The hand stuff...

[Bill Mattocks]

I'm talking about movement and manipulation. I've heard it called 'tuite' by some. For example, person grabs, you use your hand or hands to effect a release and / or move into a joint lock or something of that nature. There's a million of them; I don't have to get specific here. I think most of you know what I mean?

I happen to be a member of an "Old Farts" MA group on FB. It's a good group; not much in the way of ego or trashing other styles, etc. People are just nice, and I appreciate being there. Being old is the only requirement, so not everyone is an advanced rank or has been training for decades.

Someone posted a YouTube video the other day, and it showed a fellow from Australia showing some tuite. Very smooth, his technique was clean and purposeful and I appreciated it. I also recognized all of it. It's stuff we practice constantly. Besides the hitting, kicking, and blocking, we practice things like body shifting, movement, stances, and of course, tuite. Common counters to the kind of thing that happens in a conflict, whether or not it's an all-out fight. Someone grabs a handful of hair, you pin their hand and move your body to bend their wrist at a painful angle, etc. I mean, it goes on and on.

Ignoring the strikes he shows at the beginning, and the discussion of 'do' versus 'jutsu', about 3 minutes in he starts to get into the hand techniques. This is what caused such amazement. I was only amazed that nobody was being shown these things.

What surprised me was that many folks expressed amazement at the video. "Wow, why isn't this taught anymore?" and "This is the true karate, this guy is a magician!"

Doesn't everyone learn this stuff?

I mean, this is the kind of casual stuff that works and can be used any time. Doesn't require years to master, or great fitness or high dan rank. It's taught in many types of martial art, it's not limited to just karate or whatever, or so I thought.

Anybody? Am I alone thinking this isn't secret ancient hidden magic knowledge, just the kind of stuff everyone should be learning?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

After watching your video, it makes me to think the following.

- Why do a video have just 2 steps?

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...

Why don't a video have:

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...
3. A then does ...

The way, you not only learn how to counter a technique, but you also learn how to counter a technique counter.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

After watching your video, it makes me think the following.

- Why do a video have just 2 steps?

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...

Why don't a video have:

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...
3. A then does ...

The way, you not only learn how to counter a technique, but you also learn how to counter a technique counter.

You'd have to ask the person who made the video. In any case, that wasn't what I asked about.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I mean, this is the kind of casual stuff that works and can be used any time. Doesn't require years to master,

When you apply 1 step counter, you may assume your opponent has no knowledge of how to counter your counter. In reality, your opponent may have the knowledge/ability to counter your counter. This is why 1 step counter is easy to learn but difficult to apply in reality.

You have to learn MA for self-defense. Just to learn some 1 step counters is not enough. The reason is simple. You have no training about what to do after that 1 step.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Doesn't everyone learn this stuff?

I have learned this in a different way.

 

[punisher73]

Depends on teacher/style/school. I know some that DO teach that stuff. BUT, I agree that many people come from lineages that only learned the block/punch/kick applications to their katas. Add to that, they start their sparring from a "sport style" distance and not the "close quarter" distance that the kata applications were designed for.

 

[wab25]

After watching your video, it makes me to think the following.

- Why do a video have just 2 steps?

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...

You have to look at the context in which this guy is teaching. The first thing he is teaching, is what A is doing. As he points out, the common idea for what A is doing, is wrong. If you go with the common idea of what A is doing, and B tries his part, A gets his attack, because B was doing the wrong thing in response to the attack.

So, first, he is teaching what A is actually doing, so that what B does, makes sense.

Remember, he is rewiring what a lot of people think is going on in these techniques. So, yes, A could then counter B... but the context he is teaching in, he is teaching what A does, and then what B does, to people that think that things are totally different. If B does not do his part right.... A has no need to counter or could counter with anything.

He is teaching step 1, a real attack for which this technique would work, as opposed to many of the common misconceptions. Step 2, he is teaching B what his technique is doing. Again, for many people, what B is doing is different than what they thought it was. In order to have A then counter B, we need to first get the right attack from A and the right response from B.

Why don't a video have:

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...
3. A then does ...

The way, you not only learn how to counter a technique, but you also learn how to counter a technique counter.

The video does have some of this... A does, then B does, then A does, then B does.... but he is focused on setting up the first step correctly, so that people can learn what the technique really is.

Rewatch the shuto part again. Most people think the block is the hand moving out after the chamber. However, what he is showing is that the block is actually the hand going into chamber. Many people need to rewire their thinking, because of the way that they were taught.

 

[wab25]

When you apply 1 step counter, you may assume your opponent has no knowledge of how to counter your counter. In reality, your opponent may have the knowledge/ability to counter your counter. This is why 1 step counter is easy to learn but difficult to apply in reality.

You have to learn MA for self-defense. Just to learn some 1 step counters is not enough. The reason is simple. You have no training about what to do after that 1 step.

How many steps is enough? If you show me a 2 step, then you assume your opponent does not know how to counter 2 step and you have no training on what to do after 2 step. If you show me a 3 step, then you assume your opponent does not know how to counter 3 step and you have no training on what to do after 3 step. If you show me a n step, then you assume your opponent does not know how to counter n step and you have no training on what to do after n step.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

How many steps is enough?

For normal human being, I believe 4 steps can be the maximum. But you can use AI to go as deep as you want to.

You can use either

- breadth first search, or
- depth first search.

to navigate through the whole tree.

Of course, you can train breadth first search by learning all the possible counters for technique 1. You can also train depth first search as the following example.

 

[JowGaWolf]

After watching your video, it makes me to think the following.

- Why do a video have just 2 steps?

My experience has been that you are almost guaranteed that 2 things (steps) will happen. You grab my wrist I escape and counter with a back fist. 95% chance that this will happen. My third step will vary depending on how you respond to my second step. If you stand still then you get hit. If you move then you may avoid the strike. That third step is less predictable and as a result the 3rd step you do will vary.

Jab then reverse punch is constant. What happens after the reverse punch will vary. That 3rd step is where "you do this then I'll do this in response becomes less reliable "

The more steps, the less reliable those pre-planned steps will be. The 2 steps that you take against me will most like happen. You'll be able to execute those steps without issue. After that a simple step back, forward, left or right. Or even a drop instance can spoil your ability to execute pre-planned step 3.

When I teach sparring. The third step is to look for additional opportunities. Then execute another 2 step attack. For me a string of 2 step plans is better than a 5 step plan in which everything after 3 steps may no longer be applicable.

 

[JowGaWolf]

For normal human being, I believe 4 steps can be the maximum. But you can use AI to go as deep as you want to.

You can use either

- breadth first search, or
- depth first search.

to navigate through the whole tree.

View attachment 29752

Of course, you can train breadth first search by learning all the possible counters for technique 1. You can also train depth first search as the following example.

4 steps pre-preplanned (4 strike combination or 4 technique combo). Is as far as I would take it. I think Jow Ga Kung fu maxes out at 3 step combos (3 technique combo). The beginner for is mostly single strike and double strike combos that string together. I know 4 is possible because I see it in boxing. But I think boxing is mostly 1 - 3 Strike combos strung together.

 

[wab25]

After watching your video, it makes me to think the following.

- Why do a video have just 2 steps?

When you apply 1 step counter, you may assume your opponent has no knowledge of how to counter your counter. In reality, your opponent may have the knowledge/ability to counter your counter. This is why 1 step counter is easy to learn but difficult to apply in reality.

You have to learn MA for self-defense. Just to learn some 1 step counters is not enough. The reason is simple. You have no training about what to do after that 1 step.

For normal human being, I believe 4 steps can be the maximum.

So, that being said... why does this guy not show 4 step combinations? He only shows A doing the attack and B doing the technique. I do not see A attacking, B doing the technique, A countering the technique, B countering the counter.... Maybe we can conclude that this guy does not know what to do after step one?

 

[O'Malley]

I'm talking about movement and manipulation. I've heard it called 'tuite' by some. For example, person grabs, you use your hand or hands to effect a release and / or move into a joint lock or something of that nature. There's a million of them; I don't have to get specific here. I think most of you know what I mean?

I happen to be a member of an "Old Farts" MA group on FB. It's a good group; not much in the way of ego or trashing other styles, etc. People are just nice, and I appreciate being there. Being old is the only requirement, so not everyone is an advanced rank or has been training for decades.

Someone posted a YouTube video the other day, and it showed a fellow from Australia showing some tuite. Very smooth, his technique was clean and purposeful and I appreciated it. I also recognized all of it. It's stuff we practice constantly. Besides the hitting, kicking, and blocking, we practice things like body shifting, movement, stances, and of course, tuite. Common counters to the kind of thing that happens in a conflict, whether or not it's an all-out fight. Someone grabs a handful of hair, you pin their hand and move your body to bend their wrist at a painful angle, etc. I mean, it goes on and on.

Ignoring the strikes he shows at the beginning, and the discussion of 'do' versus 'jutsu', about 3 minutes in he starts to get into the hand techniques. This is what caused such amazement. I was only amazed that nobody was being shown these things.

What surprised me was that many folks expressed amazement at the video. "Wow, why isn't this taught anymore?" and "This is the true karate, this guy is a magician!"

Doesn't everyone learn this stuff?

I mean, this is the kind of casual stuff that works and can be used any time. Doesn't require years to master, or great fitness or high dan rank. It's taught in many types of martial art, it's not limited to just karate or whatever, or so I thought.

Anybody? Am I alone thinking this isn't secret ancient hidden magic knowledge, just the kind of stuff everyone should be learning?

Do you mean dealing with grabs? Yeah we tend to know a thing or two about it in aikido...

The approach is different, though, as the point of contact is seen as the gateway to take the other guy off balance.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

So, that being said... why does this guy not show 4 step combinations?

Maybe I didn't make my point clear. It's not how many levels that a combo should get into. It's who makes the initial attack.

Most of the online videos use the 2 steps approach as

- A attacks B.
- B counters (B is showing technique).

Not too many videos use the approach as

- A attacks B (A is showing technique).
- If B doesn't counter, A will finish his initial attack (this is just 1 step).
- If B counters, A will change his initial attack into a different attack (this is 3 steps).

This clip shows 1 step:

- A attacks B.
- B doesn't counter. A then finishes his initial attack.

This clip shows 3 steps:

- A hook punches at B.
- B counter with a hook punch.
- A change hook punch into arm wrap.

This clip shows 5 steps.

- A attacks B's right leg.
- B steps back right leg.
- A attacks B's left leg.
- B steps back left leg.
- A sweep B's right leg.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

4 steps pre-preplanned (4 strike combination or 4 technique combo). Is as far as I would take it.

I won't call that "pre-planned". I'll call that "natural respond" instead. Whether your natural respond is just 1 step, or multiple steps that depend on individual training.

When you

- kick my groin, if I drop my arm to block it, you will punch my face.
- attack my leading right leg, if I step back my right leg, you will attack my leading left leg.
- pull me. if I resist, you will change your pull into push.
- try to straight my arm, when I resist, you will bend my arm.
- attack my right side, when I switch sides, you will attack my left side.
- ...

Do you have to plan for these? I don't think so.

 

[wab25]

Maybe I didn't make my point clear. It's not how many levels that a combo should get into. It's who makes the initial attack.

Most of the online videos use the 2 steps approach as

- A attacks B.
- B counters (B is showing technique).

Not too many videos use the approach as

- A attacks B (A is showing technique).
- If B doesn't counter, A will finish his initial attack (this is just 1 step).
- If B counters, A will change his initial attack into a different attack (this is 3 steps).

This clip shows 1 step:

- A attacks B.
- B doesn't counter. A then finishes his initial attack.

This clip shows 3 steps:

- A hook punches at B.
- B counter with a hook punch.
- A change hook punch into arm wrap.

This clip shows 5 steps.

- A attacks B's right leg.
- B steps back right leg.
- A attacks B's left leg.
- B steps back left leg.
- A sweep B's right leg.

You did not like the initial video... as he was not demonstrating 4-5 step combos. There is certainly a time and place for that. But, not every time is the right time. You post videos showing 1 step.

Students need to learn to perform each technique. If the student can not do step one... then there is no need for any further steps.

In the original video in this thread, the guy is showing people that a move they thought was a formality, is actually a technique. Many people are taught these hand positions at the start of a kata, as just a formality of the kata. The guy in the video is trying to change that perception and teach that the starting position of the kata is actually a technique. It is a technique that many people who do that kata, have a very hard time doing. I know... I have tried to teach many Shotokan Karate folks how to do those locks.... not realizing that they were in the kata that they should know.... I did not need any special counter when they first tried it... the only counter I needed was let them try the technique.... They will mess it up so badly, they will effectively counter themselves. After a few repetitions, and corrections, they start to put on the technique correctly.... now we can move on to the counter. This first counter will take time for the beginner to learn.

There is a habit that people have. When they see a video demonstrating a technique, to immediately criticize and say, but what if??? There does not exist any technique or combo that you can not "what if?" I understand the need to criticize the other guys video... but if the video was supposed to show one technique, it should not be criticized for not showing a combo. And it should not be criticized for not showing how to deal with the counter to technique A, if the intent was to show technique A. Yes, A can be countered.... but it can be countered many different ways.... but if the student cannot even do technique A to begin with.... there is no need for him to learn the counter to the counter to A.

This does not mean that you cannot criticize the video. It just means criticize the video for what it is intending to show. In your last video, showing the 5 steps... I should not criticize that it does not show 10 steps. I should not criticize, that the other guy could have countered in a different way. (If you showed that video, then I would criticize saying that he could counter the way he is doing in this video... see how that gets us no where?) I can criticize this video and say that he is in a bad position at the end, after the throw. He ends on one foot, his back to the other guy and off balance. Because of this he will have a hard time should he need to continue... notice the little hop to regain his balance before putting his foot down. If he were to do the same set he is showing, but maintain his balance and end in a good structure... then this technique would be good and he would be able to handle many or most of the what ifs. But, I would not be criticizing the video, for what it is not intended to show.

 

[drop bear]

I like dirty grip fight style boxing. I think this might be a bit rules based as to whether people do it much though.

 

[O'Malley]

After watching your video, it makes me to think the following.

- Why do a video have just 2 steps?

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...

Why don't a video have:

1. A grabs B.
2. B does ...
3. A then does ...

The way, you not only learn how to counter a technique, but you also learn how to counter a technique counter.

You might like this one:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You might like this one:

Video like this is difficult to find online.

 

[Holmejr]

It’s amazing how complicated a simple teaching video can get. I didn’t see any blood being spilled, hard to take it seriously.

We begin teaching a blocking technique that addresses the most common way someone would attack with a blunt weapon. At first it seems rather one step and routine. But students have to become comfortable with something coming at them fast and hard, in fact, very hard. If I were to post a video of this beginning technique, one would wonder “what’s next?”or “where is this going?” or “it seems rather static” or “why isn’t there four steps…”