What is the point of a tag in a full-contact fight?

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Did you see Tyson's jabs? It looked like they took a lot of effort but you have to consider the source. I don't ever want to get hit with that jab. The speed between punches is just unreal.

That's another continuum thing. And you should be able to throw multiple types of jabs. Which I imagine most people who throw them can, even if they don't realize that they're doing it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The jab is a good way to find your range. It’s a simple strike to perform and it opens the door for other shots, making it the most important punch in a boxer’s repertoire.

It's easier to block a staff that swing at you than to block a spear that stab into you. Since jab is like a spear stabbing, to use jab to set up your next move can be difficult.

The jab is a linear punch, it's not that easy to block it compare to a circular punch such as a back fist. If you want to use a jab to set up something else may be difficult since no arm contact is established. But if you use a back fist, since it's so easy to block it, 99% of the chance that your arm can contact on your opponent's arm. You can then change your punch into a pull and set up for your next move (such as to pull your opponent into your punch).

In other words, if you want to establish arm contact, the back fist or hook punch are better choice that the jab.

For example,

- You throw a back fist.
- Your opponent blocks it.
- You grab on his wrist, use another hand to control his elbow, and then ...

A punch can be a punch followed by a pull.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

It's easier to block a staff that swing at you than to block a spear that stab into you. Since jab is like a spear stabbing, to use jab to set up your next move can be difficult.

The jab is a linear punch, it's not that easy to block it compare to a circular punch such as a back fist. If you want to use a jab to set up something else may be difficult since no arm contact is established. But if you use a back fist, since it's so easy to block it, 99% of the chance that your arm can contact on your opponent's arm. You can then change your punch into a pull and set up for your next move (such as to pull your opponent into your punch).

In other words, if you want to establish arm contact, the back fist or hook punch are better choice that the jab.

For example,

- You throw a back fist.
- Your opponent blocks it.
- You grab on his wrist, use another hand to control his elbow, and then ...

A punch can be a punch followed by a pull.

You don't need them to block something in order to set something else up. It could also be set up from the person swaying, ducking or sidestepping (ie: if they side step a certain way from a jab, you can jab trying to get that for your roundhouse), getting them to focus on the jab so they don't realize you were actually stepping forward for a takedown (the old high low technique), or simply blocking their face to hide your next move.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You don't need them to block something in order to set something else up. It could also be set up from the person swaying, ducking or sidestepping (ie: if they side step a certain way from a jab, you can jab trying to get that for your roundhouse), getting them to focus on the jab so they don't realize you were actually stepping forward for a takedown (the old high low technique), or simply blocking their face to hide your next move.

Without connection, your opponent's foot work can make your next move fail. With connection, your body and your opponent's body will be connected as one unit. When your opponent moves back, he will pull you into him.

Here is an example that you use a back fist, arm pulling to set up your back leg side kick.

 

[wab25]

It's easier to block a staff that swing at you than to block a spear that stab into you. Since jab is like a spear stabbing, to use jab to set up your next move can be difficult.

The jab is a linear punch, it's not that easy to block it compare to a circular punch such as a back fist. If you want to use a jab to set up something else may be difficult since no arm contact is established. But if you use a back fist, since it's so easy to block it, 99% of the chance that your arm can contact on your opponent's arm. You can then change your punch into a pull and set up for your next move (such as to pull your opponent into your punch).

In other words, if you want to establish arm contact, the back fist or hook punch are better choice that the jab.

For example,

- You throw a back fist.
- Your opponent blocks it.
- You grab on his wrist, use another hand to control his elbow, and then ...

A punch can be a punch followed by a pull.

While a back fist punch can be great to set up other things... a jab is still, very good for setting up things. At least boxers have been using it for over 100 years in full contact fights, as a setup punch, among other things.

Getting the guy to focus on the jab, creates openings. Putting the jab in his eyes, creates openings and hides your next move. And you can establish arm contact with a jab as well. The easy way is to keep hitting him in the face, until he does establish arm contact... if I have to hit 4 or 5 times, it works for me. You can still turn your jab into a pull, even if you hit him square on the beak, it should actually be easier to hook one of his arms while his head is still snapping back.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Without connection, your opponent's foot work can make your next move fail. With connection, your body and your opponent's body will be connected as one unit. When your opponent moves back, he will pull you into him.

Here is an example that you use a back fist, arm pulling to set up your back leg side kick.

I'm not arguing that connection doesn't help. But there are plenty of ways using your own footwork, strikes, vision prevention, and feints to set something up without that connection. If that's your only way of doing it, people will just avoid the connection.

 

[oftheherd1]

When I studied TKD I was taught to strike, kick, block or whatever, with as much power and accuracy as possible, and always seek a new maximum. So in sparring, we would aim for a spot near wherever we wanted to strike our opponent, preferable about 1/4 " or less. Naturally that meant you had to start 1 or 2 inches away as a beginner, and work on your control to get better (closer). Blocks of course were full force at all times.

It was considered bad form to actually make contact on strikes and kicks, and would cost you points in sparring.

I don't seem to see teaching of that any more.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm not arguing that connection doesn't help. But there are plenty of ways using your own footwork, strikes, vision prevention, and feints to set something up without that connection. If that's your only way of doing it, people will just avoid the connection.

And the jab can also set up a connection, if you're not limiting "connection" to arm-to-arm connections. I can use a jab to set up an entry to get to clinch. No arm connection needed, if I can get to the head.

 

[Buka]

I am of the belief that stopping short of striking someone is the equivalent of teaching someone to shoot and miss on purpose.

 

[drop bear]

I am of the belief that stopping short of striking someone is the equivalent of teaching someone to shoot and miss on purpose.

Yeah. If I think I am going to unnecessarily kill the guy I will pull my strike up. But otherwise I will try to hit them.

It would render a jab useless though as you could just walk through it.

 

[oftheherd1]

I am of the belief that stopping short of striking someone is the equivalent of teaching someone to shoot and miss on purpose.

I am guessing that was an answer to my post. If not sorry.

The training was to pick a point and strike for it. But in training (sparring) it should be short of an actual hit. The power is always there. The location of the hit changes, and could move as the strike or kick was delivered. The idea is that if you can strike 1/4 inch away from an opponent, you can strike one inch inside him if need be. One of Jhoon Rhee's favorite sayings was "Always hit with maximum power, always seek a new maximum."

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I am guessing that was an answer to my post. If not sorry.

The training was to pick a point and strike for it. But in training (sparring) it should be short of an actual hit. The power is always there. The location of the hit changes, and could move as the strike or kick was delivered. The idea is that if you can strike 1/4 inch away from an opponent, you can strike one inch inside him if need be. One of Jhoon Rhee's favorite sayings was "Always hit with maximum power, always seek a new maximum."

The issue with this is similar to an earlier post of mine-you're training yourself to actively not hit people. So when it comes to an actual fight, what your body is used to, is striking hard and then stopping right before the person. This is a mental thing that is pretty tough to change once it's ingrained in you.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The issue with this is similar to an earlier post of mine-you're training yourself to actively not hit people. So when it comes to an actual fight, what your body is used to, is striking hard and then stopping right before the person. This is a mental thing that is pretty tough to change once it's ingrained in you.

I've always used both methods in training. Some drills use what I call a "simulated strike" (striking to a point just shy of making contact), while others use actual contact of varying power. Mix in bag work (where you're routinely striking the target with significant power), and it should eliminate the issue. This should be much like the issue of training to not hit hard (which we all do). If that's all you train for, it's unlikely you'll automatically switch to anything like full power under stress. But using light contact as part of training doesn't seem to have a detrimental effect.

I do think it's necessary to spend part of the time hitting people with some significant power, or you risk training yourself either to stop short (which, at the very least is likely to produce off-power shots) or to hit them lightly. I don't think bag work alone reliably eliminates this risk, though it'd certainly be better than not having anything where you strike dynamically with force.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

You can use the jab for a lot of things - it can sting, it can rock your opponent, it can cover the eyes to hide a follow up strike, it can measure distance, it can distract, it can be thrown a bit short to provoke a counter which you then counter, it can rack up points on the judges scorecard (in a sports competition), it can act as a stop hit, it can break your opponent's rhythm. Lots of options.

However all of that relies on having the capacity to actually hurt your opponent with your jab and to hurt them even more with a follow-up strike. If your opponent doesn't respect your power then they can just walk right through your jab to get you. But if you have the capacity to throw a power jab then you don't have to do it every time. You can mix it up, keep your opponent confused. Since each jab could be one that inflicts damage, they have to take them seriously and react, which helps you control the fight.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

When I studied TKD I was taught to strike, kick, block or whatever, with as much power and accuracy as possible, and always seek a new maximum. So in sparring, we would aim for a spot near wherever we wanted to strike our opponent, preferable about 1/4 " or less. Naturally that meant you had to start 1 or 2 inches away as a beginner, and work on your control to get better (closer). Blocks of course were full force at all times.

It was considered bad form to actually make contact on strikes and kicks, and would cost you points in sparring.

I don't seem to see teaching of that any more.

I am of the belief that stopping short of striking someone is the equivalent of teaching someone to shoot and miss on purpose.

My experience is that martial artists with experience in fighting/sparring full contact can switch to sparring with light/touch contact in a realistic way. Distancing and body mechanics are correct, they can just hold back on the power. People who have only ever sparred light/no-contact have a tendency to get the range wrong. If you throw a fully extended punch at me and it comes up 1/4" short, that's not a demonstration of control, that's just you missing.

 

[oftheherd1]

The issue with this is similar to an earlier post of mine-you're training yourself to actively not hit people. So when it comes to an actual fight, what your body is used to, is striking hard and then stopping right before the person. This is a mental thing that is pretty tough to change once it's ingrained in you.

I think one can train oneself to know the difference between sparring where one stops before actually striking, and a real fight where one applies the strike or kick with full power.

 

[oftheherd1]

My experience is that martial artists with experience in fighting/sparring full contact can switch to sparring with light/touch contact in a realistic way. Distancing and body mechanics are correct, they can just hold back on the power. People who have only ever sparred light/no-contact have a tendency to get the range wrong. If you throw a fully extended punch at me and it comes up 1/4" short, that's not a demonstration of control, that's just you missing.

I would think it is control if I can do whichever one I wish, to fit the situation.

 

[skribs]

It's easier to block a staff that swing at you than to block a spear that stab into you. Since jab is like a spear stabbing, to use jab to set up your next move can be difficult.

The difference is that a spear stabbing is far more lethal than a staff swinging. Where a jab is much less likely to KO you than a hook or a cross.

 

[wab25]

I think one can train oneself to know the difference between sparring where one stops before actually striking, and a real fight where one applies the strike or kick with full power.

I would think it is control if I can do whichever one I wish, to fit the situation.

I think Tony has the key right here:

My experience is that martial artists with experience in fighting/sparring full contact can switch to sparring with light/touch contact in a realistic way. Distancing and body mechanics are correct, they can just hold back on the power. People who have only ever sparred light/no-contact have a tendency to get the range wrong.

I have trained with far to many "experienced martial artists" who can't hit me. Sure, they can score points all day long, nothing I can do to stop that. They move better, they move faster, their timing is excellent, they can set me up for whatever scoring technique they want... but I must be a Jedi when it comes to contact though. Those same individuals will pull their attacks short of delivering powerful contact by reflex. They have a very hard time when we switch the rules to medium level of contact. (no one wants a concussion, buts lets give and take some pop...) Yes they technically could have made contact, and dropped me... but getting them to make that contact is another story.

I have found that guys that have trained full to medium contact have very little issue hitting me, and making significant contact. They can dial it back, and still be in the right position, or know when they are not. They can also dial it up. Its the folks that have never trained with medium to hard contact that seem to have a mental barrier to actually hitting someone else. That can be very hard for a person to overcome.

 

[dvcochran]

I am of the belief that stopping short of striking someone is the equivalent of teaching someone to shoot and miss on purpose.

Agree. I started to post the same comment, comparing it to the old saying that we are what we practice. Always 'just' miss in practice? That is a miss.