Sonnal Makki

[IcemanSK]

Or double knifehand block.

What is the reason behing the chamber hand at the sternum instead of at the hip like most chambers?

 

[Carol]

Or double knifehand block.

What is the reason behing the chamber hand at the sternum instead of at the hip like most chambers?

When the hands are chambered at the hips it is often to place the arms in a good position to generate the torque for the punch. However, torque isn't necesarily required for a knife-hand strike. I'm not a TKDer so does that make sense? Or am I all mixed up? LOL!

 

[newGuy12]

Here is my understanding of it:

It is a guarding hand. It guards the solar plexus.

 

[Kacey]

Or double knifehand block.

What is the reason behing the chamber hand at the sternum instead of at the hip like most chambers?

A different form of equal and opposite reaction (reaction hand moves with the block instead of opposite it).

 

[exile]

When the hands are chambered at the hips it is often to place the arms in a good position to generate the torque for the punch. However, torque isn't necesarily required for a knife-hand strike. I'm not a TKDer so does that make sense? Or am I all mixed up? LOL!

The 'concealed' interpretation of that chambering/withdrawal move, based on the Okinawan-based bunkai, before all those moves were repackaged by Itsosu for children's use in the Okinawan school system—can't have the kids killing each other, eh? :wink1:—is that the chamber isn't prep for a new punch; it's the continuation of a countergrab you do when the assailant has gripped your arm, shirt, shoulder... whatever. Cover the gripping hand, pull with a wrist twist to extend the arm, and then pin the arm at the elbow, etc. This kind of tuite is the whole point of these kinds of retraction moves. What's happening in the double knifehand is a different response to the attacker, though a trap can still be involved (as per Abernethy's bunkai description below).

Here is my understanding of it:

It is a guarding hand. It guards the solar plexus.

Folks—here is what I think is an extremely helpful set of observations about the OP question from Iain Abernethy's August 2007 newsletter (a reproduction in the newsletter of his 'Ask the Experts' column in Martial Arts Illustrated magazine:

Question 1: Hi Iain, I like your kata bunkai. We are using similar stuff in our shotokan club. Can you please tell me what the open hand hikite is for in a knife hand block? Thanks. James 3rd kyu Shotokan​

Hi James,

Thanks for the kind words about the bunkai – I'm glad you've found it useful and are engaged in similar training in your club. That's great! In answering your question, I'll also try to explain the underlying concepts as readers may find this useful.

One of the keys to understanding kata is that there are no "dead hands" or "shi-te" (pronounced "she-tay"!). Both hands are always active with the non-striking hand assisting the striking hand.

The non-striking hand essentially has two jobs: Setting datums and clearing obstructions. Setting a datum is using one hand to allow the other to strike more accurately during the chaos of the fight i.e. grabbing the opponent's hair or clothing whilst repeatedly striking the head with the other hand (an application of the "basic punch"). When being repeatedly stuck in this way, the opponent is likely to instinctively raise their arms to protect the head. The second function of the non-striking hand is to get these limbs out of the way so that effective strikes can still be delivered. As mentioned earlier, I call these actions "clearing obstructions". Shuto-uke ("knife hand block") is all about clearing obstructions.

On the Shuto-uke, the lead forearm is striking the opponent's neck or base of their skull. The rear open hand is keeping the opponent's arms out of the way so the strike can be delivered effectively. There are two ways to clear obstructions using shuto-uke (inside and outside) and hence that back hand is used in two ways:

Outside: To clear the obstruction so that you end up on the outside, the opponent's arm is pushed down as you move your other arm back (Figure 1). Shift your weight forward whilst keeping your hand on the opponent's elbow. Because the opponent's arm is out of the way, you should have relatively little trouble delivering a forearm strike (Figure 2). Notice how the back hand ensures the strike has a clear path.

Inside: To clear the obstruction so that you end up on the inside, slap the opponent's arm backward and to the side as you extend your other arm over the top (Figure 3). You then wrap the opponent's arm and slam your forearm into the side of their neck (Figure 4). Again, you'll notice how the back hand ensures the strike has a clear path.

I hope that helps make the use of the back hand on shuto-uke a little clearer? It may also help if you look in the video section of the blog on my website (www.iainabernethy.com) where you'll be able to watch my first online video lesson which contains a couple of basic drills related to this technique and the concepts we have discussed.

Thanks once again for the question James. Best of luck with your bunkai study!
​

 

[YoungMan]

Okinawan karate aside, there are several reasons for the hand being at the sternum rather than the waist.

First, the dynamics of the torquing motion are different from, say, the side block, and work on different physics and biomechanics. The supporting fist for a side block is at the waist to obey Newton's Law of action/reaction.

The supporting hand for a double knife hand block is placed at the sternum to aid the smooth rotation required of this technique. Placing the hand at the waist would prevent the body from making this added torque. Since both arms are making a wave-like swinging action, it would not be wise disrupt this action by placing the non-blocking hand at the waist, in effect canceling this wave motion.

Second, the sternum hand is there to aid in blocking a possible attack to the stomach or dan jeon if necessary. The hand can easily be turned over and twisting power utilized from this open hand blocking position.
Hope this helps.

 

[exile]

First, the dynamics of the torquing motion are different from, say, the side block, and work on different physics and biomechanics. The supporting fist for a side block is at the waist to obey Newton's Law of action/reaction.

Hardly. 'Newton's law of action and reaction', the conservation of momentum, is already obeyed by every action in the physical universe. Momentum and and angular momentum are conserved quantities. You have no choice about whether or not to obey 'Newton's law of action and reaction.' There are any number of ways of carrying out a 'side block' which don't involve placement of the hand at the hip; the fact that you can do them at all means that the action/reaction law is obeyed. The claim that the idea is to generate torque is a post hoc rationale which doesn't seem to hold up and which is probably connected to the loss of the knowledge of how these 'hikite' techs were originally applied.

Stand in facing north, and carry out a 'side block' so you wind up facing west, but instead of retracting the right fist to your side, rotate it hard toward your right shoulder at the same time the 'side block' is coming down. Any problem doing that? In one word, NO. In fact, you'll feel like you're getting a greater torque/countertorque sum to zero doing that than you do pulling the hand to the hip. Now put your right hand on your head and try it. Still no problem executing the tech. In fact, depending on how limber you are, you can do just about anything with your other hand and still execute an effective block, of any kind. So just what does the conservation of momentum or angular momentum or any other inherently conserved quantity have to do with it?

This is the kind of thing where history and technique meet each other. The reason why these moves appear in the TKD technique set is because they were part of the kihon training the Kwan founders underwent on the way to coming home with their black belts in Japanese karate, and faithfully reproduced in their first dojangs. Those kihon techs in turn were developed by breaking the original Okinawan kata sources down into 'atomic' techniques for purposes of large class instruction in the Japanese university system where Funakoshi and other Okinawan expats set up shop (Burgar's Five Years, One Kata gives the details, and the motivation). The reason the forms contained those particular hand placements can in no way be derived from anything remotely like real physics, because the 'laws' in question are respected by any set of physical events (apart from nonconservative forces like friction). The reason for hand placement in the Okinawan source forms for the Japanese kihon movements that were picked up and faithfully reproduced by the Kwan founders was combat utility. Which is what Abernethy is trying to explain. From the point of view of actual physics, there's nothing about retraction of the fist to the hip which is any different from any other physically possible set of movements.

And whether you're doing Okinawan, TKD or anything else, the idea that you would take a hand out out of the fight to position it so that you could administer a followup punch using it seems to me highly suspect. One of the points that people Abernethy, or TKD boon hae analysts like Simon O'Neil, have made repeatedly, is the most practical angle of all: in a streetfight, you, um, probably don't want to be setting up torque for the next strike by taking one hand out of action. Your attacker won't be impressed by your taking one of your main attacking weopons out of play, given the necessary time involved. He's not going to be doing that. The advantage of looking at it from the angle that IA does is that it makes clear how you can be using both hands to counter the threat you're facing. It's not Okinawan vs. Korean; there was a reason why that retraction move was introduced into TKD's ancestor art, and it wasn't about 'winding up' the body for the followup strike...

 

[YoungMan]

You know exile, I'm sure there's a nice Japanese karate school somewhere with your name on it.

Anyway, very difficult to describe in writing why a technique is done a certain way. Tae Kwon Do being a dynamic action art, it's easier show why the hand placement is where it is. Even the Internet has its limitations.

 

[exile]

You know exile, I'm sure there's a nice Japanese karate school somewhere with your name on it.

Let's see... I point out that what you say, in terms of the 'physics' you seem to think is involved, makes little sense, and note that the origins of this retraction movement in Okinawan MAs, which TKD has inherited it from, were based on certain combat uses. And your response to these points of substance is—in toto—that I'm affiliated with a karate dojo?? :lol: Now that I think about it, it seems to me that you've made this same mistake before, and I've explained the same point to you, about my lineage and so on... it's very strange that every time we come to some issue of technical interpretation, your response to the content of what I'm saying is to talk about my (in fact nonexistent) involvement in karate training...

Anyway, very difficult to describe in writing why a technique is done a certain way.

It's remarkable, then, how many very lucid descriptions there are out there, in book or article form, of how certain movements in various martial arts are applied in actual combat situations.

Tae Kwon Do being a dynamic action art, it's easier show why the hand placement is where it is. Even the Internet has its limitations.

It's not at all difficult to describe, and it has nothing to do with Japanese karate. It does help, of course, to get the physics somewhat right, if you insist on talking about that. (And I have to repeat.... since I learned the techs I described as part of the technique set that came down from one of the five original Kwans—Song Moo Kwan, founded by Byung Jik RoYM—I'm kind of confused about what you're talking about in your first sentence. Care to explain you comment further? )

And now the description of a basic example: Your arm or shirt is grabbed. If your arm is grabbed, you reverse the grip and pull the attacker's arm towards you while pivoting your own body 90º away from the attacker, and pressing ramming your other-arm forearm into the attacker's now extended arm, whose hand you are twisting as part of your retraction and whose elbow you are using as a fulcrum; same for a grip to your clothing, except that you don't have to reverse the grip. Now you are outside the attack, and any weight you move forward into the pin on his now hyperextended arm will force his upper body lower. You quickly release the pin on the elbow to bring that arm up to your opposite side ear and then down, hard, into his throat, carotid sinus, or whatever. Take him out of the picture, do that sequence solo, and what you have will look exactly like a 'down block' with retraction of the opposite arm to the hip. You can also do a variant of the same thing by deflecting his straight punch to the inside, trapping the hand, and so on. Kids learn these kinds of techs quickly and more than once I've had an eleven-year-old easily force my upper body and head down into position for an elbow, forearm or hammerfist strike to my face or throat. Take me out of the sequence, and the kid looks like s/he's doing the first two moves of Kicho Il Jang (which is, in fact, Taikyoku Shodan, very likely an Itosu-era 'pre-kata').

If you want to take one hand out of play and take the time to 'set up' the next punch, I'm certainly not going to tell you not to, YM. That's entirely up to you. I'm just trying to point out why it might be a much better idea to do something different, and more practical in a typical SD situation. But as always, the choice is yours; it makes no difference to me, really.

But please... tell me how Japanese karate comes into it. Is it the case that if you're doing karate, then using both hands in every tech is much more combat-effective, but if you're doing TKD, it stops being more combat effective? I'm just not following you, I'm afraid.

 

[Razorfoot]

I have always viewed it as a "point of origin" related movement. By that I mean, it starts from a point in space where it will be most effective. It does not have to be retracted to then move forward. You never, as someone else stated, remove it from the fight.

If you are in a confrontation, I doubt seriously the opponent is going to throw one technique and stop. The rear hand is in a position already to counter a second technique if thrown anywhere towards the upper body simply by turning it out (boxing one-two punch). I never saw it as being any different from apply blocks from a fighting stance. Both hands are up with one lead hand and the other a bit closer to the center line or solar plexus. We dont rechamber to the hip to initiate a block from a fighting stance. We throw it from where our hands are in space. I see this as being the same application.

Scottie

 

[exile]

I have always viewed it as a "point of origin" related movement. By that I mean, it starts from a point in space where it will be most effective. It does not have to be retracted to then move forward. You never, as someone else stated, remove it from the fight.

If you are in a confrontation, I doubt seriously the opponent is going to throw one technique and stop. The rear hand is in a position already to counter a second technique if thrown anywhere towards the upper body simply by turning it out (boxing one-two punch). I never saw it as being any different from apply blocks from a fighting stance. Both hands are up with one lead hand and the other a bit closer to the center line or solar plexus. We dont rechamber to the hip to initiate a block from a fighting stance. We throw it from where our hands are in space. I see this as being the same application.

Scottie

I agree—and that's a big part of why I think that the intent of the chambering is very different from the standard (but increasingly less standard) official story that the rechamber is a setup for the next punch, or assisting in proving momentum for the current punch, or anything else that takes it out of play in real-time combat. It's going to be far more useful in an actual fight when it's serving as an active part of a forcing or controlling tech, as per the description of its use in my previous post...

 

[newGuy12]

I agree—and that's a big part of why I think that the intent of the chambering is very different from the standard (but increasingly less standard) official story that the rechamber is a setup for the next punch, or assisting in proving momentum for the current punch, or anything else that takes it out of play in real-time combat. It's going to be far more useful in an actual fight when it's serving as an active part of a forcing or controlling tech, as per the description of its use in my previous post...

Okay, now the posts in this thread talk about what I think is the single most exciting area of TKD today, and I have great respect for all of these things.

However... let's remember one thing -- IF we go to break the wooden target (held up vertically), how will we punch this target, from what position? It will be from the chambered position, of course. So, what I mean is -- there MUST be some credence to the idea that you punch FROM THE CHAMBER -- that is a valid idea at least, when you wish to give the MAXIMUM energy to the target.

Now, I don't mean to say that this is the ONLY reason for the chamber here. I only say that it seems evident that this is NOT to be seen as "oh, that is just the old way of teaching this, and that is not true."

EDIT --> You see, the TRUTH is somewhere that encompasses BOTH of these ideas, not one or the other. That is my idea of this.

 

[exile]

Okay, now the posts in this thread talk about what I think is the single most exciting area of TKD today, and I have great respect for all of these things.

However... let's remember one thing -- IF we go to break the wooden target (held up vertically), how will we punch this target, from what position? It will be from the chambered position, of course. So, what I mean is -- there MUST be some credence to the idea that you punch FROM THE CHAMBER -- that is a valid idea at least, when you wish to give the MAXIMUM energy to the target.

Now, I don't mean to say that this is the ONLY reason for the chamber here. I only say that it seems evident that this is NOT to be seen as "oh, that is just the old way of teaching this, and that is not true."

EDIT --> You see, the TRUTH is somewhere that encompasses BOTH of these ideas, not one or the other. That is my idea of this.

Absolutely. No argument there!

 

[Kacey]

From a GM (no, not my association's GM) on an ITF-only board:

Try having a student grab both wrists from the front and then perform the knife hand block exactly. Let me know what happens.

 

[JWLuiza]

Is Sonnal Makki the same as the Sudo Mahki in Tang Soo Do?

 

[IcemanSK]

Is Sonnal Makki the same as the Sudo Mahki in Tang Soo Do?

More than likely, yes.

I bring this up again because a precocious (sp?) 10 year old asked tonight. Physics aside, I'm looking for a simpler way to put it to him.

 

[SJON]

I generally consider this as follows:

chamber to hip = grab, twist and pull - could be a handfull of shirt, could be either edge of his hand for a wristlock, whatever; doesn't have to come all the way back to the hip in practice, but you pull as if you're aiming to do that.

open hand at solar plexus = rear hand out front doing something like pinning, holding, clearing etc.

 

[YoungMan]

The rear hand is at the solar plexus palm up so that it can be used to deliver a palm block against a kick with twisting power should the need arise.

 

[SJON]

Is that fact or opinion, YoungMan?

What if he decides to grab you with both hands and headbutt you in the face instead of kicking you?

 

[FearlessFreep]

I think an important point is that the basic mechanics in the form are basic mechanics and can be interpreted in many ways.

This is not to mean like you can interpret a book to have many meanings. In this case the author has an intention and an interpretation that is other than the author's intentions is probably..'wrong'

My thought is more like in music, a scale is a scale, an interval is an interval, a chord is a chord, etc... the interpretation of those particular basic concepts, their use and application, is open to a wide range of possibilities, based on the given artist. None of them is particularly wrong, some may seem more appropriate to a given listener.


The double-knife hand is a basic mechanic, I think. Why you got their and where you go from there I think is pretty open ended. There could be many varied and different reasons for which this was your reaction. Some more likely than others, some with a higher percentage of success than others, etc... But if you are practicing without a partner, then you can say to yourself "well it could be this or it could be that" and you are, to lesser or greater degree, probably correct.

I think what's important is that you "know" what you are doing in the sense that you visualize your opponent when you are doing the technique and can explain why and what it's for. If you are willing to do that and to keep your mind open and allow yourself to keep working through the possibilities, then perhaps over time you w ill realize that maybe your technique is not so effective as you thought for that attack... or you may come up with a better rationale... or you may find that it really works.

But for yourself I think it's important to not get stuck in a mode where "this technique is for this attack/situation and that's it". Keep yourself open