the punch by moving hips, feet, etc. before the punch, but I think Doc addressed this already above.
Or maybe I'm just tired tonight....

 

[Doc]

I was going to ask about intitiating the punch first, as someone famous used to advocate, in order to avoid telegraphing the punch by moving hips, feet, etc. before the punch, but I think Doc addressed this already above.
Or maybe I'm just tired tonight....

No you're not tired sir, and you make plenty of sense.

 

[MarkC]

"The proper methodology utilizes an understanding of depth zones in dimensional stages of action, on an anatomical level. Therefore, in a primarily "torquing principle," as the punching action is initiated it will cause the rotation of the shoulder and hip to follow, culminating in the rotation of the foot in the torquing scenario. This would be anatomically proper.

In a scenario that utilizes body momentum and inertial impact as primary principles, the actions reverse themselves. This time beginning with the rotation of the foot, which will drive the hips, followed by the shoulder, which drives the arm forward. This too, would be proper.

One exerts a pulling action anatomically, the other a pushing anatomical action. Keep in mind it is possible to utilize a combination of the two principles predicated on the intent inherent in the various dimensional stages of movement of the chosen action.

Further, neither of these scenarios takes into consideration inherent strategy in initiating a potentially successful strike on an aware opponent. Also consider, deceptive body movements such as feints of various body parts, as well as deceptive footwork all become factors with various levels of anatomical efficient tradeoffs, versus successful applications."

The answer to my somewhat unasked question was indeed already in Doc's post.
For me, it's a bit difficult to put scenario 1 into practice consistently.
I wonder about the difference in power between the two methods.
I also wondered if the method of intiating the strike first isn't more effective for stikes with the lead hand.
All this is probably elementary, but my mind sometimes work in strange ways....

 

[Doc]

"The proper methodology utilizes an understanding of depth zones in dimensional stages of action, on an anatomical level. Therefore, in a primarily "torquing principle," as the punching action is initiated it will cause the rotation of the shoulder and hip to follow, culminating in the rotation of the foot in the torquing scenario. This would be anatomically proper.

In a scenario that utilizes body momentum and inertial impact as primary principles, the actions reverse themselves. This time beginning with the rotation of the foot, which will drive the hips, followed by the shoulder, which drives the arm forward. This too, would be proper.

One exerts a pulling action anatomically, the other a pushing anatomical action. Keep in mind it is possible to utilize a combination of the two principles predicated on the intent inherent in the various dimensional stages of movement of the chosen action.

Further, neither of these scenarios takes into consideration inherent strategy in initiating a potentially successful strike on an aware opponent. Also consider, deceptive body movements such as feints of various body parts, as well as deceptive footwork all become factors with various levels of anatomical efficient tradeoffs, versus successful applications."

The answer to my somewhat unasked question was indeed already in Doc's post.
For me, it's a bit difficult to put scenario 1 into practice consistently.
I wonder about the difference in power between the two methods.
I also wondered if the method of intiating the strike first isn't more effective for stikes with the lead hand.
All this is probably elementary, but my mind sometimes work in strange ways....

No sir, you make perfect sense. It's all about context. A person could mechanically throw a perfect punch, but the goal is to actually hit someone AND be mechanically sound as possible under the circumstances. This is where the instincts and skill of the executor comes into play, constantly making decisions based on what is in front of them from one jiffy-second to the next, what is viable functional and not. A not-so-perfect punch that can knock the guy out, in my book is still a dam good punch sir.

 

[donald]

My Yi Li Quan friends tell me that their punches start at the foot, and spirals upwards through the hips etc.

This may sound ignorant, but how in the world do you start a punch from the ground up?

Peace,
1stJohn1:9

 

[Doc]

My Yi Li Quan friends tell me that their punches start at the foot, and spirals upwards through the hips etc.

This may sound ignorant, but how in the world do you start a punch from the ground up?

Peace,
1stJohn1:9

When you lift something substantial sir, do only your arms move, or do the feet, legs, etc all flex and move before the arms are actually engaged in the action?

 

[Mark L]

I guess I'm with Donald here. I still don't see the foot moving first, and I've tried. It is intuitive to me that the feet, knees, thighs provide an integral support system but I don't see them as the impetus for the strike. Hips and core, backed up by our structure to the floor. It works for me, even if I'm wrong.

 

[Doc]

I guess I'm with Donald here. I still don't see the foot moving first, and I've tried. It is intuitive to me that the feet, knees, thighs provide an integral support system but I don't see them as the impetus for the strike. Hips and core, backed up by our structure to the floor. It works for me, even if I'm wrong.

I think you probably misunderstand. The foot doesn't have to move for the action to start at the ground.

 

[Big Don]

What MR Planas told us yesterday:
"In Kenpo, you do not hit with your hand, foot, arm or leg, but with your whole body"

 

[jks9199]

I guess I'm with Donald here. I still don't see the foot moving first, and I've tried. It is intuitive to me that the feet, knees, thighs provide an integral support system but I don't see them as the impetus for the strike. Hips and core, backed up by our structure to the floor. It works for me, even if I'm wrong.

I think you probably misunderstand. The foot doesn't have to move for the action to start at the ground.

What MR Planas told us yesterday:
"In Kenpo, you do not hit with your hand, foot, arm or leg, but with your whole body"

We have some similar principles in my style; they're not really easily amenable to writing except as a reference after you've been taught. Essentially, a hand strike actually starts with the toes...

 

[Doc]

What MR Planas told us yesterday:
"In Kenpo, you do not hit with your hand, foot, arm or leg, but with your whole body"

As I read it, everyone here agrees on the "what," which is a "whole body" strike. But that's not what we were discussing. We were talking about the "how."

 

[MarkC]

I was sitting here thinking about all this information on proper punching technique, and going over it in my mind, then realized (duh!) that I've been mostly thinking about it in relation to a single punch, which we don't often do in real life. This is where repetition of basic techniques until they're right, and continuing after, to make sure they stay right, come in handy. To actually have to think about all this in a second or two would not be the most pleasant experience while also trying to avoid having your opponent clean your clock.