Originally posted by MJS
Dave, Thanks for the reply! Like I said in my first post, I have not trained with or have met Dillman, I was just going by what I have seen on tape, and what others have said.
No quarrels here my friend, my statement was made purely from the third person perspective as well.
As for the movement, again, from what I have seen, all I've seen is people just standing there. I realize that this is good for a reference point, but to test the effectiveness of it, it should be done on a moving, resisting person.
You are quite right on this point. One of the worst things about trying PP stuff on a static target is the fact that you basically need to induce blunt force trauma to make them work. We all know, you don't have to be trained to do that
However to make it real, you need your opponent/ training partner to be moving like it was for real, and when you do your stuff, both you and he will know if it works or not.
Don't get me wrong. I do believe that there is something to be leanred from every art. Something that might work for one person, may not work for another. PP are something that take alot of time to effectively develop. Considering that in order to get the most out of it, you pretty much have to be very accurate when hitting the point, if you want the desired result. Its hard enough to pinpoint the spot on someone standing still, but on a moving opp. you definately need to be precise..
Whilst, I agree with you that what works for one won't always work for another, I think that in most cases, the level of effectiveness is directly proportional to the desire to learn and the intensity at which you train. As to the accuracy required, I think there maybe a number of different schools of thought on this one.
Some of us believe, that it is more about nerve facilitation in a certain area than pin point accuracy. You would use the PP names as a reference, but in reality, you are striking in that area, rather than on the spot.
From what I have been told, Mr. Oyata's schools teach to strike areas rather than specific PP, and my school does the same. For example, rather than GB20 you would strike to the back of the head at about where a short hair cut might finish. Now you know where to strike, all you have to do is apply angle and direction to make it more effective.
As to making it work on an attacking opponent, think of any effective combination you would use in either self defense or sparring. Now think back to when you first began training, could you do this combination effectively then? Probably not, but you have trained with intensity and now in the middle of a situation, there is the opening and pop, you've done it. PP's are the same.
Also, even if you only manage to shake him up a little, because your technique was off, then you've still given yourself time to either hit him again, or run away.
PP are something, that if you can get them to work, are a safer alternative to actually punching someone, gouging the eyes, etc. In todays world, where people are very sue happy, being able to control someone rather than hitting them, might be safer.
Whilst this is true in essence, PP's are nothing more than a tool in our martial arts tool box. Where the Muay Thai guys have those nasty round house thigh kicks, and Judo and BJJ guys have countless numbers of chokes and holds, some of us use PP.
Getting them to work, as I said before is as easy as training hard.
Thanks for a highly inciteful discussion.
--Dave
:asian:
