Discussion in 'General Martial Arts Talk' started by amateur, Nov 27, 2020.
What was the final say on the combo?
Do you mean the final say on the cross-tornado kick? That can work, but it's just not fully clear what OP is describing.
Or do you mean OP's actual question about combos to practice? Afaik only john actually answered the question by how to extend those combos. Everyone else got distracted by the tangent on the one combo.
Your 1st punch can be
- back fist
For example, when you throw a right back fist, if you opponent uses:
1. Upward block - Since his chin is open, you can use left uppercut to punch under his chin.
2. Upward block - You can pull down his blocking arm to open his head, you can then use left hammer fist (or cover fist) to punch on top his head.
3. Right block - Since his left side is open, you can change your right back fist into a right hook.
4. Left block - Since his right side is open, you can follow with a left hook.
IMO, without learning boxing, just by using some basic logic, meaningful 2 punches combo, or even 3 punches combo can be created.
The final say on the cross-tornado kick combo. The OP seemed to be unsure about the whole thing. Did he find one that that he liked?
This is how I create all of my combos. Anything that flows while allowing me to defend/attack or evade/attack
Your 1st attack may create some opening. You then attack that opening. This principle can fit for all MA style and has no style boundary.
A: What MA style do you train?
B: I train how to fight.
I like B's approach that his technique doesn't come from his MA form, but come from his logic - create an opening, attack the opening.
If you start with a kick combo. you then do 1, 2, 3 punch combo on the right, and 1, 2, 3 punch combo on the left. You then turn around, you can create a form as long as you may like. I don't understand why this kind of form has never been created before.
I think some systems do have this in their forms, it's just that the form isn't completely made of combos. My kung fu shadow boxing is like how you described. My beginner form in Jow Ga is like this for the most part. The only difficulty is knowing when the combos begin and end, because there are some single techniques in the form that help to transition from one type of combo to another.
I like to start with kick and end with punch. So to use a kick combo to separate the number road of the form make sense. If I go back and force for 16 roads, that will be 16 roads form (16 kick combo + 16 punch combo).
1. On guard (fighting stance).
2. Roundhouse kick, side kick.
3. Right hook, left spin back fist, right hook.
4. Left hook, right spin back fist, left hook.
5. Turn around, repeat 1 - 4 with different combos.
Now we will have a form that contain kick combo and punch combo. Will that be nice? What MA style are we talking about here? No MA style. Just record kick/punch combo.
The nice thing about this approach is one can teach this form in his class of Kung Fu, Karate, TKD, Sanda, MMA, MT, boxing, ...
In Jow Ga beginner form Sei Ping Kyuen
From 0:20 - 1: 06.
This is a combo that I can actually attack someone with if I wanted to. The thing about long combos in a real fight or even sparring is that they take a lot of energy to do. But if I wanted to I can go through that combo as shown in the video with a few minor but important adjustments.
From 0:34 - 0:48
I think I can pull that off as long as I go in the same direction. Instead turning behind me, I can continue. The only problem would be where the person turns. That is where a second combination begins. I would probably take that out and anticipate a punch and not a kick.
The rest are more like single techniques. I can and have used all of the techniques in that video with the exception of may 2 or 3. Still trying to figure those out. Most of my sparring videos use those techniques. So there's a bit of usable combos in the video, but not all are combos.
In practical terms of fighting as a sport and as a self-defense. It's probably better to train combos in spurts and to break combos up with single techniques. This is probably what one would experience in actual fighting.
Do you believe this cannot be found in any forms of any system? I believe it is found within my system.
In my opinion, forms train fundamental principles expressed through various techniques. Those techniques, and the combinations as found within the form may or may not be useful as they are found in the forms. But that’s ok, as the forms are not meant to be the sum total of what you can do or are allowed to do or must do, within the methods of your system. They are meant to help you drill fundamental body mechanics, and give you an idea of what is possible, but cannot be absolute or complete.
What you do and how you apply it, is open to much more interpretation and is up to you. This includes doing additional drills that build your creativity and spontaneity. So feel free to do as you describe. Just don’t think that forms are meant to fulfill the same purpose.
I try not to let my system to put restriction on me. If XingYi or Taiji is my system, no matter how long that I have trained that system, I will never be able to come up with right hook, left spin back fist, right hook combo. In other words, when I construct punch/kick combo, I try not to use any MA system as my base. I only try to use my common logic as my base.
I come from a mixed system. XingYi and Taiji may not have a hook, or spinning back fist but there's nothing in the books that say you can't combine techniques from one system and add it to another. So take some of the core principles in XingYi or Taiji and see if you can apply those principles to drive a hook or a spinning back fist.
I say this because sometimes I apply Taiji principles to Jow Ga and it works.
I don't know much about Taiji but I do know that it will be possible to use a hook right about here in the Yang style 24 simplified form. The move before this can be used to strike a reaching hand downward into the ground and then circle from there for a hook to the face.
In Jow Ga there is a a technique where we use the back of the hand similar to this to knock the arms away from an attempted take down, From there you can loop it into a hook from there. I personally I think this is where the hook naturally goes in Tai Chi because that's what it feels like. In the form, I think it trains both hands to do a hooking motion. When you do this technique with 2 hands, you'll feel silly. but do it fast with 2 hands, then do it fast with 1 hand and the hook naturally forms.
Ok, the rest of my sentence is actually very important. The complete sentence is:
“But that’s ok, as the forms are not meant to be the sum total of what you can do or are allowed to do or must do, within the methods of your system.”
Taking the last portion of the sentence out of context creates a misleading message. It is important to take it in context.
Techniques do not make the methods of your system. Body mechanics and power principles and combat strategy do. Those fundamental concepts are what make up the methods of your system. Certain techniques are used within the context of your training to develop those concepts. But once you understand them, you can use them with any technique that you wish, even techniques that are not part of those fundamental trainings. So if you want to use a hook and a spin backfist, if they are compatible and function on your foundation principles, then do it. You can do anything with it that you want. There are no limitations to your style, if you can grasp that your system is simply a form of physical education that teaches you how to effectively do whatever you want, with authority and with power. Nobody should ever think “I train XX system, therefor I am not allowed to do YY technique”. That kind of thinking is dysfunctional and completely misses the point of your training.
The full sentence I wrote, which you quoted a portion of, was meant to convey that you should not be limited by your forms, in what you do. Your forms are simply a tool to help you develop and grow, like any training drill. But you still need to go beyond them, and anyone should feel free to do so.
You and I may agree on this but many people don't.
A: Here is how you may train hip throw.
B: My teacher told me that I should always keep my head up and not bend down.
A: Here is how you may train spin back fist.
B: My teacher told me that the shortest distance between 2 points is the straight line.
A: Here is how you may attack first.
B: My teacher told me that if my opponent doesn't move, I should not move.
In many discussion, people may say:
- We don't do this in our system.
- This is against our system principle.
- To do this will make my style not pure.
Well, I feel that many people have a limited vision of what martial arts training is all about.
This should be written on a big banner of every Martial Art school. This is exactly why we see so many similar techniques among different Martial Arts systems.
Agree that principle can be mapped into technique. What if there is a technique that your system doesn't have principle to map into it?
The "spin back fist" and "roundhouse kick" exist in the long fist system. But I don't think both exist in the WC, or XingYi system.
So if you use principle -> technique approach, you may find some restriction. But if you use the reverse mapping technique -> principle, you will find out that you are free to use principle from other MA systems.
The way that I look at this is first, I decide what kind of tools that I want to have in my toolbox (such as jab, cross, hook, uppercut, hammer fist, downward hook, back fist, spin back fist, side punch, spiral punch, front kick, side, kick, roundhouse kick, hook kick, ...), I then decide which principle from which MA system that I want to map if from. Of course, this will require some cross training.
- I want technique X in my toolbox.
- But it's not in my MA system A.
- Where can I get it?
- I can get it from MA system B.
- I need to cross train MA system B.
Well, one way or the other, you need to have consistency in your methodology. Otherwise you end up with a Frankenstein’s monster of a method, scattered all over the place.
I’m pretty confident that any striking system has principles to support these techniques. It may be that these techniques are not preferred by people who practice these systems, but I bet the principles are there. In the end, people gotta do what is right for them. But stop looking at a system as a limitation and a confining wall. I see it as liberating and a springboard, something that gives me a method with which to do just about anything I want.
If Wing Chun has a spinning elbow and a horizontal back fist then it has a spinning backfist.
If this is XingYi then you there's a round house.
look at 0:59, this is where your round house can be added.
Traditional martial arts that care more about preserving the past will probably always be historians. Which is Ironic since the natural path that Traditional Martial Arts was to develop and improve. Not sure why so many have forgotten that. Adding a round house kick to XingYi won't disqualify it from being XingYi.
I should have read this before I posted my videos. All I can say is ditto.
I also feel the same way about the "the principles" being there. I look at some systems and I see 1vs1. As long as it's 1 vs 1 systems can stay very rigid. Add a person attacking from behind and things change. Add an attacker from a different system and your (general) system will morph again in order to deal with the new attacks.
I think by people only fighting 1 vs 1 and System A vs System A, student and teachers make the system more rigid then it was probably intended. As a result the development of the system ceases. We can look at Wing Chun and how the smallest variation can cause heated debates and arguments about "what real Wing Chun is" and "Who does correct Wing Chun and who doesn't."123
Separate names with a comma.