Reverse Gravitational Marriage?

[Rich_Hale]

Without defending his (Mr. Hale's) loss of decorum, . . .

Good day to you Dr. Dave, I will take you polite and professional admonishment to heart as well.

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

Mr. Hawkins:

I enjoy your posts, as well as those by Mr. Hale. You mentioned in one of them that you would not respond to his apparent attack with one of your own. This comment is followed by several posts, leveling poorly veiled passive-aggressive barbs at Mr. Hales underlying position and presentation. Without defending his loss of decorum, I would also like to encourage you to regain your own.

Increasingly, the better minds in kenpo aim at each other, creating derisive and divisive atmospheres between practitioners. I would like to invite interested parties to join in our collective hobby with the knowledge that they'll find themselves in an honorable arena, populated by scholarly martial gentry. I am not without fault, and am (more frequently than I care to admit) among the first to drop courtesy...particularly when my blood sugar is low.

Nevertheless, I think some higher grounds are worth aiming for. Perhaps we can all help each other up to the next level, so that "kenpo" becomes synonymous with minds working and growing together. I know I can use the help.

Best Regards,

Dave

Point taken, but for the official record. My subsequent posts were not ONLY for the eyes of Mr. Hale. To be blunt, he was at the very bottom of the list since he at the very least had the gumption to post his thoughts in public no matter how I feel about them. There are a great number who prefered to read what's posted here and respond via phone calls and private e-mail to me. So I figured I'd give them somemore things to read and think about. Everything is not always as it appears and "poorly veiled" is usually a sure sign that no attempt to conceal anything was made. After much thought I changed my mind about letting it go. My honor and integrity as a martial artist and as a man are things that I hold in high importance and I don't take too well to have them attacked by anyone. Especially not people whom I'd shown nothing but respect too at that point. But for obviously letting you down I sincerely apologize. As for the "others" I have no apologies for "showing one of my teeth."

 

[Sapper6]

"A martial artist who boasts of being IN the art longer than another forgets that the person being accused may have been AT the art longer than he."

. :asian:

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Messeur's Hale & Hawkins:

I am more than pleased that my encouragements to raise the bar have been met optimistically. Thank you for your honest and quick replies. Viewing them leads me to believe there is yet hope that future generations of kenpo students can find men of honor with which to train. My hat's off to you both.

There should be safe places to air an opinion, err with opinions, and grow. Much more preferable than shoring up sides as seen on other kenpo boards.

In full salute,

Dave Crouch

 

[Michael Billings]

I am encouraged by your getting things back on track yourselves ... as members of this board, and as Kenpoist.

Kudos,

Left over Right,
-Michael

 

[kenpoworks]

.........Left over Right.......
-Michael

Wow Michael...flash backs... "ok lets finish here left over right"......Thanks...Rich

 

[DavidCC]

OK, just to kick the hive a bit...

We've discusses REVERSE gravitational marriage...

what is OPPOSITE gravitational marriage?

 

[jonah2]

...what is OPPOSITE gravitational marriage?

May be I was confused when I described what I thought was REVERSE in post #27 - may be this is OPPOSITE gravitational Marriage

Jonah wrote in post #27:

"For me the reverse gravitational marriage is to use the principle of marriage of gravity but in the reverse or opposite way. With marriage of gravity we settle our weight with the strike of our weapon into the target utilising the additional effect of gravity and therefore increasing back up mass and power transference.

With reverse gravitational marriage – as I see it – we use the exact same effect of gravity to increase power transference to the target but by dropping the target onto the weapon.

In my opinion the straightening of the legs for a reverse head-butt is not reverse marriage of gravity but is back up mass. As an example in my mind for reverse marriage of gravity try the back breaker when we bring the attacker down onto our grounded and stationary knee.

I agree with ‘teej’ that reverse gravity does not exist but IMHO the term reverse gravitational marriage does not mean to reverse the effects of gravity itself, but, to use the principal of gravitational marriage but oppositely ie body to weapon not weapon to body."


I dunno - As long as you know these thing work - thats the main thing.

jonah

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

May be I was confused when I described what I thought was REVERSE in post #27 - may be this is OPPOSITE gravitational Marriage

Jonah wrote in post #27:

"For me the reverse gravitational marriage is to use the principle of marriage of gravity but in the reverse or opposite way. With marriage of gravity we settle our weight with the strike of our weapon into the target utilising the additional effect of gravity and therefore increasing back up mass and power transference.

With reverse gravitational marriage – as I see it – we use the exact same effect of gravity to increase power transference to the target but by dropping the target onto the weapon.

In my opinion the straightening of the legs for a reverse head-butt is not reverse marriage of gravity but is back up mass. As an example in my mind for reverse marriage of gravity try the back breaker when we bring the attacker down onto our grounded and stationary knee.

I agree with ‘teej’ that reverse gravity does not exist but IMHO the term reverse gravitational marriage does not mean to reverse the effects of gravity itself, but, to use the principal of gravitational marriage but oppositely ie body to weapon not weapon to body."


I dunno - As long as you know these thing work - thats the main thing.

jonah

Sounds well thought out to me as definition of "opposite marriage of gravity" Salute and keep thinking.:asian:

 

[Doc]

I've had my share of chuckles with this one. I've seen the explanations all over the place attempting to assign physics and vertical planes and strikes in all manner of directions that oppose this and that ............. all before I looked at this forum. I was taught a very simple explanation by Mr. Parker.

In the very conceptual Gravitational Marraige:

"The utilization of your own body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

In the even more conceptual Reverse Gravitational Marraige:

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

May I please be allowed to say "Duh!?" On a conceptual level, everyone is correct.

 

[Jagdish]

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

Could you give a couple of examples of this?

Yours,

Jagdish

P.S.:Good to have you back!

 

[parkerkarate]

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

Could you give a couple of examples of this?

Yours,

Jagdish

P.S.:Good to have you back!

I do not mean to be rude but I have a couple of examples, one is Glancing Salute and the other could be Deceptive Panther. In Glancing Salute you are craning the opponent down from the back of the kneck while delivering a right knee, and then as you plant you are delivering a sort of upward elbow under the chin or to the troat, which ever target you like better. Then in Deceptive Panther after you rotate out of your twist stance after bringing the opponents head down with two hammer fists, you deliver a right lifting inverted back knuckle.

I could be toatally off subject but this what came to mind.

 

[teej]

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions." [/QUOTE]


Doc, Wouldn't this just be considered "borrowed force" ??

Thanks Teej

 

[parkerkarate]

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

Doc, Wouldn't this just be considered "borrowed force" ??

Thanks Teej[/QUOTE]

You have a point

 

[jonah2]

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

Doc, Wouldn't this just be considered "borrowed force" ??

Thanks Teej[/QUOTE]

I agree with you. If you think about it, utilization of YOUR body weight could be considered using back up mass, but, the actions in terms of gravitational marriage and reverse gravitational marriage are back up mass and borrowed force with the additional effects of inhacement by gravity so therefore the use of a seperate term.

IMHO anyway for what its worth,

jonah

 

[DavidCC]

I've had my share of chuckles with this one. I've seen the explanations all over the place attempting to assign physics and vertical planes and strikes in all manner of directions that oppose this and that ............. all before I looked at this forum. I was taught a very simple explanation by Mr. Parker.

In the very conceptual Gravitational Marraige:

"The utilization of your own body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

In the even more conceptual Reverse Gravitational Marraige:

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

May I please be allowed to say "Duh!?" On a conceptual level, everyone is correct.

Well, you all should feel silly becasue I guessed the right answer all the way back in post #5 hahahahaa
artyon:

(that is, assuming Doc has posted the "right answer" )

 

[Doc]

Doc, Wouldn't this just be considered "borrowed force" ??

I agree with you. If you think about it, utilization of YOUR body weight could be considered using back up mass, but, the actions in terms of gravitational marriage and reverse gravitational marriage are back up mass and borrowed force with the additional effects of inhacement by gravity so therefore the use of a seperate term.

IMHO anyway for what its worth,

jonah

Everything you do has a "gravitational and "mass" component to it - if that is how you wish to approach the discussion. Every time you take a step or sit down you utilize "gravitational marriage," 'back up mass," body alignment," "stance changes," etc. None of these conceptual terms are mutually exclusive of each other, and many more are inclusive or actually contradict each other. So what? The "outer rim" contradicts the "box." Isn't a "scoop" a "hook" on a vertical plane? Isn't a "whip" the tail end of a "snap?"

If we were to shift our focus to actual mechanics of execution there would be less room for misunderstandings and misinterpretations. We must be grounded in the reality of and the understanding of actual physics as it applies to human anatomy. We never "disengage" from gravity so how can we "marry" something already present? It is simply the expression of an idea of how, and the various ways we might utilize our own mass, and an attackers mass to our advantage and his disadvantage. That is the real discussion.

I was taught to create terms to describe function and stay away as much as possible from conceptual descriptive terms. They will always be subject to extreme interpretations. Most of us would be comfortable that everyone would "conceptually" understand the term "kick." The argument is in the specifics of actual function. We most certainly will disagree with "how" we execute a specific kick.

What you ultimately decide "Gravitational Marriage," or its "Reverse" actually means and how its utilized is up to you. Make it work and you can do what the Chinese did and call it, "weight falling from the sky that really **** Edited to conform to MT's Profanity Rules with you up."

This is why conceptual arguments are ultimately silly. It is all about the study of ideas and how they can be utilized to enhance ones understanding of what they do. Discussing the the theory of relativity, the speed of light, and its relationship to the possibility of time travel is an interesting discussion. When talking about someone trying to kick your butt, you need to get more real.

Hey let's talk about the conceptual differences between a "leap," a "jump" and a "hop?" - NOT! Show me you can get out of the way, and then you give it a name.

Didn't I already say, "Conceptually, everyone is right?"

See you gonna make me say it again. "Duh!"

 

[Doc]

OK, just to kick the hive a bit...

We've discusses REVERSE gravitational marriage...

what is OPPOSITE gravitational marriage?

Another less than uselful idea.

 

[kenposikh]

"The utilization of your opponent's body weight to enhance your strike or actions."

Doc, Wouldn't this just be considered "borrowed force" ??

Thanks Teej[/QUOTE]

SImply put only if it's voluntary i.e. if your opponent for example pulls you towards them and you execute a straight thrust punch to their sternum as in raking mace then this is borrowed force, however as in flashing wings by the use of gravitional marriage on your oppents knee you are involuntarily sending them downwards to me your final strike coming up hence not borrowed force as they did not intend to go that was

Amrik

p.s. Hi Doc got you mail just been busy will reply soon.

 

[Doc]

Doc, Wouldn't this just be considered "borrowed force" ??
jonah

Hi Jonah. I don't want to get too deep into these conceptual arguments for reasons already stated, but ... If someone were to attack you, they would be creating a/the force that you would "borrow" to use against them. When you create the force with their body and use it against them, its another story. OK Buddy?