So an interesting thing happened to me today...

[Gerry Seymour]

WORKS has to have a relatively high % of works in it against a capable oppoinent

Remember that boxers' punches fail a pretty high percentage of the time against skilled defensive boxers. Counters work.

 

[jobo]

Remember that boxers' punches fail a pretty high percentage of the time against skilled defensive boxers. Counters work.

indeed but they can only fail badly once in a fight, when the punch leaves them wide open and next thing someone is using smelling salts

 

[oftheherd1]

I suck at picturing what people describe. I swear that sounds like a backwards hip throw to me, no matter how many times I read it.

And I often suck at describing things.

 

[drop bear]

I've done it as,well in a,controlled environment, that doesn't mean its not the,sort of thing that canend very badly against a real attacker.

people have trouble,doing it to me, if they,duck my right i hit them with a left or a knee and trapping a full speed punch is only a high % move if you are in the matrix. In real life people,don't stand there with their,arm out, they pull it back double quick

For ducking you just keep your hands up. That way you are still covered. And duck towards the right arm pit in this case to cut off space.

If you want to go all street. It is more important to use head movement because you may not know where the next punch is coming from.

The conservative nature of ducking is not exactly straight forwards. There is a concept that if your head is not where it should be they have a harder time targeting it. So you should attack and move all the time. Ducking is part of that mechanic.

Bloody Slap Boxing

So while you may think you are being safer by not moving your head. You kind of aren't.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

For ducking you just keep your hands up.

You can

1. duck your opponent's punch.
2. wrap your opponent's punching arm.

IMO, 2 > 1

If you

- duck your opponent's 1st punch, you will need to duck again.
- wrap your opponent's punching arm, he can't punch you any more.

 

[drop bear]

You can

1. duck your opponent's punch.
2. wrap your opponent's punching arm.

IMO, 2 > 1

If you

- duck your opponent's 1st punch, you will need to duck again.
- wrap your opponent's punching arm, he can't punch you any more.

Arm wraps are super hard to do at pace. Ducking does not have to be in response to a punch. You can just duck to reposition. Then you don't have to adress every shot coming at you. A percentage just miss anyway.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

indeed but they can only fail badly once in a fight, when the punch leaves them wide open and next thing someone is using smelling salts

That is the issue, indeed.

Just remember that what you're describing as a "technique" (and is probably described that way in the curriculum) is actually a series of moves, rather than a single technique. Each has to be used properly, or the whole sequence fails - or, more accurately, if one is interrupted or countered, you don't follow that sequence.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And I often suck at describing things.

Well, this should go fabulously, then!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

For ducking you just keep your hands up. That way you are still covered. And duck towards the right arm pit in this case to cut off space.

If you want to go all street. It is more important to use head movement because you may not know where the next punch is coming from.

The conservative nature of ducking is not exactly straight forwards. There is a concept that if your head is not where it should be they have a harder time targeting it. So you should attack and move all the time. Ducking is part of that mechanic.

Bloody Slap Boxing

So while you may think you are being safer by not moving your head. You kind of aren't.

I think the ducking he is describing is literally just ducking under the punch - like a bad fight scene in an old Star Trek episode. I've seen it used in some MA as a placeholder for high passes and ducks like the one you're describing.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You can

1. duck your opponent's punch.
2. wrap your opponent's punching arm.

IMO, 2 > 1

If you

- duck your opponent's 1st punch, you will need to duck again.
- wrap your opponent's punching arm, he can't punch you any more.

Which is better depends upon where you want to be. For most of our techniques, behind his shoulder (after the ducking) is superior.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Which is better depends upon where you want to be. For most of our techniques, behind his shoulder (after the ducking) is superior.

Here is another example.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I can only comment of the Hapkido I studied. No entertainment. Just practical and effective defensive techniques against attacks.

It's not all Hapkido schools, just some.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Two thoughts on this. If you know what they are going to do (either because they've told you, or because you recognize it), you're countering, and that doesn't necessarily show a problem with the series of techniques. And it may be that they are forcing it - trying to do it when it's really not available. The most exaggerated example I can think of off the top of my head would be someone continuing to try a double-leg when their opponent has sprawled and gotten their upper body over their back. There are much better options from there. The same may be happening with this technique - they keep trying to make it work, even after your body shifts to where they are in danger of those strikes from you. There's something "next to" that technique that they should be using there, instead.

Of course, none of that means the technique is necessarily useful or effective - just some thoughts on where I see techniques "fail", but it's not a problem with the technique.

Or it may be actually 2 separate techniques and not an actual combination. Sometimes forms will tie 2 different techniques together but they aren't actual fighting combination. I'm thinking about the forms that I train and how the forms have actual combination and some are just 2 separate techniques tied together. Those techniques that are tied together were never meant to be used as a combination. In one of my forms there is a slap followed by long fist punch, but in application the punch isn't going to realistically follow the slap. I have done both techniques in free sparing and the slap is more like an striking entry for grappling and head control. The punch is just a punch

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Or it may be actually 2 separate techniques and not an actual combination. Sometimes forms will tie 2 different techniques together but they aren't actual fighting combination. I'm thinking about the forms that I train and how the forms have actual combination and some are just 2 separate techniques tied together. Those techniques that are tied together were never meant to be used as a combination. In one of my forms there is a slap followed by long fist punch, but in application the punch isn't going to realistically follow the slap. I have done both techniques in free sparing and the slap is more like an striking entry for grappling and head control. The punch is just a punch

Agreed - the term "technique" is used in some styles to identify what is actually a short form. It is done in NGA, though to a lesser extent. What I refer to as a "classical form" for the technique is usually called the "classical technique", and contains more than the technique.

 

[DaveB]

indeed but they can only fail badly once in a fight, when the punch leaves them wide open and next thing someone is using smelling salts

So which kata advocated such tactical weaknesses?

 

[oftheherd1]

Agreed - the term "technique" is used in some styles to identify what is actually a short form. It is done in NGA, though to a lesser extent. What I refer to as a "classical form" for the technique is usually called the "classical technique", and contains more than the technique.

Interesting way to look at that.

In the Hapkido I studied, we tend to respond to one attack at a time, just as one would do in a classic kata. We know about moving to engage other possible attackers, pretty much in conjunction with and flowing from a particular technique. But our techniques tend to prevent a 'primary' attacker from being able to do anything to us, and put other potential attackers at disadvantage, usually because we won't be where they planned on us being, and we are already preparing for that attack. But we do not consider our art one that uses katas or forms. I suppose it was decided early on, perhaps even in Dai ito Ryu, that it would be limiting to restrict oneself to canned responses. But I don't really know if that is the reason.

 

[jobo]

So which kata advocated such tactical weaknesses?

any kata that,advocates,ducking under a punch

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Interesting way to look at that.

In the Hapkido I studied, we tend to respond to one attack at a time, just as one would do in a classic kata. We know about moving to engage other possible attackers, pretty much in conjunction with and flowing from a particular technique. But our techniques tend to prevent a 'primary' attacker from being able to do anything to us, and put other potential attackers at disadvantage, usually because we won't be where they planned on us being, and we are already preparing for that attack. But we do not consider our art one that uses katas or forms. I suppose it was decided early on, perhaps even in Dai ito Ryu, that it would be limiting to restrict oneself to canned responses. But I don't really know if that is the reason.

Daito-ryu does use forms - that's what their "techniques" are. They are specific, technically detailed, and rigid (in structure, not the person doing them). That's all a form is. The distinction from the technique is conceptual - the technique is the lock/throw, itself. So, a hip throw starts from the moment they are in position at your hip. Practicing the technique requires some sort of entry to it. In many MA, there's a prescribed entry that's the "official" version - and that is essentially a form. So, if a hip throw starts from a same-side grip (left hand gripping right wrist), and that's how it's always taught (with variations from other attacks being practiced later), that's a short form. Some forms are highly stylized (you can see this in the videos with the Kondo brothers doing Daito-ryu). Some are less stylized (you can see this in videos of "classical techniques" from NGA). Both are still forms, because they are not variable. There's a precise "right" way to do the "technique". Application of that technique will be (should be) more variable.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

any kata that,advocates,ducking under a punch

DB mentioned earlier that there's a valid way to duck a punch. I don't know if the kata you're talking about approaches that or not - you haven't pointed us to which one it is.

 

[DaveB]

any kata that,advocates,ducking under a punch

But specifically, the one your teacher was going through that you mentioned earlier..
Is there a reason you're avoiding this question?