Short Form #2 and Mace of Aggression?

[kenpo3631]

The first move of Mace Of Aggression relates to the first move in Short Form #2. How does the foot maneuver of Mace Of Aggression relate to the one in Short Form #2? How do the hands relate? :asian:

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

I am not sure I understand your question. The motion relates because they are almost exactly the same in nature. The motion just have different uses. It is applied in different ways. Again I am not sure what you are really asking.

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by kenpo3631

The first move of Mace Of Aggression relates to the first move in Short Form #2. How does the foot maneuver of Mace Of Aggression relate to the one in Short Form #2? How do the hands relate? :asian:

I don't really think that they are related. The initial movement in Short Form Two is comparable to the first move of Five Swords, but I don't see how it relates to Mace of Aggression (The initial movement in Mace of Aggression is a hammerfist to your opponent's face, not a block to the forearm and chop to the neck.)

I also don't see the relationship in the foot work... In Mace of Aggression you're stepping forward and executing a stomp to your opponenet's in-step. In Five Swords you are simply stepping forward and checking your opponent's knee. (Just like the form dictates.)

Where do you see the relationship? Other than the fact that you are moving forward in both the form and the technique you mentioned?

 

[Klondike93]

That was my understanding of the begining of short 2, that's it's the start of 5 swords, I don't think it's mace of aggression.


:asian:

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

A hammer fist and a block are the same basic motion. Stepping forward and stomping are the same basic motion. That is what I was saying. The movements are pretty much the same if you evaluate them. You are just applying them in a different way.

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by eternalwhitebelt

A hammer fist and a block are the same basic motion. Stepping forward and stomping are the same basic motion. That is what I was saying. The movements are pretty much the same if you evaluate them. You are just applying them in a different way.

Stomping and Hammerfisting are exagerated motions in relation to their cousin moves (blocking and stepping), and their intent is not the same. They are different in both application and execution, not to mention intent.

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

Many answers can be obtained in one move. I disagree with you. We can just leave it at that. I teach more than one application for a move.

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by eternalwhitebelt

Many answers can be obtained in one move. I disagree with you. We can just leave it at that. I teach more than one application for a move.

What do you disagree about?

What are the answers to which you are reffering?

Seriously,
Billy

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

Mace of aggression is a formulation of one master key technique, five swords. I stated that the motions were basically similar, you disagreed with me. Apparently we have been taught in a different manner. I have been taught Ak using master key techniques and then the formulations of them and have had this explained to me. When you mention a motion like a hammer fist being different from a block because of the intent and application I do not dsagree with you. I have trained in other arts as well where a forms motion has many interpretations. I think in terms of the motion first. I assume you think only in terms of the technique you have been taught. I may be wrong but that is how you are coming across.

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by eternalwhitebelt

Mace of aggression is a formulation of one master key technique, five swords. I stated that the motions were basically similar, you disagreed with me. Apparently we have been taught in a different manner. I have been taught Ak using master key techniques and then the formulations of them and have had this explained to me. When you mention a motion like a hammer fist being different from a block because of the intent and application I do not dsagree with you. I have trained in other arts as well where a forms motion has many interpretations. I think in terms of the motion first. I assume you think only in terms of the technique you have been taught. I may be wrong but that is how you are coming across.

I have been taught many different things from many different vantage points... and I am assuming that we are both capable of interacting on the same intellectual level without having to make "assumptions" about the quality of the others training.

What does this relationship between the technique and the form provide you with? A more thorough understanding of the movement? What other advantages are gained from this knowledge when it comes to applying it in an altercation?

Please answer my question. I'm not trying to be rude. I'm just curious.

 

[WilliamTLear]

The difference between the hammerfist and the inward block are defined by the amount of force used when executing the movement, and the amount of penetration when contact is made.

The difference between the stomp and step are defined very much in the same way mentioned above... the force applied to the stomp is greater than the force applied to a step, therefore a minor preperatory adjustment is needed to execute the stomp (i.e. lifting your leg higher to gain more momentum before making contact with your opponent's foot.)

How was I wrong about these differences?

 

[matthewgreenland]

If I may - How about the fact that both "disagreeing" parties are correct.

I see the relationship to Mace of Aggression in relation to the hands: hammerfist/inward block with the rear hand executing a pushdown block/pin/palm press check of the hands as in Mace of Aggression.

I also see the relationship to 5 Swords. The inward block bouncing into the handsword.

I again, see a relationship with the step through in Circling Windmills - with the inward hammerfist/inward block and the rear hand executing a pushdown block/palm press check - open hand - check palm down to the hands.

I also agree with the "intent," and "power," aspect of the debate.

I think that the more one opens themselves up to a broader interpretation - the more one can find an intimate familiarity in the movements. Hence, with familiaity comes speed, precision, and power. Correct me if I am wrong, but it is all only motion.

Lighten up friends -
(your debate has sparked me to view this from a few different angles, which is a good thing.)

 

[WilliamTLear]

I went back and read the previous posts again and feel I must apologize for misunderstanding EternalWhiteBelt's point of view. He is correct in that the initial motion of Mace of Aggression (the forward stomp while executing a hammerfist strike) is identical to the first move of Short Form Two (the step forward with a right inward block). I was posting on these movements as they would be applied on a body... while i believe he was posting on the issolated movements and how they look in the air. Sorry for the misunderstanding. EternalWhiteBelt you are right.

Take Care,
Billy

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

I must say Mr. Lear I have a lot of respect for you now. If of course you are not being sarcastic. But of course I never said you were wrong. I infact believe everything you have said. I think we are both correct. I was just trying to answer the post above and how the motions were very SIMILAR. I love AK but technical points are both its strength and its weakness. It makes it hard to see the forest from the trees. AK is strong in seeing the trees.

 

[Goldendragon7]

I agree eternal...... I think both of you had good statements but were missing each other. Perception is everything.... some may be talking micro another telescopic, yet another just a birds eye view.... all are looking at the forest but focusing on different or specific elements.

You both brought up good points just about different points of view.........

Again, I say.... give each other a little levity when posting one dimensional on a forum... there is no feeling here as to what the written word means at times. And to explain yourself well you will need 3 sets of fingers and a few weeks of air time......... LOL

:asian:

 

[Seig]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

I agree eternal...... I think both of you had good statements but were missing each other. Perception is everything.... some may be talking micro another telescopic, yet another just a birds eye view.... all are looking at the forest but focusing on different or specific elements.

You both brought up good points just about different points of view.........

Again, I say.... give each other a little levity when posting one dimensional on a forum... there is no feeling here as to what the written word means at times. And to explain yourself well you will need 3 sets of fingers and a few weeks of air time......... LOL

:asian:

Or about 4 hours good qualtiy phone time!