Adding to your difficulty?

[Hand Sword]

I started thinking last night and this morning (the woodburning smell that you all were probaly smelling - LOL) about an incident that occurred. Long story short, Me and a friend who is a Kenpo stylist met up with an old friend that was recently "released". The topic came up about Kenpo (or the M.A.'s in general) and how it don't work against "real" fighters. Well, on pads went and the tussle began. Back and fourth, ending with laugh's, and the statement "see, I could've had you for real". when we parted with him, my friend thinking it over admitted that was probably true. He tried our "stuff" (and he's good-take my word for it!) and just couldn't get the results. We just chalked it up to our other friend is who he is and has always been-one of the ones that you don't want to knuckle up against.

Thinking it over in my mind and analyzing, as we Kenpoka do, I came to a thought, that may or may not be applicable, just something that's sticking in my craw. Were our methods of control causing the added difficulty? Further thinking, our off balancing of our opponents occurs in our techniques against those that are trained, or balanced as they come in. We do our thing, and their balance is shaken, technique works. However, "street fighters" are unbalanced already, coming in wild,wide, and fast. Is our unbalancing techniques actually helping to balance and satbilize them? What stuck out to me was a moment when the Kenpo frien kicked out a supporting leg causing the widened stance. But, this actually stabilized the narrower, unbalanced stance, causing more power in his next shot. There were other moments, but they seem to fall along the same route.

So, are our methods actually adding to our difficulty for real? Has any of us that had encounters found this problem upon analyzing it your minds?

I dunno, maybe I'm off on a tangent again--LOL!

 

[tshadowchaser]

Is our unbalancing techniques actually helping to balance and satbilize them?

That is a good question. Many times those not trained are so wild that a pull or push may actualy give them a better base than they had to begin with. When we practice (as you said) we practice against a person who has a good stance and balance but if we practice against a beginner our techniques may not always have the desired results

 

[LawDog]

A guideline for breaking balance by attacking the stance.
If your opponent is in a narrow "in line" type of stance you should kick the forward leg,(at the knee), inward toward his 12:00 center line. This action should cause is stance to fold, placing his weight over his front leg. This should give you enough time to follow up with a good attack pattern or take down.
If the stance is wide, boxer style, then you should kick the forward leg, at the knee or ankle, outward away from his 12:00 center line. This should cause his stance to over widen. This should cut down on his mobility long enough for you to follow up with a good attack pattern or take down.
Proper direction for attacking the rear leg is just as important as when attacking the front leg.
Proper direction when using any off balancing move is extremely important.

 

[Hand Sword]

True enough. This moment came in the middle of action, where both parties were in motion. Plus, it was just one example, there were others. It was just the concept that got me thinking. We know off balancing works against those that are balanced (hence the term). But, is doing the height, width, depth, and unbalancing controlling methods against those that are unbalanced actually helping to stabilize them, making it more difficult for you?

 

[kidswarrior]

True enough. This moment came in the middle of action, where both parties were in motion. Plus, it was just one example, there were others. It was just the concept that got me thinking. We know off balancing works against those that are balanced (hence the term). But, is doing the height, width, depth, and unbalancing controlling methods against those that are unbalanced actually helping to stabilize them, making it more difficult for you?

I would think it depends on how you unbalance them. If they are unbalanced due to narrow stance, seems I'd want to go under them and take them up and off their feet. If they were unbalanced due to crossed legs or just 'going crazy' with flurry of punches (usually a straight on attack), would want to step off the center line and strike to their weak point (e.g., if feet are aligned straight front to back, they'd be vulnerable from the side). If they were unbalanced due to low karate style stance, or as LawDog said, boxer stance, would want to capitalize on their temporary immobility (will take slightly longer to get up out of that stance), and slide to oblique angle to stike/unbalance.

But yeah, there are some guys out there that are just plain street good. Even the best MA would have a hard time with some of them.

 

[Hand Sword]

True enough on that one too. However, I think were going with techniques themselves here and not what I was getting at in the first post

. These all work against the scenarios presented by you two. I agree with them also. It's just a concept of "offbalancing" the opponent for control of the fight. We do it all of the time in training etc.. and I was just thinking over the incident and the comment trying to make sense of it. I thought if a street fighter is unbalanced in technique execution from stances to movement, etc.. Does our unbalancing methods help to restabilize them, thus making it more difficult for ourselves? At least that's what seemed to be the problem.

 

[kidswarrior]

True enough on that one too. However, I think were going with techniques themselves here and not what I was getting at in the first post

. These all work against the scenarios presented by you two. I agree with them also. It's just a concept of "offbalancing" the opponent for control of the fight. We do it all of the time in training etc.. and I was just thinking over the incident and the comment trying to make sense of it. I thought if a street fighter is unbalanced in technique execution from stances to movement, etc.. Does our unbalancing methods help to restabilize them, thus making it more difficult for ourselves? At least that's what seemed to be the problem.

Yeah, but that question is too hard for me, hence I chose to answer something easier.

 

[Hand Sword]

Me too! LOL!!!! We didn't concept it back then, it was "just whack 'em!" LOL! We need some ponderous EPAKers LOL!

Something that was reenforced though.. Nothing replaces reality against those kind of "Alphas". They can't be replicated! They are the ones that helped evolve our styles in the first place.

 

[Hand Sword]

Basically, I'm tying a few things together. Thinking it over further, I remember many times in my life where I heard something along the lines of "Damn! That was tougher than I thought it would be", then I replayed it in my mind, compared that with the above, and this concept thing that we practice all the time stuck out at me.

 

[LawDog]

In Kenpo "off balancing" is included as part of your ways to block. When you off balance an opponent you are temporarily blocking his ability to move. This includes but is not limited to,
1) defensive moves,
2) counter attack,
3) striking / kicking,
4) footwork,
5) counter judo/jujitsu techniques.
If you apply an armbar to your opponent and it re-stabilizes his stance but it still keeps his torso bent over,(off balanced), then you have temporarily blocked his ability to apply footwork, counter striking etc. Because the stance is stable does not mean that the torso is in a balanced position. If his hip joints, knees and ankles are in proper alignment with each other then the stance will be stable. If his torso bends to far in any direction then the torso is off balance.