Your thoughts on these locks?

[Kung Fu Wang]

For me if I know without doubt that a technique doesn't work for escaping, grappling, striking, or defending, within my ablility then I won't trust the technique for use in fighting.

But if a technique that you have

- tested over and over on your partner, you should know it will work.
- not tested over and over on your opponent, of course you won't trust it will work.

 

[Oily Dragon]

But if a technique that you have

- tested over and over on your partner, you should know it will work.
- not tested over and over on your opponent, of course you won't trust it will work.

"your partner", and "it will work" is part of the problem. There is a lot in the MA world that is merely play fighting, you could "Drill" it a thousand times, so what.

Joint locking though is the core of a lot of practical arts, though sport or traditional, and is one of my favorite subjects, so I've read the whole thread. Lots of great stuff so far. I figured I'd log in and fart up the thread.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"your partner", and "it will work" is part of the problem. There is a lot in the MA world that is merely play fighting, you could "Drill" it a thousand times, so what.

It's very common that one may have trained a technique for 5 years. But he can't make it work even once in the ring, or on the mat.

- In partner training, your opponent gives you that opportunity.
- In fighting, you have to create that opportunity yourself.

When opportunity arrives, whether you can recognize it, and have the courage to grab it, that's something else.

 

[Oily Dragon]

It's very common that one may have trained a technique for 5 years. But he can't make it work even once in the ring, or on the mat.

- In partner training, your opponent gives you that opportunity.
- In fighting, you have to create that opportunity yourself.

When opportunity arrives, whether you can recognize it, and have the courage to grab it, that's something else.

Oh bother, if only courage was a decent substitute for skill.

How's that for some Pooh Tao.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If he had committed to those attacks. He would have just bashed the guy.

I don't think so. Being committed to a strike has no bearing on how hard it lands. When you take a step forward on land with no obstacles, then you are fully committed to that step even though it doesn't require you to stomp on the ground. When a person walks on icy ground then that person's steps aren't fully committed until he plants the foot and starts to take a step forward.

The difference between a committed strike and a half committed strike is that it has good rigidity a the point of contact for the defender to exploit. But when a strike comes in with half committed, it's like trying to apply a technique to a noodle.

When I train on my ground fighting, I often get noodle arms because I now that my sparring is looking for those points of rigidity in which to apply the technique

Some of the kick that the Akido practitioner tried to grab were kicks that slid downward causing the Akido guy to chase it downward. It's bad to chase kick. You want kicks to come straight for you like a baseball to catch.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The problem is Rokas doesn't lead his opponent, control the center and his timing is off (too late).

Correct. Rokkas is always chasing the technique instead of letting the technique come to him. He'll do better when he stops chasing.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Well ... you are back to the clinch, which JowGaWolf said is a wrestling engine rather than aikido. I agree with you that there may be better alternatives from the clinch than trying to use aikido techniques.

In the "Aikido's Six Most Effective Fighting Techniques" video I posted, Aikido techniques are performed without entering the clinch. They're similar in control and timing to what Bookman is doing. At :38, one example is Gedan-ate:

https://imgur.com/5DE9tjo

Again the technique doesn’t chase. I think of it like playing catch. Commitment from the attacker is full and that is used against him. That technique wouldn't work if he was 50% Committed. If that was Rokas then we would have seen someone chasing the technique.

If I was going to try to catch a punch, then I think I would preferred to do it during a combo attack. The combo strikes give me the opportunity to become familiar with my opponent's attack pattern. This is beneficial when it comes to timing and to knowing where the next strike will land. Combos also use a good level of commitment that is vital to pulling off a technique.

I wouldn't try to do the technique off the first punch. That first punch is often a setup jab so it's less committed and is often thrown in search for setting up a combo. If that Jab doesn't find a set up then the person is most likely to reset the Jab. Very few throw the jab with knock out power.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The thing that always seems to be missing in these endless YouTube examples is footwork in conjunction with structure. I see one or the other or someone alternating between but almost never someone keeping good structure while moving. That’s fine for takedowns and grappling to break someone else’s structure. If you want to strike with any real juice then the posture, angles, structure and footwork to move that structure have to work in conjunction. It’s not surprising when people can’t make something work without moving their feet in coordination. I have said it many times, no foot, no punch. The same applies to a catch, grab, or standing lock. I am constantly reiterating the importance of structure as it relates to telegraphing. Watch yourselves in the mirror, pick up one foot, did your head move? Even a slight motion anywhere other than the leg lifting is a telegraph.

Like I often say. Footwork drives the technique

 

[JowGaWolf]

But if a technique that you have

- tested over and over on your partner, you should know it will work.
- not tested over and over on your opponent, of course you won't trust it will work.

It should work in both environments. I strongly believe the training for it should be done as System A vs System B. Then after the student is able to do the technique in this manner he/she should should bring that experience back to the school.

To do it the other way is counter productive. To train System A vs System A and to think that it's the same as fighting System A vs Sytem B is just wrong. The knowledge that BJJ currently has now is built from System A vs System B experience.

But we also see System A vs System A issues where a practioner will slide on their butts in BJJ competition. But I wouldn't recommend it for System A vs System B encounters.

When I teach Jow Ga Kung Fu, it's from a System A vs System B perspective.
I only attack with Jow Ga to provide a working example of how to initiate the technique. This is done slow enough for them to analyze and copy me. Then I revert back to System B fighting which is me fighting without using unique Jow Ga techniques.

My philosophy is "Family doesn't Fight Family" I don't learn Jow Ga kung fu for self defense against Jow Ga attackers and thugs. I've sparred with a lot of strangers and I have yet to run into one who trains Jow Ga.

When BJJ takes people down in the streets it's often System A vs System B. I haven't heard of a bar fight where it's BJJ vs BJJ.

 

[JowGaWolf]

There is a lot in the MA world that is merely play fighting, you could "Drill" it a thousand times, so what.

System A vs System B benefits
1. System A keeps System B honest
2. System B keeps System A honest.

System A vs System A is not informed about things outside System A. We also tend to give a pass on things that we shouldn't like training against low quality single led take downs.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Oh bother, if only courage was a decent substitute for skill.

How's that for some Pooh Tao.

Well hello!

 

[Oily Dragon]

System A vs System B benefits
1. System A keeps System B honest
2. System B keeps System A honest.

System A vs System A is not informed about things outside System A. We also tend to give a pass on things that we shouldn't like training against low quality single led take downs.

This is why family styles like Jow Ga Kuen are rich, there's a lot of versatility in there, from centuries of style mixing. Muay Boran, another one that includes so much stuff, including the entire full contact set of Muay Thai. These arts didn't spring up in a vacuum.

Sprawling as a single or double leg defense is fundamental in quite a few CMA (especially tiger and dragon styles), which is why it's odd to not find it in others, but I always chalk that up to individual lineages and instructors, focusing on striking vs grappling etc.

Fast forward to today, it's BJJ 101, since knocking someone on their butt is important when fighting.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Praying Mantis!

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Praying Mantis!

Huh - I hadn't noticed that Toph's fighting style is based on a different art than that of the other earth benders. I'll have to pay more attention whenever I get around to rewatching the series.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Huh - I hadn't noticed that Toph's fighting style is based on a different art than that of the other earth benders. I'll have to pay more attention whenever I get around to rewatching the series.

Mantis is what led me to Hung Ga, which is kind of funny and poetic if you know Toph.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Mantis is what led me to Hung Ga, which is kind of funny and poetic if you know Toph.

The irony of it is that training Hung Ga or Jow Ga will make the stance feel heavy. If boxers are sports cars then Hung Ga is like a tank. If you want to kill your vertical jump and have it maxed out at 2 feet then train Hung Ga.

I do jumping training to deal with that issue. Earth would a good characteristics for Hung Ga. It makes it clear why the Jow Ga founder added the footwork of Choy Ga.

 

[Oily Dragon]

The irony of it is that training Hung Ga or Jow Ga will make the stance feel heavy. If boxers are sports cars then Hung Ga is like a tank. If you want to kill your vertical jump and have it maxed out at 2 feet then train Hung Ga.

I do jumping training to deal with that issue. Earth would a good characteristics for Hung Ga. It makes it clear why the Jow Ga founder added the footwork of Choy Ga.

I know what you mean. I think that is more of a village Hung Kuen issue, vs the canonical family style (which is a lot more diverse than the "earthbending" type stuff seen on the show).

The family style has five element/ five animal concepts, which do include a lot of springy, off your feet motions. Kicks are all relatively grounded, but there are "cat" jumps in several of the Wong Fei Hung lineage fist sets, from the Shaolin Tiger and Crane. To actually pull them off you have to be and stay sort of limber and be able to leave the ground.

Kind of the reverse of all those deeply rooted foot positions, but sign of a true master is a tank that can float on air. I once saw a disciple of Frank Yee leap 5 feet in the air with no setup, during a New Year celebration. Lion's head!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Correct. Rokkas is always chasing the technique instead of letting the technique come to him. He'll do better when he stops chasing.

I think this is at least partly the result of something that seems common in the aiki world: training as if techniques are a one-shot thing. If you don't do resistive training, the drills can make it seem like you're supposed to be able to pull the technique off out of nowhere. This leads to chasing techniques because you think they're supposed to be easy to get.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think this is at least partly the result of something that seems common in the aiki world: training as if techniques are a one-shot thing. If you don't do resistive training, the drills can make it seem like you're supposed to be able to pull the technique off out of nowhere. This leads to chasing techniques because you think they're supposed to be easy to get.

That was a lesson that my first Jow Ga school taught. "What if" scenarios should always be factored.

1. What if I throw a jab and it doesn't connect? What may happen to me next? What can I do to try to prevent it.

I throw a jab, my opponent duck and goes under the jab for a take down. What can I do to prevent the take down after the Jab? Do I need to implement the counter after the jab? Should I put in preventive measures by punching from a lower stance? Should I back up after throwing the jab or cut an angle after throwing the jab?

My personal training and my teaching follow this type of logic. Then I will try each possibility in sparring to see which one works and which one gets me into more trouble. After a couple of attempts I have a promising idea of what works and what to do if it fails. This is when it's good to spar against analytical people because they will try to break that strategy.

Now that you mention it. I don't see a lot of that in Aikido nor in Roka's sparring. What if I don't get that grip? What next? Can't I move to a different technique? Does the failure to get one technique give me a better opportunity to set up another? Do I reset?

That's a good observation that you made. To be honest I wonder how much would change if the logic that you pointed out is changed. Where other schools are taught that if you can't land one technique then move to the next.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That was a lesson that my first Jow Ga school taught. "What if" scenarios should always be factored.

1. What if I throw a jab and it doesn't connect? What may happen to me next? What can I do to try to prevent it.

I throw a jab, my opponent duck and goes under the jab for a take down. What can I do to prevent the take down after the Jab? Do I need to implement the counter after the jab? Should I put in preventive measures by punching from a lower stance? Should I back up after throwing the jab or cut an angle after throwing the jab?

My personal training and my teaching follow this type of logic. Then I will try each possibility in sparring to see which one works and which one gets me into more trouble. After a couple of attempts I have a promising idea of what works and what to do if it fails. This is when it's good to spar against analytical people because they will try to break that strategy.

Now that you mention it. I don't see a lot of that in Aikido nor in Roka's sparring. What if I don't get that grip? What next? Can't I move to a different technique? Does the failure to get one technique give me a better opportunity to set up another? Do I reset?

That's a good observation that you made. To be honest I wonder how much would change if the logic that you pointed out is changed. Where other schools are taught that if you can't land one technique then move to the next.

There is usually some work on technique progression (if you hit resistance on kote gaeshi, reverse to kokyu nage). Unfortunately, the mindset often continues into that kind of drill, where the reversal isn’t practiced with real resistance.

Part of the problem is inherent in the pursuit of aiki. Aiki development is not an efficient path for fight training - it takes a lot of time and effort to develop the aiki principles, for a marginal increase in fighting ability. Leaving out the aiki, and just focusing on solid fighting fundamentals is a more efficient path to competence.

But some of us really like the subtlety and challenge of aiki training, so we prefer that path. The problem is that means we aren’t looking to progress our respective art to the most efficient and effective techniques, etc. That can lead to ignoring realities of combat, in favor of developing aiki.