Gift of Destruction

jfarnsworth

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 17, 2002
Messages
6,550
Reaction score
34
Location
N.C. Ohio
Let's try this technique now. Gift of Destruction - right handshake.


4. GIFT OF DESTRUCTION (front handshake)
1. With right hand shaking and while standing naturally, hop directly forward or slightly to your left to 11 o'clock, depending on circumstances, with your left foot as your right hand pulls your opponent's right hand toward and past your right hip.
2. With the above action, simultaneously strike in and against the joint of your opponent's right elbow with your left heel of palm as you deliver a right knee kick to opponent's groin.
3. As you plant your right foot forward (toward 10 o'clock) and against the inside portion of opponent's right knee, (in a right neutral bow) deliver a right inward horizontal elbow strike to left jaw of opponent while checking opponent's right arm down with your left hand (pressing check).
4. Front crossover cover out towards 6 oclock.

This is what I have from the class curriculum. Please feel free to post anything you feel is important, personal preference, etc.
 
Sounds about the base tech there. Just one tip in teaching it is to teach the BODY as well. I have seen everyone do it with the attacker standing in a "neutral" or whatever. To body properly for this I found that keeping your feet shoulder with apart and squared to shoulders this technique works effectively and also the defender doesn't risk the attacker bringing up his/her knee.
We saw a lot of bruised knees and nearly severly damged.

Just a tip from my side of the world.
Enunciate, Expand, Enlighten
Dave
 
My thoughts on this technique? LOL It is the biggest over-reaction to a handshake I can imagine. "No really officer, he was squeezing my hand really hard! Look! Look at those red marks! I felt in fear of my life, well no, OK, I felt in fear of the loss of a couple of my fingers. So I felt justified to hyperextend his elbow, and crush his testicles."

So in what scenario do you feel justified to use this? The opponent can't be punching with the other hand, because then he would be retracting with his right, and you would wind up in a tug-of-war for his hand. In any case you can't defend your right upper quadrant because both of your hands are tied up on his arm.

In any case we avoid the groin completely and don't deal with the issue of banging knees. We use it as a thrusting knee to the floating rib or solar plexus depending on the angle (very Muay Thai really). It is still a complete over-reaction.

Lamont
 
Originally posted by jfarnsworth
3. As you plant your right foot forward (toward 10 o'clock) and against the inside portion of opponent's right knee, (in a right neutral bow) deliver a right inward horizontal elbow strike to left jaw of opponent while checking opponent's right arm down with your left hand (pressing check).

Depending on attacker's body position we also do this technique planting the right foot in the inside of his left knee. Whatever you fell more confortable with, but it's basically the same thing.
 
Originally posted by Blindside
It is the biggest over-reaction to a handshake I can imagine.

At my school we have a similar technique in the yellow chart which ends with the knee, and we all have the same feeling about it. One black belt mentioned at some point that a reasonable interpretation is that the attacker is going to pull back with his left in order to punch, and therefore pulling them off-balance with your right prevents the attacker from being able to connect with the punch. Still brings a grin pretty much every time it's brought up.

Originally posted by jfarnsworth
3. As you plant your right foot forward (toward 10 o'clock) and against the inside portion of opponent's right knee, (in a right neutral bow)

I don't understand this part. If you move your left foot to 11 o'clock initially, subsequently moving your right foot toward 10 o'clock (using the original point of reference) will put you in some sort of twist stance, not a right neutral bow; if you use the new position of your left foot as a new reference point, moving your right foot toward 10 o'clock will put you on your opponent's right-rear side, facing away from him. If you want to have your right leg end up on the inside of your opponent's right leg while you're in a right neutral bow, shouldn't you be stepping toward 1 o'clock? Or am I missing something here?

Rich
 
Originally posted by Blindside
The opponent can't be punching with the other hand, because then he would be retracting with his right, and you would wind up in a tug-of-war for his hand. In any case you can't defend your right upper quadrant because both of your hands are tied up on his arm.

why can't they throw a punch...?

when we do the technique the "attack" is the old squeeze of the hand first, followed shortly by an attempted punch if the reaction isn't quick enough. sometimes we just do it for the handshake/punch deal without the squeeze. i call it the ultimate sucker punch, you'd have to be a real jerk to pull that type of move. when you take them off balance that's when they can't throw the punch, the center of gravity is thrown off as well as balance. even if he did throw the punch somehow, just because you can't block or parry it in time with the hand doesn't mean you can't simply slip it as you go off on an angle.

a drunk or mean guy out to do harm is just trying to hit you and probably has no idea that what he's doing isn't "right," he just want to make contact. it might just wind up being some pansy hit...
 
Originally posted by SingingTiger
I don't understand this part. If you move your left foot to 11 o'clock initially, subsequently moving your right foot toward 10 o'clock (using the original point of reference) will put you in some sort of twist stance, not a right neutral bow; if you use the new position of your left foot as a new reference point, moving your right foot toward 10 o'clock will put you on your opponent's right-rear side, facing away from him. If you want to have your right leg end up on the inside of your opponent's right leg while you're in a right neutral bow, shouldn't you be stepping toward 1 o'clock? Or am I missing something here?

Rich

You drive through the attacker. Step out left then drive through with the right foot. The right foot should probably be at the 11 position rather than 10 but that's our class technique. You should end up with a right neutral bow right leg check on their right leg; left pressing check on the right arm; your right inward elbow on the face/chin/whatever target you get.
 
Originally posted by Kenpomachine
Depending on attacker's body position we also do this technique planting the right foot in the inside of his left knee.

Do you leave your centerline open when executing the tech. this way? When advancing to the inside; cross your stance slightly. This gives your leg check as well as puts your centerline away from any accidental attack. If you elbow in the face and your stance is open could you get an accidental foot in your groin. Just curious if the way your doing it is the way I perceive it in my head as I read it?
 
Originally posted by SingingTiger
I don't understand this part. If you move your left foot to 11 o'clock initially, subsequently moving your right foot toward 10 o'clock (using the original point of reference) will put you in some sort of twist stance, not a right neutral bow; if you use the new position of your left foot as a new reference point, moving your right foot toward 10 o'clock will put you on your opponent's right-rear side, facing away from him. If you want to have your right leg end up on the inside of your opponent's right leg while you're in a right neutral bow, shouldn't you be stepping toward 1 o'clock? Or am I missing something here?

if you hop to 11 with the left, and then step to 1 with the right...you've just opened up your centerline completely to any incidental contact. ideally you will hop to 11 on your left foot, after the knee is thrown you will step down with the right foot to 10 or maybe 11 or 12 depending on how things go for you in the technique, as long as you check that leg. 10 always seemed a little extreme to me, i just use what works for me, but if you do go to 10 you get a pretty mean buckling check there if you get it right.

trying it yourself to see what happens is the only way to get the feel of what's happening.
 
Originally posted by jfarnsworth
Do you leave your centerline open when executing the tech. this way? When advancing to the inside; cross your stance slightly. This gives your leg check as well as puts your centerline away from any accidental attack. If you elbow in the face and your stance is open could you get an accidental foot in your groin. Just curious if the way your doing it is the way I perceive it in my head as I read it?

Well, in a way yes. But that's were the depending on attacker's body position come... He's already "fallen" over you with the previous knee to groin, making it more difficult to go for the right knee that it is to go for the left. But planting your foot on his left knee, besides buckling it, further unbalances the attacker, who will then fall to your right and out of your center line.

Mmmm, don't know if I make it clearer or more confusing...
 
Originally posted by Kenpomachine
Well, in a way yes. But that's were the depending on attacker's body position come... He's already "fallen" over you with the previous knee to groin, making it more difficult to go for the right knee that it is to go for the left. But planting your foot on his left knee, besides buckling it, further unbalances the attacker, who will then fall to your right and out of your center line.

Mmmm, don't know if I make it clearer or more confusing...

The only thing I see as stated above is if the left is stationary and their falling back the right leg will come up. If your centerline is open you may get kicked in the groin. Just a thought that's all. After the right knee strike it should plant down from there thus giving your right leg buckle.
 
why can't they throw a punch...? when we do the technique the "attack" is the old squeeze of the hand first, followed shortly by an attempted punch if the reaction isn't quick enough. sometimes we just do it for the handshake/punch deal without the squeeze.

This is my point, if you key off the squeeze, you are over-reacting. If you key off the punch you are too damn late. This sucker punch gets alot of its energy from the push pull. If I'm the attacker I pull your hand in with my right, and punch with my left. When I start retracting my right you cannot play catch up to that arm, you will lose.

If I reach out to shake the hand of a stranger (lets hope this guy is a stranger OK ;)) my body is seldom directly aligned with the other person. My right shoulder is generally forward and my arm extended for the handshake. This serves to put myself farther away from the other person, this is purely do to North American (north of Mexico anyway) social mores. Guys generally do not intrude in other guys space unless they know each other. That is why using the left hand to clasp the other person gives the appearance of such friendliness. You cannot be at a formal distance and accomplish that. This applies to the self-defense technique because both you and your opponent are probably right shoulder forward, right hand extended, to use the left hand you have to pivot the shoulder, or you will just be an arm puncher. Hence, the argument "the attacker isn't punching" because if he does I don't think the ideal phase works. If this assertion is true, the my original question stands, what reason has this person given you to knee him in the groin?

Ok, I'm repeating myself, and I'm babbling, and the above paragraph doesn't make much sense. I'm going to bed, to dream of how latino social mores and machismo affect self-defense techniques south of the border.

Lamont
 
Originally posted by Blindside
This is my point, if you key off the squeeze, you are over-reacting. If you key off the punch you are too damn late. This sucker punch gets alot of its energy from the push pull. If I'm the attacker I pull your hand in with my right, and punch with my left. When I start retracting my right you cannot play catch up to that arm, you will lose.

If I reach out to shake the hand of a stranger (lets hope this guy is a stranger OK ;)) my body is seldom directly aligned with the other person. My right shoulder is generally forward and my arm extended for the handshake. This serves to put myself farther away from the other person, this is purely do to North American (north of Mexico anyway) social mores. Guys generally do not intrude in other guys space unless they know each other. That is why using the left hand to clasp the other person gives the appearance of such friendliness. You cannot be at a formal distance and accomplish that. This applies to the self-defense technique because both you and your opponent are probably right shoulder forward, right hand extended, to use the left hand you have to pivot the shoulder, or you will just be an arm puncher. Hence, the argument "the attacker isn't punching" because if he does I don't think the ideal phase works. If this assertion is true, the my original question stands, what reason has this person given you to knee him in the groin?

Ok, I'm repeating myself, and I'm babbling, and the above paragraph doesn't make much sense. I'm going to bed, to dream of how latino social mores and machismo affect self-defense techniques south of the border.

Lamont

we can probably both agree on the fact that this is more of an offensive attack than it is self defense.

you do this to someone you probably don't like them too much. :D
 
Originally posted by jfarnsworth
Do you leave your centerline open when executing the tech. this way? When advancing to the inside; cross your stance slightly. This gives your leg check as well as puts your centerline away from any accidental attack. If you elbow in the face and your stance is open could you get an accidental foot in your groin. Just curious if the way your doing it is the way I perceive it in my head as I read it?

It's just a continuation of the knee in the groin, and you don't open your centerline any more than that. And after the side kick you go back to left neutral bow instead of forward into a right neutral. Don't know if this mades it somewhat clearer... But the technique is still made the way you describe most of the times.
 
Originally posted by Kenpomachine
... And after the side kick you go back to left neutral bow instead of forward into a right neutral. Don't know if this mades it somewhat clearer... But the technique is still made the way you describe most of the times.

Are we doing the same technique? By reading your statement I'm picking up on the older version of thrusting prongs or something. I'm also trying to be sincere here as well not sarcastic. Variations vary from instructor to instructor/ club to club/ and personal preference. Good discussion though.;)
 
Well, I have the techniques by numbers and so it well may be thrusting prongs or something...
I talked about what I understood of what you wrote in the description, though:)

Good to learn new things from all of you :asian: :asian:
 
I went to Billing's site :) Yeah, the end I wrote for the variation is that of thrusting prongs.
And example of the flow between different techniques to adjust for the actual situation?

I'll be sticking around, sure

:cool:
 
Originally posted by Blindside
My thoughts on this technique? LOL It is the biggest over-reaction to a handshake I can imagine. "No really officer, he was squeezing my hand really hard! Look! Look at those red marks! I felt in fear of my life, well no, OK, I felt in fear of the loss of a couple of my fingers. So I felt justified to hyperextend his elbow, and crush his testicles."

So in what scenario do you feel justified to use this? The opponent can't be punching with the other hand, because then he would be retracting with his right, and you would wind up in a tug-of-war for his hand. In any case you can't defend your right upper quadrant because both of your hands are tied up on his arm.

In any case we avoid the groin completely and don't deal with the issue of banging knees. We use it as a thrusting knee to the floating rib or solar plexus depending on the angle (very Muay Thai really). It is still a complete over-reaction.

Lamont

I disagree sir. On the street many a confrontation begins with this type of assault. Ed Parker even had a "unique" way of shaking hands with people because of this. When a person appears to know you and/or seems friendly, most civilized people instinctively extend their hand when a person does the same toward you. It really depends where you are and what you're doing.

The opposite hand can be deployed without pulling on the seizing hand by simply moving forward. In fact, that is how it is usually done.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top