Goldendragon7
Grandmaster
In techniques that utilize an elbow sandwich, why do many students insist on opening up their center and creating so much "dead space" before the smash?
Dead Space.....
- Thread starter Goldendragon7
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2002
- Messages
- 8,069
- Reaction score
- 25
It seems to me, that even though they are violating point of origin, they seem inclined to believe that by opening up and then striking that they are increasing their force/velocity.
M
MisterMike
Guest
Since the sandwich contains 2 basics, the heelpalm and the elbow, if you do them correctly you won't be opening yourself up more than necessary.
I think students get carried away when executing it and go outside the rim. (Of course it isn't as bad when you're doing it from behind )
I think students get carried away when executing it and go outside the rim. (Of course it isn't as bad when you're doing it from behind
)
K
kenpo12
Guest
I think the dead space question could be asked for alot of things not just elbow sandwiches.
OP
Goldendragon7
Grandmaster
- Thread Starter
- #5
that was just a starting example.......
:asian:
R
Rainman
Guest
I pick timing today! How 'bout snapping twig... I think the heel palm should hit the head and push the head over into the inward elbow to the maxilary hinge. Rarely do I think about simultaneous contact, I don't rule it out either though.
:asian:
:asian:
My instructor emphasized keeping motion "small"; in other words, going more than necessary is a waste of energy and time with motion. I can't remember what that particular principle is called. Maybe ya'll can jog my memory there.
He mentioned that most of the energy is concentrated in major joints (ie. hips, etc) and utilizing these joints will eliminate the erroneous idea of having to "go big for maximum power" that many lower ranked students seem to hold.
- Ceicei
He mentioned that most of the energy is concentrated in major joints (ie. hips, etc) and utilizing these joints will eliminate the erroneous idea of having to "go big for maximum power" that many lower ranked students seem to hold.
- Ceicei
M
MisterMike
Guest
If you prefix outward motion with inward motion, and convert outward motion back in, you'll have a lesser chance of "dead space".
If you overextend yourself, you'll open yourself up.
I think....
If you overextend yourself, you'll open yourself up.
I think....
K
Kenpo Yahoo
Guest
What about in techniques that just use an elbow to the body? Do you find that your students swing there elbows past their centerlines? Also do you see your students coming "around the barn" as opposed to taking a more direct path?
This is something that I was (probably still am) guilty of, but that I tried to remedy a while back. Now I'm beginning to see this in alot of other students as well.
Something that has helped me tremendously with the dead space issue is tightening my circles, you really only need two to three inches to hit hard (if you do it right). Unfortunately, I have learned to tighten my circles on a number of techniques but not all of them. On some techniques that old muscle memory kicks in and I find my arms extended well beyond my periphery.... bad... bad.... bad. This not only increases flight time, which attributes to dead space, but doesn't result in any higher returns in regards to power.
Something else that I've begun to notice is that in order to facilitate these tighter moves I have started to make circles on the back end of my movements (i.e. if I'm hitting with my elbow I circle and drop at the wrist, shoulders, hips, knees, and ankles).
This is something that I was (probably still am) guilty of, but that I tried to remedy a while back. Now I'm beginning to see this in alot of other students as well.
Something that has helped me tremendously with the dead space issue is tightening my circles, you really only need two to three inches to hit hard (if you do it right). Unfortunately, I have learned to tighten my circles on a number of techniques but not all of them. On some techniques that old muscle memory kicks in and I find my arms extended well beyond my periphery.... bad... bad.... bad. This not only increases flight time, which attributes to dead space, but doesn't result in any higher returns in regards to power.
Something else that I've begun to notice is that in order to facilitate these tighter moves I have started to make circles on the back end of my movements (i.e. if I'm hitting with my elbow I circle and drop at the wrist, shoulders, hips, knees, and ankles).
I think doing these tighter moves actually increases the power (if I'm understanding your point) by having the hips, knees, ankles help in pivoting, etc. That should eliminate the tendency for larger movements with upper extremities.
- Ceicei
R
Rainman
Guest
Larger to smaller spiraling elipses are accelerators, joint to joint are whips, whips are generally 3rd class levers- whips can have larger movements. Time and place for most things I think, fusing the body's joints during rotation generally gives you centrifugal force and can still be a whip.
Depending on how the movement is tightened- power can be lost especially if the body parts are working against each other. Alignment is a tricky thing because it can be manipulated and is manipulated in the form of adjustment. Sometimes adjustment is needed when a target is struck too hard or too soft and the movement of the opponent is greater or less than expected. That would be your ASOM in application to AK self defence techniques. Adjustments in acceleration depend on a lot of variables such the size and mass of opponents and skill. Larger circles are only bad if used incorrectly at in oppertune moments using an incorrect plane- then you are apt to pay the price.
R
Rainman
Guest
Interesting observation sir, how do you suppose awareness detracts from dead space?
Doc
Senior Master
Absolutely correct in my opinion.
The "big circle" being synonymous with "bad" is a knowledge level misunderstanding. In reality students should be taught "big circles" as a body training mechanism, focusing on the end of the appendage to season the connecting tissue. As skill and knowledge grow, the circles become smaller and smaller until in some applications, they are imperceptable in execution at the higher levels.
In commercial Kenpo the "shortcut" to reasonable self defense skills eliminates the "big circle concept" of training seen in "old world" Chinese teaching. But the "shortcut" lays no foundation for long term skills or efficient and proper body alignment development.
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Just to map out a couple of areas of my agreement with Mr. Chapel, I think that some of the posters here are confusing a) how to learn and to teach, b) how to stay close and small on some techniques, c) how to maintain control/cover one's centerline, d) how to monitor rather than repeat the same thing helplessly.
I think that the point he raised was exactly correct: if you teach these small circles from the start, you'll end up with a student who has no power and no way to make the techniques work effectively at first--if, indeed, they EVER learn to make the technique work effectively. What is in some ways worse, you end up with a student who thinks that ONLY the "small circle," method is correct--and this, of course, is in its way just as bad as a student who thinks that only the big circle method is correct.
Take Snapping Twig. I was originally taught this technique with a left stepback into a neutral bow, and two inward blocks, one to the attacker's hand and wrist, one to the elbow. Then, there was the pivot to the right forward bow, with the left hand-sword and the right pulling back to the right ear; theen the right inward hammer, bringing that fist all the way to your left hip; then shuffle in as necessary, collapsing the arm into a right elbow.
Now what does this achieve? First off, effective control and damage of the attacker's push. Second, real power in the strikes. Third, the beginnings of a sense of where the patterns of the weapons are those of a closing spiral (see also Circling the Horizon). Fourth, reinforcement of the proper way to start out with (and continue) a technique such as Thundering Hammers, in which the single commonest set of mistakes I see all revolve around the failure to bring the fists up high enough, so that the strikes are cut short and the defender relies on muscle rather than good stances, leg checks, and shuffles.
I suspect that this prematurity is related to the reasons that you sometimes see bizarre changes in techniques and forms--somebody's been trimming too much out, loses half of what made the darn thing effective, and then has to start fidddling around with what would've worked if they'd just left it alone in the first place. I know this is related to the fascination with the cool, the, "more-advanced," and with the way that instructors sometimes forget that there's a helluva big difference between what they need to work on and what their students need to work on.
Those circles have their uses. Students neeed to learn to write big before they work on writing little, to use big broad strokes before they fiddle with finesse. And they need the idealized template that these big circles (like chambering punches and kicks in practice) provide.
And why not just leave it till, say, Second Brown? If you look at techniques such as Dance of Darkness, Circling the Storm or Glancing Lance, don't they teach shortening circles in ways that students can extend to other material for themselves?
Mr. Chapel's right.
I think that the point he raised was exactly correct: if you teach these small circles from the start, you'll end up with a student who has no power and no way to make the techniques work effectively at first--if, indeed, they EVER learn to make the technique work effectively. What is in some ways worse, you end up with a student who thinks that ONLY the "small circle," method is correct--and this, of course, is in its way just as bad as a student who thinks that only the big circle method is correct.
Take Snapping Twig. I was originally taught this technique with a left stepback into a neutral bow, and two inward blocks, one to the attacker's hand and wrist, one to the elbow. Then, there was the pivot to the right forward bow, with the left hand-sword and the right pulling back to the right ear; theen the right inward hammer, bringing that fist all the way to your left hip; then shuffle in as necessary, collapsing the arm into a right elbow.
Now what does this achieve? First off, effective control and damage of the attacker's push. Second, real power in the strikes. Third, the beginnings of a sense of where the patterns of the weapons are those of a closing spiral (see also Circling the Horizon). Fourth, reinforcement of the proper way to start out with (and continue) a technique such as Thundering Hammers, in which the single commonest set of mistakes I see all revolve around the failure to bring the fists up high enough, so that the strikes are cut short and the defender relies on muscle rather than good stances, leg checks, and shuffles.
I suspect that this prematurity is related to the reasons that you sometimes see bizarre changes in techniques and forms--somebody's been trimming too much out, loses half of what made the darn thing effective, and then has to start fidddling around with what would've worked if they'd just left it alone in the first place. I know this is related to the fascination with the cool, the, "more-advanced," and with the way that instructors sometimes forget that there's a helluva big difference between what they need to work on and what their students need to work on.
Those circles have their uses. Students neeed to learn to write big before they work on writing little, to use big broad strokes before they fiddle with finesse. And they need the idealized template that these big circles (like chambering punches and kicks in practice) provide.
And why not just leave it till, say, Second Brown? If you look at techniques such as Dance of Darkness, Circling the Storm or Glancing Lance, don't they teach shortening circles in ways that students can extend to other material for themselves?
Mr. Chapel's right.
R
Rainman
Guest
I am not confusing anything. Staying close and staying small has to do with pinpoint accuracy and regulation of power- and I would say it is predetermined through cause and effect interacting with zone cancellation. Can you paint it with a large brush and say techniques? No. Techniques without basics are crude and may or may not work how they are supposed to.
Your whole body is vital- wren and du are just 2 more areas to be exploited or covered. Nothing more and nothing less. The femoral artery, carrotid sinus, are not centerline targets yet they are just as damaging as anything in the centerline when struck with purpose.
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
I'm sorry, sir, but I don't think I understood your post. However, let me make my basic points clear: a) there is a difference between what we need to know at different levels of expertise in kenpo; b) it is as incorrect to say, "small circle always better," as it is to say," big circle always better;" c) there is an enormous amount of information tucked away in those big circles, and merely getting rid of them means that you never get that information; d) trimming those circles too early in one's training means a loss of power; e) it is far better to let thee basics simmer for a while and then trim away at them slowly and carefully; f) one of the reasons that some instructors "jump the gun," has to do with issues in their understanding of the art, not what students need.
I'd ask: if those big circles are useless, why are they there in Ram and the Eagle? Why is there a difference in the radii of the circles in, say, Snakes of Wisdom and Marriage of the Rams?
I'd ask: if those big circles are useless, why are they there in Ram and the Eagle? Why is there a difference in the radii of the circles in, say, Snakes of Wisdom and Marriage of the Rams?
R
Rainman
Guest
I'd ask: if those big circles are useless, why are they there in Ram and the Eagle? Why is there a difference in the radii of the circles in, say, Snakes of Wisdom and Marriage of the Rams?
Different planes and different applications that is why they are different. And point of reference of the plane changes the radii of the circle (if you really want to call a multi demensional elipse a circle) as well. That is determined by target, which in a self defense technique is already predermined... if you follow some particular guidelines. The radius and circumferance are just as predetermined as the combination and targets in the ideal phase of a self defense technique. If the ideal phase is done ideally then what do you need "what if "for?
What if is a kenpo tool for cultivation in a higher realm of consciousness- THE ZONE
Different planes and different applications that is why they are different. And point of reference of the plane changes the radii of the circle (if you really want to call a multi demensional elipse a circle) as well. That is determined by target, which in a self defense technique is already predermined... if you follow some particular guidelines. The radius and circumferance are just as predetermined as the combination and targets in the ideal phase of a self defense technique. If the ideal phase is done ideally then what do you need "what if "for?
What if is a kenpo tool for cultivation in a higher realm of consciousness- THE ZONE
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
I'm afraid that my point, however, was this: if you look at Ram and the Eagle, that, "unnecessary," big, flat circle becomes a way of attacking the front guy's arm and carrying the attack back into the fella grabbing from the rear. If you look at Snakes of Wisdom, you see a smallish circle (actually a flattened circle, as you mentioned) to the groin, while the companion technique uses relatively-big flat circles to attack the opponents' faces and arms.
And my point is, of course, that this same employment of, "useless," circles can be seen through the system. Look at the leg buckles and double factors in short form 1, for example...
And my point is, of course, that this same employment of, "useless," circles can be seen through the system. Look at the leg buckles and double factors in short form 1, for example...
R
Rainman
Guest
I use 3 of 4 points of an infinity symbol on a #4. No big flat circles for me on ram and eagle.
Snakes of wisdom. Not a flattened circle at all. An elipse on a #7.
Double factors in the forms. It makes no sense to me to try to deflect an incoming weapon twice. One movement may redirect one strikes. One siezes, one controls. Double factor= using both arms not drawing flat circles because someone told you to.
What is a leg buckle? hip, knee, ankle, or snap the bone?
