non-telegraph without loosing power, to what extent can training keep power?

[Fungus]

This is a question for you more experienced.

Many kicks, such as mawashi geri, or ushiro mawashi or ushiro geri can be done in a few ways.

Some ways are "easier", some ways may give more "power", and some ways usually implying not moving your other foot alot, but just spinning on the spot, is less telegraphing, but I feel you loose power.
For example, muay thai mawashi, often side steps with the lead foot, to gaiin power power when slamming your shin into the opponent.
Also ushiro geri, you can side step (beginners method) or you can first shift balance and then turn on the spot, for less telegraph etc.

My question for say ushiro geri (turning back kick), is if you perfect your techiniques - can you make the difference in power zero, or would it, even if you master this kick very WELL that there is STILL a compromise in power?

I feel that, where I am right now as a beginner - I can perform both - but in the advanced version I loose ALOT of power but I think with perfected balance, I can add more POWER into the kick without loosing balance. But the question is - will it EVER be as powerful as the telegraphing tecnhique, or will it will it always be capped to some %power of the telegraphing technique? My hunch is that there will always be a significant difference, am I wrong?

 

[Dirty Dog]

There is always a tradeoff, but as your skill improves it lessens. How much depends on how good you get.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Power and speed are always a tradeoff. A fully compressed kick is always more powerful that a partial compressed kick. The question is, do you have time to do that full compression in fighting?

 

[isshinryuronin]

Some ways are "easier", some ways may give more "power", and some ways usually implying not moving your other foot alot, but just spinning on the spot, is less telegraphing, but I feel you loose power.

There is always a tradeoff, but as your skill improves it lessens. How much depends on how good you get.

There is often a trade-off with power vs speed and telegraphing, but how much power does one really need? Enough to blast thru the defense, to disrupt, to cause serious injury? If one can execute a strong technique, a small loss of power may not be that important. I'd place a higher priority on speed over power most all of the time.

A positional adjustment in preparation of a technique can telegraph it, but only if the opponent sees it. One can mask the prep move by providing some distraction such as a feint, change of guard, or even a kiai. Timing the technique to when the opponent is unable to respond due to his position or balance can also be helpful.

 

[Holmejr]

Explosiveness from standstill, I would think to be more effective in a typical self defense situation. That first exhale (kiai) along with good technique doesn’t necessarily have to be the most powerful, just overwhelming, hopefully putting you in control over the attacker.

 

[Fungus]

Power and speed are always a tradeoff. A fully compressed kick is always more powerful that a partial compressed kick. The question is, do you have time to do that full compression in fighting?

As for the ushiro geri, my limited experience is that, the full power version does work in fighting, but only - provided it's disguised by a feint.

Optionally with an aggersive style, the full power version of some kicks, one can attempt to strike through the normal guard if you have solid balance. So forcing the opponent has is to move out of the way. The back kick is powerful to kick away any arms or even elbows in their way.

 

[Fungus]

There is often a trade-off with power vs speed and telegraphing, but how much power does one really need? Enough to blast thru the defense, to disrupt, to cause serious injury? If one can execute a strong technique, a small loss of power may not be that important. I'd place a higher priority on speed over power most all of the time.

A positional adjustment in preparation of a technique can telegraph it, but only if the opponent sees it. One can mask the prep move by providing some distraction such as a feint, change of guard, or even a kiai. Timing the technique to when the opponent is unable to respond due to his position or balance can also be helpful.

Good points indeed, but my question was mainly a matter of principle as well.

For head kicks, speed is more important for sure as you don't aim to actually break the skull. But as I have difficuly doing head level kicks, I focus on liver or body kicks or leg kicks. And for them to have any effect, power is needed, otherwise the strikes have not effect.

There is a hugh different between quick leg kick using the foot, or a muay thai kick. If you are conditioned you just take some kicks, but you don't just take strong shin kicks, as you will be limping.

And in fighting I notice that power can be a strategy to control distance by fear. If someone has a powerful technique that isn't easily blocked, you really try to avoid that my staying out of the striking range.

Both the spinning back kicks are also some of my favourite techniques, because they are something I can do with minimal back pain. There are many more common kicks that i have a hard time to do due to my back. So I better be very good instead at those limited things I can do, at least thats the idea.

 

[Fungus]

limted experience from the fighting class is that everyone naturally tends to adop a style that is optimal for their physics. If you are quick like a cobra and have good cardio, then those usually tend to rely on speed and perhaps fatigue the opponent and more often move around alot. I am not like that. I am strong, but have mediocre cardio, so my style is to maintan stable balance, and whenver possible I block instead of jumping away (to save my own energy), I eat the medium strikes, I don't jump out of the way to avoid a strike I can eat. Instead I focus on countering with fewer, by harder attacks.

But this is not to sugest this is ideal, it's just what works for me. I get tired fast! So I save my energy for power counters, I avoid wasting energy on evading weak strikes.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I save my energy for power counters, I avoid wasting energy on evading weak strikes.

That's a good strategy.

In one challenge fight, I only threw 1 punch and finished the fight. I was a white belt in a YMCA Karate class. The YMCA Karate instructor's young brother just got his black belt in TKD. He challenged me in a match in front of my whole Karate classmates. At that time, I had no idea what TKD was. I put myself in 100% defense mode. He liked to throw side kick at my chest. I blocked his kick with one hand, I then dropped my elbow on his instep and ankle (metal against wood strategy). After I had hurt his feet so badly that he could not kick me anymore. I jumped in, one punch on his face and end that fight. I left that Karate class after that day. Those were some good old days to brag about.

In another thread, I suggest someone to spend 80% energy in defense. I did that myself and it worked. If my opponent's punch/kick cannot land on me, I will consider myself as a winner already.

 

[Fungus]

In another thread, I suggest someone to spend 80% energy in defense. I did that myself and it worked. If my opponent's punch/kick cannot land on me, I will consider myself as a winner already.

The problem I persoanlly have with that strategy is - when does the fight "end"? Either it ends when something knocked the other one out - or in sparring or competition - when the bell rings. I think in a real fight there is no bell.

So as having not so good cardio endurance, I see it's to my disadvantage if the fight takes long. So I would opt, to finish it before I get too tired. I willingly accept some bruises (it takes no physical energy, just mental strength), and trade that in for saving my energy. But you can't take infinitely many bruises in the same fight as it then starts to wear you down physically eventually, especially if they strike at hte same spot, so there is a balance as well.

 

[Fungus]

The problem I persoanlly have with that strategy is - when does the fight "end"? Either it ends when something knocked the other one out - or in sparring or competition - when the bell rings. I think in a real fight there is no bell.

Of course in sparring when practicing strategues that supposedly is max power, you don't use full power. So what could have been a finishing blow, still means the sparring continues, and they could then counter the power attack - but which wouldn't happen in a real situation. But your opponent understand that "had this been full power" I would have been out. This is why the sparring isn't exactly realistic. In our sparring we usually greets the partner with a confirming "osu" if we feel that the opponent lands something that could have been a KO if it was at full force.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

This is a question for you more experienced.

Many kicks, such as mawashi geri, or ushiro mawashi or ushiro geri can be done in a few ways.

Some ways are "easier", some ways may give more "power", and some ways usually implying not moving your other foot alot, but just spinning on the spot, is less telegraphing, but I feel you loose power.
For example, muay thai mawashi, often side steps with the lead foot, to gaiin power power when slamming your shin into the opponent.
Also ushiro geri, you can side step (beginners method) or you can first shift balance and then turn on the spot, for less telegraph etc.

My question for say ushiro geri (turning back kick), is if you perfect your techiniques - can you make the difference in power zero, or would it, even if you master this kick very WELL that there is STILL a compromise in power?

I feel that, where I am right now as a beginner - I can perform both - but in the advanced version I loose ALOT of power but I think with perfected balance, I can add more POWER into the kick without loosing balance. But the question is - will it EVER be as powerful as the telegraphing tecnhique, or will it will it always be capped to some %power of the telegraphing technique? My hunch is that there will always be a significant difference, am I wrong?

There is often more involved. When you kick, you are vulnerable to an extent because you are on one leg. You can protect yourself with speed, position, and by off-balancing the attacker, or any combination.

For example, a stepping otoshigeri, similar to some sorts of mawashigeri, one steps off the embusen to change one's angular momentum and potentially to trap the attackers lead hand, pulling him off-balance just prior to the kick being launched. It also increases the kicker's stability and the power of the kick. These things work together. Timing is key.

Each type of kick has its purpose and appropriate time to deliver. Not every kick has to be delivered at maximum power to be effective. Sometimes technique and speed are more important. For example, a shobakonate kick delivered low and to the side or back of an attacker's knee. Power is less important than collapsing the person's knee in the direction it's already bending. So speed and focus are primary here.

 

[Dirty Dog]

That's a good strategy.

In one challenge fight, I only threw 1 punch and finished the fight. I was a white belt in a YMCA Karate class. The YMCA Karate instructor's young brother just got his black belt in TKD. He challenged me in a match in front of my whole Karate classmates. At that time, I had no idea what TKD was. I put myself in 100% defense mode. He liked to throw side kick at my chest. I blocked his kick with one hand, I then dropped my elbow on his instep and ankle (metal against wood strategy). After I had hurt his feet so badly that he could not kick me anymore. I jumped in, one punch on his face and end that fight. I left that Karate class after that day. Those were some good old days to brag about.

In another thread, I suggest someone to spend 80% energy in defense. I did that myself and it worked. If my opponent's punch/kick cannot land on me, I will consider myself as a winner already.

I think I saw that movie...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The problem I persoanlly have with that strategy is - when does the fight "end"? Either it ends when something knocked the other one out - or in sparring or competition - when the bell rings. I think in a real fight there is no bell.

One of my students used this strategy in a street fight. His opponent tried to punch him. But none of the punches could land on my student. Finally, his opponent gave up. Nobody got hurt. Everybody lived happy ever after.

If your opponent finds out that

- it's hard for him to hurt you, and
- you have no intention to hurt him,

the fight could end peacefully. No body injury. No lawsuit. Will that be nice?

 

[Fungus]

In a real self defense fight I agree de-escalation is preferred. For myself I am not short tempered at all, on the contrary. So I am not worried about doing something hastily, that wont happen. Knocking someone out is certainly not the first move when a troublemaker approaces you. But I've never been in a street fight and don't plan to either.

So I was thinking of the hypothetical situation where you somehow get to the point of no return where you are seriously threatened and get the feeling that this opponent simply will not give up and one of us is going down, and you have no way to escape. This is the vision I have in mind when thinking about the fighting system. In some sense, you train for something you really beg that you never have to use!

 

[JowGaWolf]

For example, muay thai mawashi, often side steps with the lead foot, to gaiin power power when slamming your shin into the opponent.

Speaking as someone who side steps. It has less to do either power and more to do with body mechanics and having a "plan B" the purpose stepping side ways is to get off centerline so you don't get hit when kicking. There are a lot of other benefits to a side step but that is the main one. Just to step off center to avoid a possible incoming strike.

Side step should be hidden by your attack. Footwork should never be done in a way that tells what attack is coming. Either your step is being done too far away from your opponent or your attack is out of sysnc with your footwork.

A sparring video illustrating your question would be more useful to giving you the answer that best fits what you are experiencing.

Sometime we don't get our self analysis correct because we can't see ourselves in 3rd person while we fight. It's possible that something else is causing your concern that has nothing to do with power.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Knocking someone out is certainly not the first move when a troublemaker approaces you.

IMO, to take your opponent down and take off at the same time can be a good strategy. You make sure that your opponent can have a comfortable fall without his head hitting the ground.

Here is an example of "take down and take off".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

For example, muay thai mawashi, often side steps with the lead foot, to gaiin power power when slamming your shin into the opponent.

You can use "sidestep and spin" to move yourself outside of your opponent's attacking path. The "wheeling step" is very useful in MA. In other words, when you use sidestep, you may try to set up your next attack.

 

[JowGaWolf]

There is often more involved.

This is the norm when it comes to the application of techniques. People seek powerful kicks and punches and right away I just want to say that there's more to it than just power. Power is often relative. A powerful strike that is blocked is not the same as a less powerful punch that lands without restriction. If I could choose between the two, I would rather be highly skilled at striking people when they least expect it and where they least expect it. This would make my strikes more effective and more dangerous than just having a lot of power that I'm trying to blast through defensive. The only power that i greater than that would be one that destroys anything that it lands on and that's not realistic.

 

[JowGaWolf]

You make sure that your opponent can have a comfortable fall without his head hitting the ground.

In training yes, in self-defense no. I don't think about the safety of my attacker if I'm the one in danger. If I have the luxury to think about their safety then that would mean that I'm significantly at an advantage and can hurt my attacker but my attacker cannot hurt me. Unfortunately I'm not that good at martial arts where I can afford to think of my abilities at this level.

In all conflicts that I get in, I naturally assume that I'm at a disadvantage. It's safer for me to approach as if I'm at a disadvantage at the beginning than to assume that I'm at an advantage. The advantage is what I want to have and for me that's not something that I start with. The fact that someone wants to physically harm you, is your opponent telling you that they have an advantage over you.