Salt vs fighting in the real world

[girlbug2]

If you glance on Salt's IMDB message board you'll find a thread denouncing Angelina for being anorexic, as well as a claim that arms and legs as "bony" as hers couldn't hold up in a fight (claiming they'd break when she tried to strike or block against the big guys she is fending off and smashing right and left).

While I know there's a lot of ignorance in the general public about MA, it does raise a good question as to how much flesh is needed to reinforce or pad one's bones. Is only muscle of value, or does fat help (she asked hopefully...)?

Also, to anybody else who has seen this movie, what are your thoughts on Evelyn's fighting and the likelihood that somebody her size could pull of that kind of widespread mayhem? I lost count of the men she laid low, very quickly, often with only one well placed strike. Very impressive; but in the real world, is anybody that great of a fighter? I kept thinking that if she were that good, she didn't belong in the CIA but straight at the top of UFC, raking in the cash and glory.

 

[Omar B]

Wow, totally not what I expected from reading that thread title.

I guess what you are trying to ask is how much adipose tissue or muscle does one need to protect the bones. The real answer is non, if your bone is gonna break from a blow it's just gonna break. At that point it's more about the mechanics of accepting the strike's energy so that it does not break the bone (if you are blocking properly).

 

[Big Don]

Wow, totally not what I expected from reading that thread title.

Yeah, I was thinking salt would be a great thing to throw in your attacker's eyes in a pinch...

 

[Omar B]

Yeah, I was thinking salt would be a great thing to throw in your attacker's eyes in a pinch...

My thoughts exactly!

 

[BloodMoney]

Hollywood fighting is generally bs. Even in something like the Bourne series (which were okay choreography wise) theres a few moments that make me go "Hmmmm okaaay".

Its not just the moves that are bs, its generally the consistency of the fighter (ie: kicking everyones **** never getting a scratch on them) or the situation (ie: fighting on a very precarious position with no regard for their own safety or fighting 5+ opponents at once etc).

I havent seen Salt but I can tell ya a borderline anorexic 40 year old women is (generally) going to kick about as much **** as she looks like she could kick (ie: none). The average black ops agent a la CIA's PAD or SAD (or whatever Salt/Bourne/Bond is supposed to be) doesnt spend heaps of time on unarmed combat. They prefer that you are smart, speak multiple languages, retain masses of information and recall it all without omitting small details etc. Think of the average Marine. Theyd rather he be trained in his primary use (a rifleman) than martial arts. Hes not a martial artist, hes a rifleman. Unarmed combat isnt really a massive amount of what they do, its tiny. Could they still kick your ****? You betcha but thats because hes a fit, confident well conditioned soldier not because he learned split kicks and fancy ********. Same goes for black ops agents, theres more important things to spend time (and money) on training than kung fu. A CIA PAD operator may have come from the military, but he isnt an **** kicking machine for hire. He is hired as a clandestine unit and is prized for his intellect and local knowledge etc...no use in training him to be a kung fu badarse

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I believe that padding over bones is important. The style I train in, Isshin-Ryu, makes that assertion as well.

Our blocks are different than the blocks of other Okinawan styles. We turn the hand so that we present the 'meat' of the arm to the threat, rather than doing a 'bone block'. Some other styles do something similar as I understand it; I am told that Shotokan head blocks are first received on the 'meat' and then 'rolled' up to stretch out the opponent and open them up to a strike. But one of Isshin-Ryu's distinguishing features is that our blocks are not bone blocks.

My Sensei teaches that the blocks used by other styles are quite effective, he doesn't put them down or say that they don't work. Great respect for other styles here. Just that we do it a bit differently, there is a reason why we do so, and for us, we believe this is a better way. Block with the meat, not the bone.

And yeah, if you got no meat, that might be a problem.

For me, it isn't and won't ever be a problem. Hehehehe.

 

[girlbug2]

That's how my blocks are trained as well Bill.

At the very least she'd come away with some massive bruisin' when it was over. It's Hollywood though, not one bruise or scratch on her entire body after the brawl.

 

[Steve]

I haven't done any striking in a while, but isn't the idea of a "block" more to redirect or deflect than to actually stop a blow?

Regarding the movie, I thought it was more like a superhero movie than anything resembling actual combat. Sort of like the Transporter wasn't about actual driving.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I haven't done any striking in a while, but isn't the idea of a "block" more to redirect or deflect than to actually stop a blow?

It can be. My very limited understanding is that blocks can be punches, punches can be blocks, both can be used to deflect, trap, redirect, or (sometimes) just flat-out stop. Depends on the circumstances, right?

If I understand my training correctly, we're told to block hard with soft, and soft with hard. So we might counter a soft technique with a very hard block that is just that - a block and nothing else. Sometimes called a 'bang block'.

 

[Big Don]

I was taught that a block is a bucking force used to stop a weapon in motion without an intent to hurt. A block can also be a strike, "Never block when you can strike"
A parry is a riding force used to redirect a weapon in motion

 

[Nomad]

I believe that padding over bones is important. The style I train in, Isshin-Ryu, makes that assertion as well.

Our blocks are different than the blocks of other Okinawan styles. We turn the hand so that we present the 'meat' of the arm to the threat, rather than doing a 'bone block'. Some other styles do something similar as I understand it; I am told that Shotokan head blocks are first received on the 'meat' and then 'rolled' up to stretch out the opponent and open them up to a strike. But one of Isshin-Ryu's distinguishing features is that our blocks are not bone blocks.

My Sensei teaches that the blocks used by other styles are quite effective, he doesn't put them down or say that they don't work. Great respect for other styles here. Just that we do it a bit differently, there is a reason why we do so, and for us, we believe this is a better way. Block with the meat, not the bone.

And yeah, if you got no meat, that might be a problem.

For me, it isn't and won't ever be a problem. Hehehehe.

Part of the reason of blocking with the meat rather than the bone is to stop you and your partner from seriously hurting each other when doing repetitive drills. Blocking a punch with a bone (eg. elbow) can be very effective, and probably stops the person from throwing a second punch with that hand for awhile.

If you do meet a strike with a bone, make sure the bone you're using is bigger and tougher than the ones your opponent is using (forearm to forearm is very risky for both of you, finger bones to elbow has a clear winner every time)

It is also easier to deflect using the meat (usually accompanied by a twisting motion) on the block rather than simply smashing your arm into your opponents.

 

[Nomad]

I haven't done any striking in a while, but isn't the idea of a "block" more to redirect or deflect than to actually stop a blow?

I've always liked the block as a way to punish your opponent for trying to hit you. It is not that difficult for a well placed and timed block to break an incoming arm. OTOH, if you're just wanting not to get hit, movement or deflection are MUCH easier to foil the attack.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Blocking a punch with a bone (eg. elbow) can be very effective, and probably stops the person from throwing a second punch with that hand for awhile.

I do not want to give the impression that the bone-block is not effective. We use a different method, that's all. Our sensei says that yes, other methods are quite effective. Hope you didn't take it the wrong way.

As to stopping a person from throwing a second punch - yes, but no. Allow me to explain.

In class last night, we practiced something we often do in the way of self-defense drills. Intercept an incoming punch with a small circular 'soft' block, then throw a hard lunge punch or uppercut counter. As sensei demonstrated to us, a punch blocked with a hard block can cause the opponent to automatically throw the other hand; it triggers the 'one-two' combination, as the opponent's mind tells them that punch 'one' has either landed or been defeated, time to throw punch 'two'. When the 'one' is sort of 'rubbed away' with a small circular soft block, the opponent's mind does not make that connection instantly, which delays their 'two' punch with the other hand. This gives you that micro-second to step in and land your counterpunch.

EDIT: The example above is actually straight out of the Isshin-Ryu 'Naihanchi' kata.

I meant no offense to anyone's style, hope you didn't take it that way. I'm not an expert or an authority on any martial arts style, including my own. This is just what I've been taught, based on my limited understanding of that training.

 

[Nomad]

None taken. I just wanted to point out that avoiding damage to yourself and your partners while performing repetitive drills may be part of the reason that your (and many other) martial arts prefer to block with the meat rather than bone. This reason may be unstated, and there may be other valid reasons for this as well.

The example of blocking a punch with a hard stop to the elbow does not imply that your opponent will stop attacking, just that you have a good opportunity to disable one of his weapons by breaking several small bones in the hand. It may not even do that much, depending on the amount of adrenaline flowing... he may only feel it sometime later.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

None taken. I just wanted to point out that avoiding damage to yourself and your partners while performing repetitive drills may be part of the reason that your (and many other) martial arts prefer to block with the meat rather than bone. This reason may be unstated, and there may be other valid reasons for this as well.

I do not think this is correct with regard to Isshin-Ryu.

 

[Carol]

I haven't done any striking in a while, but isn't the idea of a "block" more to redirect or deflect than to actually stop a blow?

No. The idea of a parrie is more to redirect or deflect than actually stop.

 

[Omar B]

It can be. My very limited understanding is that blocks can be punches, punches can be blocks, both can be used to deflect, trap, redirect, or (sometimes) just flat-out stop. Depends on the circumstances, right?

If I understand my training correctly, we're told to block hard with soft, and soft with hard. So we might counter a soft technique with a very hard block that is just that - a block and nothing else. Sometimes called a 'bang block'.

I would try to avoid the complete stop. Energy has to go somewhere and placing something that completely stops it means that thing is going to take in a lot of energy. There's a reason the blocks travel in those exagerated arcs, it's not simply to stop, but to accept and redirect energy. Just my take on the whole thing.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I would try to avoid the complete stop. Energy has to go somewhere and placing something that completely stops it means that thing is going to take in a lot of energy. There's a reason the blocks travel in those exagerated arcs, it's not simply to stop, but to accept and redirect energy. Just my take on the whole thing.

When you block a soft technique with a hard technique, the person throwing the soft technique is the recipient of the energy (or chi if you prefer). That's at least part of the reason we don't block hard with hard or soft with soft. I really need to be careful here, though; I'm getting into "I don't know what I'm talking about" area pretty quickly. I can only explain that we do it - if it's wrong according to some, I can't argue pro or con; I can only say we do it and why I think we do it based on what I've been told.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

If you glance on Salt's IMDB message board you'll find a thread denouncing Angelina for being anorexic, as well as a claim that arms and legs as "bony" as hers couldn't hold up in a fight (claiming they'd break when she tried to strike or block against the big guys she is fending off and smashing right and left).

While I know there's a lot of ignorance in the general public about MA, it does raise a good question as to how much flesh is needed to reinforce or pad one's bones. Is only muscle of value, or does fat help (she asked hopefully...)?

Also, to anybody else who has seen this movie, what are your thoughts on Evelyn's fighting and the likelihood that somebody her size could pull of that kind of widespread mayhem? I lost count of the men she laid low, very quickly, often with only one well placed strike. Very impressive; but in the real world, is anybody that great of a fighter? I kept thinking that if she were that good, she didn't belong in the CIA but straight at the top of UFC, raking in the cash and glory.

First thing your martial arts instructor should tell you.

First thing ANY self defense/unarmed combat instructor should tell you.

Is that if you're 5'0" and 100 pounds, and the other guy is 6'6" and 300 pounds-- then barring the introduction of some kind of force multiplier, the other guy's gonna win.( IF you stick around to "fight" ).

The second thing that instructor should teach you is the First Rule of Unarmed Combat ( Never be Unarmed). Even when you must be, there are always things you could use that aren't "Weapons" per se. Fights happen in places, which in turn are full of stuff.


Now, are there techniques that can be employed that can make physical qualities matter less? Sure. Jujutsu, Aikido, Hapkido, Wing Chun, etc. and the arts descending from them are based around this entire concept. In an ideal world, technique could make physical qualities not matter at all. But in this one, they always matter, it's just a matter of to what degree.

Technical proficiency and the will to win are always desirable, but no amount of can do attitude will alter the laws of physics, and you must allow for this.

 

[Omar B]

When you block a soft technique with a hard technique, the person throwing the soft technique is the recipient of the energy (or chi if you prefer). That's at least part of the reason we don't block hard with hard or soft with soft. I really need to be careful here, though; I'm getting into "I don't know what I'm talking about" area pretty quickly. I can only explain that we do it - if it's wrong according to some, I can't argue pro or con; I can only say we do it and why I think we do it based on what I've been told.

Relax man, you know your style and how it does things. Nothing at all wrong with that, in fact I like seeing how different styles do things. Still if we want to get into the receiving and passing energy thing we should get an aikido or hapkido guy in on this. I will say though that when I was doing Choi Kwang Do which is a pretty well thought out and organized style, movements were circular rather than linear in all cases and while accepting the energy in a block this arc acts as a can opener on the opponent's defenses.