Regarding Blocking

[Joab]

Should each kata end and begin with a block? Should a form be more defensive and more focused on blocking than counter attacking? Should you block than strike, or block and strike at the same time? Or should you basically disregard blocking, believing that the counter attack is the way to go when attacked, your going to get hit or kicked anyway, strike back at the attacker but don't even try to block their hit or kick?

Well, I've experienced most of these trains of thoughts in studying four different forms. Even the one that told me there are no blocks in his system did have some, although very few, and only while striking at the same time. I do agree you should block and strike at the same time, as when your attacked you have very little time to work with, hit him or kick him as fast and as often as possible even while attacking. What do you think?

[Thesemindz]

What is the purpose of Kata?


-Rob

[seasoned]

There are no blocks, they, are a waste of time. The secret is to not get hit. What you thought were blocks are just another way of striking.

[Big Don]

Blocking with your face and/or groin is cheating, and will only be tolerated so others may laugh at you.

[Uchinanchu]

There are no blocks, they, are a waste of time. The secret is to not get hit. What you thought were blocks are just another way of striking.

Darn! You gave away the secret! Yes, the 'secret' is to not get hit...and when you do get hit, refer to secret #1 again, because you obviously messed it up somehow.

And I concur with Seasoned. What you thought were blocks, were actually just another way of striking...and redirecting....and grappling....and, oh yeah...blocking.

Make it what you will. Learn the kata. Learn, practice and thouroughly understand the bunkai. Learn the principals. Then, eventually, make it your own.
Gambatte kudasai
‚ª‚ñ‚΂Á‚Ä‚*‚¾‚³‚¢�B

[seasoned]

Darn! You gave away the secret! Yes, the 'secret' is to not get hit...and when you do get hit, refer to secret #1 again, because you obviously messed it up somehow.

And I concur with Seasoned. What you thought were blocks, were actually just another way of striking...and redirecting....and grappling....and, oh yeah...blocking.

Make it what you will. Learn the kata. Learn, practice and thouroughly understand the bunkai. Learn the principals. Then, eventually, make it your own.
Gambatte kudasai
‚ª‚ñ‚΂Á‚Ä‚*‚¾‚³‚¢�B
I gave away the obvious secret, "not get hit", a little extra, "blocks are strikes". You turn around and give away the whole 9 yards. Yes, I agree, Kata, bunkai, principals, and, make it all your own, are the missing ingredients to a fruitful karate experience.

[MJS]

Should each kata end and begin with a block? Should a form be more defensive and more focused on blocking than counter attacking? Should you block than strike, or block and strike at the same time? Or should you basically disregard blocking, believing that the counter attack is the way to go when attacked, your going to get hit or kicked anyway, strike back at the attacker but don't even try to block their hit or kick?

Well, I've experienced most of these trains of thoughts in studying four different forms. Even the one that told me there are no blocks in his system did have some, although very few, and only while striking at the same time. I do agree you should block and strike at the same time, as when your attacked you have very little time to work with, hit him or kick him as fast and as often as possible even while attacking. What do you think?

Depends on the kata and perhaps the art from which the kata comes from. I have some that begin with a block, some that begin with a block and an immediate counter strike and I have some that begin with a defense to a set attack.

IMHO, I would not take a kata for what it shows on face value. Instead, it may take some digging to really see what is in the kata. I'll use the following example that happened to me:

A few years ago, one of the Black Belts affiliated with the school I train at, had George Dillman down for a seminar. First time meeting the man, and I had heard good and bad, however, I wanted to form my own opinion of him, so I went. He started covering some katas that some may not have known, however, I recognized them from my SKK days. I found it very interesting because he was covering things in those forms that were totally different from the way I learned them from my old teacher. Dillmans way made much more sense to me, and the applications were much more practical.

Moral of the story....sometimes you'd be surprised by what you'll learn, if you have someone, who really knows the applications, teaching you. :)

[Joab]

... my SKK days.

What is SKK? Thanks for taking my post seriously, I was getting tired of reading all the sarcasm in the other posts.

[MJS]

... my SKK days.

What is SKK? Thanks for taking my post seriously, I was getting tired of reading all the sarcasm in the other posts.

Shaolin Kempo Karate. I originally started in the Villari system, changed to Parker and now Tracy. Its all the same, in a way, just a different branch of the tree. :)

[Joab]

Shaolin Kempo Karate eh? never heard of it. Thanks.

[Daniel Sullivan]

Should each kata end and begin with a block? Should a form be more defensive and more focused on blocking than counter attacking? Should you block than strike, or block and strike at the same time? Or should you basically disregard blocking, believing that the counter attack is the way to go when attacked, your going to get hit or kicked anyway, strike back at the attacker but don't even try to block their hit or kick?
Since you are addressing this in the context of kata, it will depend upon the kata. In taekwondo, all of the taegeuk forms and Koryo start off with a block of some kind, followed by either a hand strike or a kick. Generally, it is proscribed to perform the block and then to perform the strike. As for ending, all of the taegeuks and Koryo end with a strike of some kind. Once again, this is proscribed. Keep in mind that all taekwondo blocks are damaging blocks designed to injure the attackers, but the kata all begin with the premise of you being attacked first and defending in some fashion.

Changing this means that you are essentially creating a new kata which may or may not be based on a preexisting one.

If your question is about creating a kata, do what you feel is approrpriate.


Well, I've experienced most of these trains of thoughts in studying four different forms. Even the one that told me there are no blocks in his system did have some, although very few, and only while striking at the same time. I do agree you should block and strike at the same time, as when your attacked you have very little time to work with, hit him or kick him as fast and as often as possible even while attacking. What do you think?
In taekwondo, the blocks are actually strikes, as Seasoned described. The block is intended to damage the attacker's limb, in addition to keeping it from hitting you. So in essence, you block and strike simultaneously.

One can also practice to execute the block with one limb while simultaneously striking with the other, though none of the kata that I am familiar with incorporate that.

In terms of an actual attack outside of a sparring scenario, I tend to rely more on movement and avoidance and quick strikes aimed at killing an attacker's mobility. Thankfully, I have had very few occasions to have to test that, but I have had enough to know what works for me.

Much also depends on the nature of the attack and the circumstances in which the attack takes place. If I am trying to protect my children, I will handle myself differently than if I am myself the intended victim; protection of others limits your options, as you must either maintain a proximity to your charge or hold up the attacker to allow your charge to escape. In that scenario, blocking would likely be a greater factor, as your mobility will be limited.

There are other circumstances that may limit your mobility; being attacked while seated at a table, for instance.

Daniel

[shihansmurf]

... my SKK days.

What is SKK? Thanks for taking my post seriously, I was getting tired of reading all the sarcasm in the other posts.

The other posts were taking you seriously.

There is a school of thought that states that there are no blocks in karate. There are a few interpretations of this principle.

1. What appears to be blocks are actually strikes to pressure points in the limbs.

2. The blocking movements are actually, when combined with the footwork, actually ways to escape from various grabs.

3. The blocks and associated re-chambers of such are grabs and are used to enhance the power of strikes, as breaking techniques, or as throws.

4. Insert other interpretation of the blocking movements as appropriate.

The point to the above is is that the is a great deal of depth to the material contained in the kata and there are several different ways to interpret what is there. Some times a Block is just a block, though to paraphrase Freud.

Ian Abernathey (I may have misspelled his first name) has a great series of books on bunkai that illustrates several alternate applications for the blocks in the kata as does George Dillman, although I personally don't believe in the pressure point knock outs, his interpretations of the blocking techs as escape moves in interesting. Another great resource for this Is a book from Rob Redmond that you can order through 24fightingchickens.


Hope this helps
Mark

[Xue Sheng]

Take this whole idea to Xingyiquan and defense and attack are the same things. So all blocks are attacks or combined with an attack.

Old Xingyi saying, attack is defense.

[Thesemindz]

I'll ask again. Completely seriously. Because if you don't have a concrete purpose in mind, the answer to the question is unimportant.

What is the purpose of kata?


-Rob

[jks9199]

In my style's forms -- they all end with a strike or finishing move. Most start with some sort of defensive sequence. After all -- they weren't about teaching you to go out and punch somebody for no reason.

But a block in a form or kata doesn't have to be a block, defining block as "stopping the attacking weapon." And there are some "strikes" that I'd actually call blocks, when you really look at what's happening and what makes sense...

[terryl965]

Blocks are a strike and vice versa. I mean anybody can evade but can you break someone forearm with a block when they are trying to hit you? Also I know alot of people believe in evading like me so I stay away from bars now.http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[seasoned]

... my SKK days.

What is SKK? Thanks for taking my post seriously, I was getting tired of reading all the sarcasm in the other posts.
Sorry for the cut and dry response to your question. I first began to question basic blocks after many hours of kata practice, only to find that they didn't work in sparring. They are great for hand/eye coordination and have value, but because they can be interpreted as strikes also, it makes their presents in kata moves and bunkai, a moot issue when thinking of blocks alone. I wasn't trying to come off as sarcastic, but I don't think I could have done your question justice at face value, as it was asked. :asian:

[searcher]

Rob makes a good point with his question,
what is the purpose of the kata.

I have a ton of different kata/hyung/tul/forms that I run through on a daily basis. Some are heavy on the blocking, some are not. Some block and counter at the same time, some do not. Each kata has its own purpose and intent. Are they wrong? No. It does what the originator wanted it to do.

[Thesemindz]

But what is the purpose of their practice? What did the originator of those kate intend? Why do them? What do they offer? How does one benefit from performing kata?

If we don't know the answers to these questions, then there is no possible way for us to answer the original question.


-Rob

[Xue Sheng]

But what is the purpose of their practice? What did the originator of those kate intend? Why do them? What do they offer? How does one benefit from performing kata?

If we don't know the answers to these questions, then there is no possible way for us to answer the original question.


-Rob

Not all styles have a kata but they all do have a block. But as to kata....here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kata)

[Ironcrane]

In taekwondo, the blocks are actually strikes, as Seasoned described. The block is intended to damage the attacker's limb, in addition to keeping it from hitting you. So in essence, you block and strike simultaneously.

[/QUOTE]

Any chance on getting a demonstration on this? The blocks I learned in my TKD training were way to slow, and complex to be used for just "blocking", So I always figured there was more to them then that. But I haven't been able to find any way to apply the movements to anything.

[Bill Mattocks]

But what is the purpose of their practice? What did the originator of those kate intend? Why do them? What do they offer? How does one benefit from performing kata?

If we don't know the answers to these questions, then there is no possible way for us to answer the original question.


I do not know if it is the 'right' answer, but for me, kata is a framework for me to practice the various blocks, kicks, punches, grabs, throws, and so on that are used in my style of karate.

By practicing within a set form (kata), my movements can be quantified, categorized, compared, contrasted, and most importantly, corrected by my sensei.

I think of it like penmanship classes. There may be hundreds of ways to write a longhand capital 'A', but there is a 'right way' according to my style. Before I can write a letter, I practice my penmanship to make sure I can create a recognizable 'A' consistently.

I also consider articles like this:

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/11/science/peak-performance-why-records-fall.html?sec=&pagewanted=all

It takes (they say) 10,000 hours of practice to master something - anything.

Karate masters of the past were saying the same thing. They didn't fear a man who knew 10,000 kicks. They feared a man who did one kick 10,000 times.

If left to oneself, one may tend to perform the exercises one likes - or the ones that one feels are 'best'. and ignore the others - or at least give them short shrift. Kata forces one to do them all. Over and over.

I deeply dislike the part in Seisan kata where I shift into a Seiuchin stance and squat down. Very hard for me. If left to myself, I probably would not bother with it. But it is part of the kata. It is a great stance-shift. I need to practice it. Since it is part of the kata, I will. Over and over. Sigh.

Anyway, just some thoughts by a newbie. Take it for what it may be worth.

[Grendel308]

Bill, that is one of the best explanations I have ever heard! Thanks.
lori

[Thesemindz]

I do not know if it is the 'right' answer, but for me, kata is a framework for me to practice the various blocks, kicks, punches, grabs, throws, and so on that are used in my style of karate.


Thanks Bill. There is no right answer, just the answer for you.

This is why I asked. The original question was -


Should each kata end and begin with a block?

So I asked what the purpose of kata is. If the purpose of kata is purely performance, then beginning and ending kata with similar movements can represent a balanced visual aesthetic. If this is your approach to kata, that's perfectly acceptable. In fact, many martial arts, and martial artists, take some variation of this approach.

If the purpose of kata is perfection of individual techniques, then beginning and ending kata with blocks doesn't serve a purpose. Blocking itself may have value within a kata, if blocking is a part of the art you practice, but its place within the kata itself is relatively unimportant.

If the purpose of kata is the transmission of effective fighting techniques and philosophy, then the placement of blocks within the form is only important in as much as the placement of those blocks relates to the overall techniques and philosophy being presented.

For instance, in the Amercan Kenpo I was taught, the first Short Form teaches a variety of lessons. One lesson is retreat and defend. So each movement within the kata involves stepping back from the attack with a blocking maneuver. In the first Long Form, one of the lessons being taught is retreat, defend, and counter, so each movement involves stepping back with a blocking maneuver and then executing a counter strike. The fifth Long Form however is a series of techniques primarily defending against punching techniques from 3, 6, and 9, so the blocking techniques in the form are specifically targeted against the attacks the techniques are addressing.

This is why I asked what the purpose of kata is. Because depending on why you are practicing kata, the answer to the original question changes. Ultimately, I think beginning and ending kata with a block is unecessary for my approach to kata, but that doesn't mean it is inappropriate for someone else's approach.

I practice kata for two reasons. One, for relaxation and meditation. For that purpose, the placement and specifics of the motion involved is unimportant because I am simply performing a memorized sequence in an effort to engage alpha brain waves. The second and more important reason is to practice specific techniques and approaches to armed and unarmed combat. For that purpose, the blocks, just like all the other techniques within the form, are only important in so much as they relate to the specific lesson I am practicing at that exact point in the kata.

So, I think in order to answer this question, we must each ask ourselves, what is the purpose of kata? Once you know your answer to that question, you can begin to understand the importance of the placement of movement within the kata you practice.


-Rob

[tellner]

The best blocking can do is delay defeat. As long as you're blocking you're a beat behind the action.

[Bill Mattocks]

The best blocking can do is delay defeat. As long as you're blocking you're a beat behind the action.

I've been thinking about this thread some. I had to go to the dojo last night, so I didn't have a chance to respond right away.

But IMHO (and it is humble, I am a newbie), blocks are far more than delaying tactics, at least in my MA discipline (Isshinryu).

As part of the bunkai we get from our sensei's while doing kata, it becomes clear that blocks, well, block, yes. But they are also used for a variety of other purposes. As some have mentioned, a block can be a punch, a punch can be a block. Also, which I have not yet seen mentioned, a block can change the course of a fight by interrupting the opponent's reactions, both natural and trained.

What do I mean by that? Well, let's say a middle body side block, which we call a 'chudan uke'. You can toss it up like a bang block, but one of the things we're cautioned about is that when bang-blocking, the natural reaction of the opponent is to throw the other hand. Trained fighters do it without thinking - they throw the right (let's say); it is blocked hard, the reaction up their arm tells their brain to toss the left immediately.

But, if you throw the chudan uke in either a soft-hand technique (we take this from Goju-ryu) or using a 'ruddering' technique that intercepts the incoming punch and redirects it to the side but does not intercept it hard, the opponent's opposite-hand punch reflex is disturbed, they may not throw it, or they may have to THINK about throwing it, because the automatic response has been interrupted.

And, when 'ruddering' the incoming punch with the chudan uke, one can also force the opponent to overextend their body towards you - the force they are applying does not get stopped, it continues on past your body to the side and they may lean forward as they complete what feels like a punch to them. The block may be able to become a grab, then a pull in the direction they are already moving. Bringing their jaw directly into line with your other hand. We have also practiced a technique of doing the chudan uke, 'setting' the blocking hand fist, and firing directly into the opponent's face without delay, using their arm to guide our fist right up their punching arm and into the opponent's jaw or nose. It works because the 'soft' intercept of their punching arm does not invoke their automatic reflex to pull the arm back and punch with the other hand.

Your thoughts?

[Xue Sheng]

The best blocking can do is delay defeat. As long as you're blocking you're a beat behind the action.

Again, Xingyiquan; blocking is attacking

[K-man]

A hard 'block' tends to tense the body and hence slow the technique. I would ask this question. In a situation where someone is rushing at you, would you use one of the 'blocks' to stop the attack? If you answer 'yes', then I fear you may be in for a tough time. If you say 'no', then you have answered the question.
For example, jodan uke. Someone is punching for your head. Do you try to deflect the strike up and over your head? No, you deflect the attack past the head and bang, ude uchi to the neck. Some one is punching to your solar plexus. Chudan uke? I think not. Nagashi to deflect and ura uchi or ura haito to the neck. Some one launches at you with a front kick. How about gedan uke? I doubt it Ude uke to deflect followed by tettsui. Each of these techniques practised without an opponent would look like the 'traditional block'.
Just food for thought. :asian:

[Daniel Sullivan]

Should each kata end and begin with a block? Should a form be more defensive and more focused on blocking than counter attacking? Should you block than strike, or block and strike at the same time? Or should you basically disregard blocking, believing that the counter attack is the way to go when attacked, your going to get hit or kicked anyway, strike back at the attacker but don't even try to block their hit or kick?
Here is a question for everyone in this discussion, including the OP: when you say block, do you include parries under the heading of blocking? For example, an outside or inside middle block in taekwondo is more accurately termed a parry, but it is called a block.


The best blocking can do is delay defeat. As long as you're blocking you're a beat behind the action.
Do you include hard blocks in this, which are actually strikes against the opponents limbs? Not agreeing or disagreeing; just trying to get where you are coming from.

Daniel

[seasoned]

In Okinawan GoJu all "blocks" involve both hands. It made no sense to me at first, because while doing a middle block with the right hand, the left would arrive a second before, and so on with all other blocking moves. This double hand movement was explained as a cover hand while the other hand completed the block. It was like we created an x with our blocking hands, while completing our moves. With closed hand blocking, upper, middle, and lower hand, in time, we were taught that this cover hand, was, the parry, which left the assumed blocking hand, to serve other purposes. When the word parry is used, I assume you mean deflect, please correct me if this is not your meaning.

[Daniel Sullivan]

Here is a question for everyone in this discussion, including the OP: when you say block, do you include parries under the heading of blocking? For example, an outside or inside middle block in taekwondo is more accurately termed a block or a parry, but it is called a block.
This should have read as above with the red, but I missed my edit window.

Daniel

[seasoned]

This should have read as above with the red, but I missed my edit window.

Daniel
Yes, everything not a strike was referred to as a block, whether open or closed handed. Parry's, deflections of redirections were introduced once blocks started to take on other meanings.

[K-man]

Here is a question for everyone in this discussion, including the OP: when you say block, do you include parries under the heading of blocking? For example, an outside or inside middle block in taekwondo is more accurately termed a parry, but it is called a block.

Do you include hard blocks in this, which are actually strikes against the opponents limbs? Not agreeing or disagreeing; just trying to get where you are coming from.

Daniel
To me a parry is a deflection, diverting the attack from the intended target and allowing a fraction of a second before the attacker's brain registers that the attack has failed. This gives you that split second to drive home your attack while he is off guard.
My reasoning here is that to his mind his attack is still on track until it is too late.
IMO, a 'hard' block, as opposed to a strike, will stop an attack by clashing with the attacker, warning him that his attack has failed, causing him to launch the next attack.
So in answer to the question "when you say block, do you include parries under the heading of blocking?" my answer is that they are two different animals.
For example, 'Nagashi Uke' is a pure deflection, in no way a block. I believe a lot of confusion arises because we were taught that uke means block when in fact it means receive.
I am trying to incorporate more of the principles of blending with the attacker rather than clashing.
The strikes against the attacker's limbs are just that, strikes. As stated by 'seasoned':


In Okinawan GoJu all "blocks" involve both hands.
The first hand diverts or parries the attack. The second can be a strike to a limb or any other appropriate target as required.

As 'seasoned', 'geezer' and a number of others here know. When you get to that magic number and you're not as fast and strong as you once were, you don't want to waste energy clashing with a younger, stronger and maybe faster opponent. The flip side is that there is more stored up top that makes you work smarter, not harder. :asian:

[Bill Mattocks]

For example, 'Nagashi Uke' is a pure deflection, in no way a block. I believe a lot of confusion arises because we were taught that uke means block when in fact it means receive.

We were never taught that 'uke' means 'block'. We are taught that 'chudan uke' for example, has a thousand applications. I've learned the bunkai of a few, and I like them a lot. They're all 'chudan uke', whether they bang-block, parry, slip, redirect, or whatever word anyone wants to use.

The other night, we were shown one of the the applications of gedan barai, in which it can be used to block (well, parry, if one must) an incoming punch, rudder the punch down and to the side, bringing the opponent's face to chest level and wide open for a reverse punch from the opposite arm. I had not seen the application, perhaps because I was initially taught to 'cross over' and 'stack' my blocking fist on top of the obi-high fist on the opposite side. Now that I've been doing that for six months, my sensei showed me how to cross over with the blocking hand chest-high, and use the downward-diagonal blocking motion to take out an incoming chest-level punch OR a kick. Suddenly gedan barai seems much more useful to me.

Anyway, these are the words of a newbie, and with the utmost respect for the training of others, particularly those who have more experience than myself, the idea that one should scorn blocks and simply evade punches or trade blows with an assailant seems odd to me. Professional warriers carried shields for a reason. Manly man man man-ness may make it seem weak to block an incoming punch, but it doesn't bother me to do so. If a kick was coming at my snarglies, I'd rather block assuming I could not evade, as opposed to taking the kick because I'm just so tough.

[Daniel Sullivan]

To me a parry is a deflection, diverting the attack from the intended target and allowing a fraction of a second before the attacker's brain registers that the attack has failed. This gives you that split second to drive home your attack while he is off guard.
My reasoning here is that to his mind his attack is still on track until it is too late.
IMO, a 'hard' block, as opposed to a strike, will stop an attack by clashing with the attacker, warning him that his attack has failed, causing him to launch the next attack.
So in answer to the question "when you say block, do you include parries under the heading of blocking?" my answer is that they are two different animals.
In principle, I agree, though in most stiking arts, you do not have separtely termed parries from what I have seen. This is definitely the case in taekwondo. Parries are considered blocks that are not 'hard' blocks. Thus I can use an outside middle block as a hard block or as a parry, or as a strike to the opponent's limbs, but the technique is still considered an outside middle block.

Some blocks that we practice in both taekwondo and hapkido are circular blocks that really are parries, but they are called blocks. It is simply that the terms are not broken down in the same way. Parries are termed as soft blocks.

The reason that I asked is that in a conversation such as this, it is important to understand that most people in a striking art are going to group blocks and parries together with regards to terminology, even though the two are distinct, which is why I asked the question.

Daniel.

[seasoned]

idea that one should scorn blocks and simply evade punches or trade blows with an assailant seems odd to me. Professional warriers carried shields for a reason. Manly man man man-ness may make it seem weak to block an incoming punch, but it doesn't bother me to do so. If a kick was coming at my snarglies, I'd rather block assuming I could not evade, as opposed to taking the kick because I'm just so tough.
When the transition from block to block with many more applications involved, with that block, came to light, our thinking also changed. My Sensei used to say the best "block" was to not be there, when the attack arrived. Thus the on set of Tai Sabaki took form. Blocking takes on many forms also, and can be accomplished by proper timing and distancing, as apposed to actually banging that leg or arm out of the way. In my beginning stages of training the foundations of hand eye coordination were taught with stationary and moving drills, with much blocking involved. As a step (1) in the not getting hit phase of training. In advanced training it is easy to say that there are no blocks in martial arts when in fact there are, just not the way we understood them to be. So yes there are blocks, and yes there are no blocks.

[chinto]

[/b]
When the transition from block to block with many more applications involved, with that block, came to light, our thinking also changed. My Sensei used to say the best "block" was to not be there, when the attack arrived. Thus the on set of Tai Sabaki took form. Blocking takes on many forms also, and can be accomplished by proper timing and distancing, as apposed to actually banging that leg or arm out of the way. In my beginning stages of training the foundations of hand eye coordination were taught with stationary and moving drills, with much blocking involved. As a step (1) in the not getting hit phase of training. In advanced training it is easy to say that there are no blocks in martial arts when in fact there are, just not the way we understood them to be. So yes there are blocks, and yes there are no blocks.


yep i agree, but again it is, but it is not a block a lot of times. Sometimes that block is a strike or brake, other times its a cover with tai sabaki, and other times its just a block... all are valid.

[Touch Of Death]

Wouldn't it stand to reason that your strikes should be done in such a way that they act as blocks or parries?
Sean