Counter torque

[Kenpodoc]

Mr. Tatum's TOW this month is B2aH with a Thrusting sweep kick simultaneous with the Heel Palm. He then discussed "Counter torque". I thought it was an interesting TOW but I was not aware of counter torque as a power principle. Any thoughts about Counter Torque?

Thanks,

Jeff

[MisterMike]

I dunno :idunno: I didn't think you could torque a thrusting sweep kick.

An example of counter torque is when your body rotates away from the direction of your weapon. Like a step-through in reverse while executing a vertical outward block off the front arm. (Short 1)

Although Kenpo-ists coined the term, it isn't a unique principle to only kenpo. They just feel the need to classify everything ;)

[Kenpodoc]

I dunno :idunno: I didn't think you could torque a thrusting sweep kick.

An example of counter torque is when your body rotates away from the direction of your weapon. Like a step-through in reverse while executing a vertical outward block off the front arm. (Short 1)

Although Kenpo-ists coined the term, it isn't a unique principle to only kenpo. They just feel the need to classify everything ;)

I would call that Counter Rotation and not counter torque. Clyde explained on Kenponet that Countertorque occurs when the top half and bottom half of the body rotate in opposite directions. In the TOW it looked to me like the force of the Heelpalm was increased as a result of backup mass. I am curious what others think.

Jeff

[jfarnsworth]

My opinion of B2aH with a thrusting sweep kick is opposing forces. Again, that's just my opinion. I haven't seen Mr. Tatum's web site though but as I picture it in my mind I would classify it as opposing forces. :asian:

[Bill Lear]

I would call that Counter Rotation and not counter torque. Clyde explained on Kenponet that Countertorque occurs when the top half and bottom half of the body rotate in opposite directions. In the TOW it looked to me like the force of the Heelpalm was increased as a result of backup mass. I am curious what others think.

Jeff

I guess I'll post... I was the one that he hit in the clip, and dood!!! Did that smart!!! (Ouch!!!)

Mr. Tatum's hips turned one way with the kick as his shoulders turned with the heel palm. Look for it and you'll see it.

As for the terms... Rotation is the action, Torque is the result.

Here's the link for the clip: April 1 Tip Of The Week (http://www.ltatum.com/movies/Week28/TipOfTheWeekSMW28.html)

[Kenpodoc]

I guess I'll post... I was the one that he hit in the clip, and dood!!! Did that smart!!! (Ouch!!!)

Mr. Tatum's hips turned one way with the kick as his shoulders turned with the heel palm. Look for it and you'll see it.

As for the terms... Rotation is the action, Torque is the result.

Here's the link for the clip: April 1 Tip Of The Week (http://www.ltatum.com/movies/Week28/TipOfTheWeekSMW28.html)

Agreed, the top portion is counter clockwise torque, the bottom is clockwise torque. but why would opposing torques increase the force of the Heelpalm?

I think the force is increased because the whole body moves forward and adds backup mass to the strike along with the torque. 2 power principles used simultaneously. I liked the move and plan to play with it but I would say that the increased power was due to added backup mass not countertorque.

The counter rotation comment is in reponse to Mr. Mikes comment. A step through reverse with a vertical outward block would be counter rotation with the body rotating in the opposite way from the blocking arm. That rotation does not increase the power of the block.

Thanks for responding,

Jeff

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Agreed, the top portion is counter clockwise torque, the bottom is clockwise torque. but why would opposing torques increase the force of the Heelpalm?

I think the force is increased because the whole body moves forward and adds backup mass to the strike along with the torque. 2 power principles used simultaneously. I liked the move and plan to play with it but I would say that the increased power was due to added backup mass not countertorque.

The counter rotation comment is in reponse to Mr. Mikes comment. A step through reverse with a vertical outward block would be counter rotation with the body rotating in the opposite way from the blocking arm. That rotation does not increase the power of the block.

Thanks for responding,

Jeff
If you've already had the question answered and you still believe what you do, why are you asking it again? Is there something that will make you change your mind?

Dark Lord

[Brother John]

Agreed, the top portion is counter clockwise torque, the bottom is clockwise torque. but why would opposing torques increase the force of the Heelpalm?
Man!
I could SHOW you, but every time I try to explain it out in writing (I've been trying on word to get it down right) I end up tripping over my own words.

Like Steve Martin said:
"Some people have a way with words and some people...
just not have way."

Strangely enough, I could show you how this principle works by demonstrating the motion of one of my sons toys... it's a stick with two marbles on strings on either side...when you shake it up and down with an even rythm the balls smack on the top and on the bottom with a good deal of force. These balls would be like ones arms and the stick like the torso, the clockwise rotation of one creates a synergistic effect with the counterclockwise rotation of the other.
Like I said, words....NO.
If you were here in my basement (and I could find my sons toy amongst the crap in his room.... :( ) I could SHOW you.

Your Brother
John

[Bill Lear]

Agreed, the top portion is counter clockwise torque, the bottom is clockwise torque. but why would opposing torques increase the force of the Heelpalm?

Directional Harmony plays an integral part in increasing the power of the heel palm strike. The upper body and the heel palm strike are moving in the same direction, and in unison, thus increasing the power of the heel palm strike accordingly. The same goes with the kick, although it is moving in the opposite direction of the heel palm it is moving in the same direction and in unison with the lower body.




I think the force is increased because the whole body moves forward and adds backup mass to the strike along with the torque. 2 power principles used simultaneously. I liked the move and plan to play with it but I would say that the increased power was due to added backup mass not countertorque.

I don't doubt that the force of the heel palm is increased by Mr. Tatum's forward momentum and back-up mass. It definately was, but it was also augmented by the rotation of Mr. Tatum's upper body. Likewise, his kick was augmented by the rotation of his lower body.

Counter-Torque might not be the most prominent power principle in the technique for you, but it is definately there.

:asian:

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Directional Harmony plays an integral part in increasing the power of the heel palm strike. The upper body and the heel palm strike are moving in the same direction, and in unison, thus increasing the power of the heel palm strike accordingly. The same goes with the kick, although it is moving in the opposite direction of the heel palm it is moving in the same direction and in unison with the lower body.





I don't doubt that the force of the heel palm is increased by Mr. Tatum's forward momentum and back-up mass. It definately was, but it was also augmented by the rotation of Mr. Tatum's upper body. Likewise, his kick was augmented by the rotation of his lower body.

Counter-Torque might not be the most prominent power principle in the technique for you, but it is definately there.

:asian:I love all the definitions in kenpo. Too bad I can't keep up with them without a cheat sheet. It was fun to see Billy get popped a couple times; liked the "thwack" sounds the best.

Love watching Mr. Tatum move; very Parker-esque in biomechanical signature. But what's with the guitar chick as centerpiece on a martial arts website? I wasn't sure at first if I even reached the right place.

All the best,

D.

[Kenpodoc]

If you've already had the question answered and you still believe what you do, why are you asking it again? Is there something that will make you change your mind?

Dark Lord
Simply put, the question wasn't answered to my satisfaction. I found no reason to argue, but I wanted other opinions.

For example I disagree with Bill Lear that the kick and Heelpalm are going in different directions. They are going in the same direction but with the body rotating differently top and bottom (thus the term counter torque). I don't disagree that there is increased force in the heelpalm I just believe it is secondary to backup mass (because of directional harmony) and not directly from the countertorque. The Countertorque is an intersting way to add backup mass to what was previously a torque based power technique.

I also disagree with Brother John's example of the toy . With the toy the counter rotation feeds the repetitive nature of the movement but does not inclease the force. In fact the pull of the opposite balls decreases the force of each strike.

I would like to hear from others. I respect Clyde's, Billy's, Brother John's opinions but I disagree in this case and have yet to be convinced. Watch the video and you'll be impressed by Mr. Tatum but watch the power principles and tell me what you think.

Can my mind be changed, sure, but not by what I've heard so far. Mr. Wedlake laughed at me when I told him that I'm a cynic and don't believe things just because someone with more prestige, or more stripes tells me something. He also knows I like to have someone demonstrate something and change my mind.

In my opinion we should all listen, learn, play and have the right to ask questions and disagree. My instructor, Mr Hatfield, allows me to question him, disagree and play with the principles. Usually he changes my mind occassionally I've changed his.
I believe that true respect is shown (and earned) not through blind obedience (those people are just groupies) but through thoughtful consideration by both student and teacher.
Respectfully,

Jeff

[Robbo]

Hello,

Just as it is hard to see any sort of one static stance in SD techniques because they all blend together in constant motion, it is also very hard to see one definitive method of generating power in SD techniques. After you have internalized the techniques your body will incorporate a myriad of ways of generating that required power. There may be one method that is the main driving force but there will be other ways of generating power present to a greater or lesser degree depending on how you have been taught or how you have tailored the techniques.

Rob

[psi_radar]

Ok, I'll take a stab at it.

I've always thought of counter torque as used in gyroscopic devices. Picture two equal sized/weighted flywheels spinning at equal speeds in opposite directions mounted one atop the other. Their respective momentum should maintain balance.

It's really hard to describe concisely how this could apply to the technique as shown; I just drew myself a couple diagrams on my whiteboard to convince myself after trying the technique a few times. These are my conclusions:

1) The kick adds balance to the entire maneuver by providing angular momentum in the opposite direction of the upper body.

2) The movement of the center of mass closer to the opponent in the middle of the strike reduces the resistance to the motion (helping to accelerate it) while increasing leverage on the strike. To illustrate the improved leverage, picture a socket wrench on a bolt in front of you. Get in a right N. Bow stance and reach out to the wrench (you and the wrench seen from above would form almost a straight line) and push. Not much juice, eh? Now shuffle forward and side cover. Pull at the wrench, which is now closer and perpendicular to you. The maximum torque able to be exerted on the bolt should be much higher due to the improved angle of force.

There's a lot of forces at work here, biomechanical as well as simple physics, so I'm sure I'm not completely on target and certainly oversimplifying, but it's fun to think about. Great tip.

[Bill Lear]

Simply put, the question wasn't answered to my satisfaction. I found no reason to argue, but I wanted other opinions.

For example I disagree with Bill Lear that the kick and Heelpalm are going in different directions. They are going in the same direction but with the body rotating differently top and bottom (thus the term counter torque). I don't disagree that there is increased force in the heelpalm I just believe it is secondary to backup mass (because of directional harmony) and not directly from the countertorque. The Countertorque is an intersting way to add backup mass to what was previously a torque based power technique.

I also disagree with Brother John's example of the toy . With the toy the counter rotation feeds the repetitive nature of the movement but does not inclease the force. In fact the pull of the opposite balls decreases the force of each strike.

I would like to hear from others. I respect Clyde's, Billy's, Brother John's opinions but I disagree in this case and have yet to be convinced. Watch the video and you'll be impressed by Mr. Tatum but watch the power principles and tell me what you think.

Can my mind be changed, sure, but not by what I've heard so far. Mr. Wedlake laughed at me when I told him that I'm a cynic and don't believe things just because someone with more prestige, or more stripes tells me something. He also knows I like to have someone demonstrate something and change my mind.

In my opinion we should all listen, learn, play and have the right to ask questions and disagree. My instructor, Mr Hatfield, allows me to question him, disagree and play with the principles. Usually he changes my mind occassionally I've changed his.
I believe that true respect is shown (and earned) not through blind obedience (those people are just groupies) but through thoughtful consideration by both student and teacher.
Respectfully,

Jeff

Jeff,

The path of action for both the kick and the heel palm are different, and probably not easy to see on the video. The principle highlighted in the clip is counter torque, although directional harmony (augmented by Mr. Tatum's back-up mass) did play a part in generating power in the move. Please re-read my last post.

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Simply put, the question wasn't answered to my satisfaction. I found no reason to argue, but I wanted other opinions.

For example I disagree with Bill Lear that the kick and Heelpalm are going in different directions. They are going in the same direction but with the body rotating differently top and bottom (thus the term counter torque). I don't disagree that there is increased force in the heelpalm I just believe it is secondary to backup mass (because of directional harmony) and not directly from the countertorque. The Countertorque is an intersting way to add backup mass to what was previously a torque based power technique.

I also disagree with Brother John's example of the toy . With the toy the counter rotation feeds the repetitive nature of the movement but does not inclease the force. In fact the pull of the opposite balls decreases the force of each strike.

I would like to hear from others. I respect Clyde's, Billy's, Brother John's opinions but I disagree in this case and have yet to be convinced. Watch the video and you'll be impressed by Mr. Tatum but watch the power principles and tell me what you think.

Can my mind be changed, sure, but not by what I've heard so far. Mr. Wedlake laughed at me when I told him that I'm a cynic and don't believe things just because someone with more prestige, or more stripes tells me something. He also knows I like to have someone demonstrate something and change my mind.

In my opinion we should all listen, learn, play and have the right to ask questions and disagree. My instructor, Mr Hatfield, allows me to question him, disagree and play with the principles. Usually he changes my mind occassionally I've changed his.
I believe that true respect is shown (and earned) not through blind obedience (those people are just groupies) but through thoughtful consideration by both student and teacher.
Respectfully,

Jeff
Are you just seeking someone to substanstiate your position or what? I don't see the point in asking a question endless times only to receive the same answer and ask it again and again because you didn't like the answers you got.

Dark Lord

[sumdumguy]

For example I disagree with Bill Lear that the kick and Heelpalm are going in different directions. They are going in the same direction but with the body rotating differently top and bottom (thus the term counter torque). I don't disagree that there is increased force in the heelpalm I just believe it is secondary to backup mass (because of directional harmony) and not directly from the countertorque. The Countertorque is an intersting way to add backup mass to what was previously a torque based power technique.

I also disagree with Brother John's example of the toy . With the toy the counter rotation feeds the repetitive nature of the movement but does not inclease the force. In fact the pull of the opposite balls decreases the force of each strike.

I would like to hear from others. I respect Clyde's, Billy's, Brother John's opinions but I disagree in this case and have yet to be convinced. Watch the video and you'll be impressed by Mr. Tatum but watch the power principles and tell me what you think.

Can my mind be changed, sure, but not by what I've heard so far. Mr. Wedlake laughed at me when I told him that I'm a cynic and don't believe things just because someone with more prestige, or more stripes tells me something. He also knows I like to have someone demonstrate something and change my mind.

In my opinion we should all listen, learn, play and have the right to ask questions and disagree. My instructor, Mr Hatfield, allows me to question him, disagree and play with the principles. Usually he changes my mind occassionally I've changed his.
I believe that true respect is shown (and earned) not through blind obedience (those people are just groupies) but through thoughtful consideration by both student and teacher.
Respectfully,

Jeff
Jeff, if you look at the paths traveled by the foot vs. the heel of palm you will notice that they travel on two different planes. The foot on a #1-3 and the heel of palm is traveling on a #9 in reverse. These two weapons are not moving in the same direction. It is this diversity of angels that assists in the "counter torque" process and adds increased power and acceloration to the two strikes. Try this yourself without the thrusting kick and see what has to happen to get the type of power you can generate with countering the torque. Try not to think about the torque, just think about the "counter" portion of that term, and realize that allthough each strike is powerfull when executed simultaneously, singularly they are a weaker weapon.
:asian:

[Kenpodoc]

Are you just seeking someone to substanstiate your position or what? I don't see the point in asking a question endless times only to receive the same answer and ask it again and again because you didn't like the answers you got.

Dark Lord

Acutually I've gotten some very useful answers. I find it useful to hear more than one opinion. I'm curious to know why you think it useful to criticize the act of asking a question. Mister Mike, Mr. Lear, John, Sumdumguy, have all been helpful, Thanks.

You have merely been critical. Each to his own.

Jeff

[Touch Of Death]

My opinion of B2aH with a thrusting sweep kick is opposing forces. Again, that's just my opinion. I haven't seen Mr. Tatum's web site though but as I picture it in my mind I would classify it as opposing forces. :asian:Its actualy a counter balance. Watch it and see if you can spot Coordination Set #1.(the counter balance set)
Sean

[ob2c]

Well, I'm no expert, nor nearly as experienced as most of you. But I can see where the counter torque adds power, and is in fact the major power principle at work in this move. In trying it, this feels very similar to many moves in Taiji.

Try moving slowly through this, and try to feel what your body is doing. Concentrate primarily on the muscles in your lower back, just behind the tantien. From the forward bow- punch and trap with anchored elbow, your weight shifts onto the right (lead) foot. In order to strike with a simultaneouse right heel palm and left instep kick, your right foot is naturally firmly rooted and your body core contracts on a diagonal from right shoulder to left leg. To do this effectively, movement has to be centered in the back, just behind the tantien. That core contraction, or counter torque, from a solidly rooted stance, is where the majority of the power comes from.

Any how, that is how I read this one. Another excellent TOW, and my thanks to Mr. Tatum.

[Touch Of Death]

Well, I'm no expert, nor nearly as experienced as most of you. But I can see where the counter torque adds power, and is in fact the major power principle at work in this move. In trying it, this feels very similar to many moves in Taiji.

Try moving slowly through this, and try to feel what your body is doing. Concentrate primarily on the muscles in your lower back, just behind the tantien. From the forward bow- punch and trap with anchored elbow, your weight shifts onto the right (lead) foot. In order to strike with a simultaneouse right heel palm and left instep kick, your right foot is naturally firmly rooted and your body core contracts on a diagonal from right shoulder to left leg. To do this effectively, movement has to be centered in the back, just behind the tantien. That core contraction, or counter torque, from a solidly rooted stance, is where the majority of the power comes from.

Any how, that is how I read this one. Another excellent TOW, and my thanks to Mr. Tatum.Actualy counter torque is one principle of counter balance.(your true source of power) This is just the same old Ed Parker lesson with a fancy new name.
Sean :asian:

[ob2c]

HMMM. I'm not that well versed in the concept of counter ballance to say for sure, but counter torque in this application seems to be more specific, as well as more discriptive of what is at work. And, of the three major power principles (mog, backup mass, and torque), this would be a type of torque.

[Touch Of Death]

HMMM. I'm not that well versed in the concept of counter ballance to say for sure, but counter torque in this application seems to be more specific, as well as more discriptive of what is at work. And, of the three major power principles (mog, backup mass, and torque), this would be a type of torque.Sure its was descriptive but the whole acheiving power while balanced on one leg is counterbalance and the sweep heel palm strike utilized counter torque, or rather something he did while in counter balance. Either way counter balance should have recieved a bit of lip service because it was just as prevalent as counter torque.
Sean

[Doc]

Simply put, the question wasn't answered to my satisfaction. I found no reason to argue, but I wanted other opinions.

For example I disagree with Bill Lear that the kick and Heelpalm are going in different directions. They are going in the same direction but with the body rotating differently top and bottom (thus the term counter torque). I don't disagree that there is increased force in the heelpalm I just believe it is secondary to backup mass (because of directional harmony) and not directly from the countertorque. The Countertorque is an intersting way to add backup mass to what was previously a torque based power technique.

I also disagree with Brother John's example of the toy . With the toy the counter rotation feeds the repetitive nature of the movement but does not inclease the force. In fact the pull of the opposite balls decreases the force of each strike.

I would like to hear from others. I respect Clyde's, Billy's, Brother John's opinions but I disagree in this case and have yet to be convinced. Watch the video and you'll be impressed by Mr. Tatum but watch the power principles and tell me what you think.

Can my mind be changed, sure, but not by what I've heard so far. Mr. Wedlake laughed at me when I told him that I'm a cynic and don't believe things just because someone with more prestige, or more stripes tells me something. He also knows I like to have someone demonstrate something and change my mind.

In my opinion we should all listen, learn, play and have the right to ask questions and disagree. My instructor, Mr Hatfield, allows me to question him, disagree and play with the principles. Usually he changes my mind occassionally I've changed his.
I believe that true respect is shown (and earned) not through blind obedience (those people are just groupies) but through thoughtful consideration by both student and teacher.
Respectfully,

Jeff

I'm with you sir. In simple physical terms, "counter torque" is a principle that can indeed generate power, however that power or energy is not created by the counter torquing action moving towards each other, but instead when torquing away from each other. This also presumes that energy has been stored previously to allow this action to occur, and is less likely to present itself in human anatomy.

In strict anatomical terms counter torque can be utilized to take advantage of the body symetry of movement that requires "complimentary movement" and a lack of pacifity for maximization of the activity at hand. This is the result of this example as I see it explained, and the power is generated through a combination of "torque," "back-up mass," and "muscle mass." The "counter rotation" does not hinder either activity as long as it does not reach an anatomical extreme at which time they will begin to cancel each other as the opposing forces oppose the actions as well. But "counter torque" as presented is not the underlining principle that creates or generates the power as I see it.

[Touch Of Death]

I'm with you sir. In simple physical terms, "counter torque" is a principle that can indeed generate power, however "counter torque" as presented is not the underlining principle that creates or generates the power as I see it.Agreed.
Sean

[ob2c]

Sure its was descriptive but the whole acheiving power while balanced on one leg is counterbalance and the sweep heel palm strike utilized counter torque, or rather something he did while in counter balance. Either way counter balance should have recieved a bit of lip service because it was just as prevalent as counter torque.
Sean

To borrow a concept from another topic (the discussion on contact manipulation on the EPAK forum), counter torque would then be a sub category of counter ballance in this example. Correct?

In my understanding, countertorque is a more specific example of the power principle torque. I would also say counterballance is a more specific application of the principle of ballance.

I don't see our two viewpoints as mutually exclusive. As in algebra, a set can be a subset of many sets. The real question is how these principles work together in this technique. Then we could ask which, if either, is more predominant. At my level of understanding, these assesments are more subjective than objective. I go by how the technique feels, and what I primarily feel is that core contraction. Possibly someone with a deeper understanding of anatomy, as well as the terminology and principles, can give a better, more objective description. I'd be interested to hear if that is the case. I'm still learning.

Edit: that sounds a little like I'm excluding you from the class of more knowlegable kenpoists. Not the case, I mean anyone mor knowlegable than me, which apparently includes you, certainly includes Doc, and probably includes a whole host of people here.

[ob2c]

Doc, couple of questions, if you don't mind.



In simple physical terms, "counter torque" is a principle that can indeed generate power, however that power or energy is not created by the counter torquing action moving towards each other, but instead when torquing away from each other.

You are apparently speaking of counter torque in general here, not as given in this technique. So, by your definition of counter torque, the inward counter rotation given here does not qualify. If this is the case, do you have a term and definition for what occurs here?



This also presumes that energy has been stored previously to allow this action to occur, and is less likely to present itself in human anatomy.

I see this action as similar to the completion of a circle in Taiji. You don't necessarily have to store energy to use the motion, rather your muscles have to be in a position to be able to contract. You open with the forward bow, crane and punch- close with the heel palm sweep. It is similar to the external component of Taiji. (My Taiji instructor hates it when I talk like this :) )



In strict anatomical terms counter torque can be utilized to take advantage of the body symetry of movement that requires "complimentary movement" and a lack of pacifity for maximization of the activity at hand. This is the result of this example as I see it explained, and the power is generated through a combination of "torque," "back-up mass," and "muscle mass." The "counter rotation" does not hinder either activity as long as it does not reach an anatomical extreme at which time they will begin to cancel each other as the opposing forces oppose the actions as well. But "counter torque" as presented is not the underlining principle that creates or generates the power as I see it.

I understand what you are saying here (I think). But it is that core contraction and counter torque (as used in the example) that engages the "combination of 'torque,' 'back-up mass,' and 'muscle mass.' " That would make torque, in the form of counter torque (or whatever term you wish to apply here), the primary power principle, would it not?

[Touch Of Death]

To borrow a concept from another topic (the discussion on contact manipulation on the EPAK forum), counter torque would then be a sub category of counter ballance in this example. Correct?

In my understanding, countertorque is a more specific example of the power principle torque. I would also say counterballance is a more specific application of the principle of ballance.

I don't see our two viewpoints as mutually exclusive. As in algebra, a set can be a subset of many sets. The real question is how these principles work together in this technique. Then we could ask which, if either, is more predominant. At my level of understanding, these assesments are more subjective than objective. I go by how the technique feels, and what I primarily feel is that core contraction. Possibly someone with a deeper understanding of anatomy, as well as the terminology and principles, can give a better, more objective description. I'd be interested to hear if that is the case. I'm still learning.

Edit: that sounds a little like I'm excluding you from the class of more knowlegable kenpoists. Not the case, I mean anyone mor knowlegable than me, which apparently includes you, certainly includes Doc, and probably includes a whole host of people here.Well speaking of math, I guess if you subtracted the power you have in C set (straight low kick with straight punch) from the intersecting low sweep heel pam then we would have the answer of which is predominant. I would say these play off eachother to some extent. I'm sure Doc has a better grasp on this than I do.
Sean

[Doc]

Doc, couple of questions, if you don't mind.

You are apparently speaking of counter torque in general here, not as given in this technique. So, by your definition of counter torque, the inward counter rotation given here does not qualify. If this is the case, do you have a term and definition for what occurs here?


That is an excellent catch sir. I prefer to not comment on the efficacy of the performance of other martial artists in particular, and instead choose to focus on the knowledge of concepts and principles discussed to allow others to broaden, (perhaps) their understanding and perspective of their activity. In doing so they may discover, see, or approach what they do from a hopefully more enlightened perspective that they may apply to their own curriculum.

Here is the problem. There is a tendency among some “modern” martial artist, (thanks to Ed Parker Sr.) to want to take a “scientific approach” to what they now do. This is not a bad thing, but unfortunately there is very little real science knowledge available among those who would teach or learn these various martial arts. Instead in general, and commercial American Kenpo specifically, a pseudo/para-science was created by Ed Parker Sr. to allow him to disseminate his very conceptual ideas among his many followers without his constant presence. To that end he created “scientific” sounding terminology to convey, and yes “sell” and proliferate his ideas. On one level this has had a positive impact on all arts. On another it has caused some to believe they are actually learning a true “science.” They are not.

Certainly there are some Newtonian Physics that translate to any physical activity, but no more than would be available in most physical interactive activities like American Football, baseball, or boxing. But the reality is the dynamics of human anatomy are completely unique in nature and science and it is rare you may “borrow” principles from other established hard sciences and insert them into a pseudo-scientific activity with any consistent degree of validity.

To take a pure physical term like “counter torque” and apply it outside of its intended use to human striking dynamics produces a subjectively conceptual interpretation far removed from reality. This term in particular would best be served by applying it to “locking, throwing, or grappling,” not generally speaking, striking.

Very few have the specific educational background and acumen necessary that will allow them to “create” true new scientific terminology, or properly apply what is known in one science discipline, to another. Subjective terminology can and does have validity but only within the conceptual framework for which it is designed. Outside of the general discipline, terms like “gravitational marriage” have no meaning, and true scientist would shrug their shoulders and dismiss it as an interesting (or not) “idea.”

That being said, you can call anything you want, anything you want to call it, until you enter into general discussions that do not include your devotees like this forum. Than you have to revert back to true science and stop pretending you know scientific principles, or at least explain what you mean by “how” YOU choose to use the term.

On one level American kenpo is about a myriad set of subjective concepts that those within choose to view as being principles. They are not. “Elastic-liquid-counter-gravitational-recoil-collisions” are just what they sound like. They allow some to sound like they’re smart and know what they’re talking about, and perhaps they do, but only for those who subscribe to their personal philosophy.

The human machine is so complex with multiple parts in varying density and connectivity floating in a fluid and contained in an elastic vessel, that you must refrain from using terms you would also apply to an inanimate object like a rock. With the human machine, one tiny entity moved can and does affect the rest of the machine. Even what you see, hear, and feel, can change how that machine physically functions beyond the control of the individual himself.

I had many a lecture from Ed Parker about how carefully you must construct application of true scientific terms. He said, “Be careful, be very careful if you want to be taken seriously by those who do not study kenpo.” That is one lesson I learned.

Bottom line – drop the word “principles” and insert “concepts” unless you really know what you’re talking about. Commercial motion based kenpo is a conceptual design according to its progenitor, that has so many interpretations that "mixed company" conversations always demand explanations instead of terminology assumptions.

[ob2c]

Doc, where do I start to reply to that? Thanks for the reply might be the best place.

I understand what you are talking about, as I've tried to discuss the 'principles' and 'science' with engineers and medical personnel. They aren't bashful about pointing out that the things we state as principles are a little oversimplified. Add to that the fact I'm still at an intermediate level, therefore not as well versed in some of our principles and concepts, and you probably can get a good idea of the problems I faced in getting my points across.

However, as a vehicle toward understanding what we are doing, I think the simplified use of our principles was, and is, pure geniouse. It gets the point across, and developes a level of understanding like no other art I've come across. Couple that with the feeling and sensitivity of Taiji, and my mind is boggled by the implications of the simplest moves. So, whatever terminology we choose to use at a given time- and you are correct that we must be careful to be clear in our definitions with the person(s) we are talking to at the time- the main thing is that we internalize the movements and concepts so that they can be called on under stress without thinking. Understanding helps us get it right, feeling helps us use it effectively.

This, again, is my take on the subject. I don't claim to know or understand it all- just to try to understand more. Thanks again, sir, for the input.