What is all this blocking about
- Thread starter Amatsu Tatara
- Start date
Attention all users:
This thread is being reopned at this time. All off topic posts have been removed and infraction cards will be issued if users do not stay on topic.
Brian R. VanCise
MartialTalk Super Moderator
This thread is being reopned at this time. All off topic posts have been removed and infraction cards will be issued if users do not stay on topic.
Brian R. VanCise
MartialTalk Super Moderator
While in College I worked as a bouncer and security and as a manager of a hangout for teens and young adults.
The guy I put on the ground tried to hit one of my female employees. He did not see me, and I saw him and caught his punch and the choked him with my other hand. While I was "talking" with the rest he turned blue and then white and then other colors and he went out. I released him and the story is as above.
Steel Tiger
Senior Master
This is exactly what I think of when I think blocking, or parrying, or deflecting, or whatever you want to call it.
It generally involves not getting hurt first and then getting into a position to do some harm.
Munkyjitsudo
White Belt
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 0
ok I guess this will be on topic... blocking is impractical have a boxer chuck punches at you while you stand in a corner not a karate or taekwondo guy who's gonna throw impractical straight punches that imitate the spear thrust old fuedel japan, it's a basic boxign drill and tell me if your magic hands are working against them... reason why the stonewall defense was invented... and catching someones punch with your hand from the side of them when there trying to hit someone else isnt a block it's a grab. The ONLY block we train in my class is a super wide haymaker and the only way to actually block a haymaker is at the bending point of the arm and you have to catch it behind the shoulder. to much to have to anticipate. impractical. better off slipping and dodging the punches. waiting for them to come to you. no one on the street throws straight punches it's all dead arm flailing and haymakers.
Munkyjitsudo
White Belt
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 0
aka spiking is stonewall defense my friend... check the crazy monkey boxing system for advanced applications for spiking while in the stonewall defense...
lol, very interesting I really thought you were joking... The spiking block was just something I accidentally discovered and somebody told me what it was called. After browsing a little bit about the crazy monkey boxing defense system I must say I'm quite curious. I could use a lot of head defense tweaking now that I only have one good eye left. Certainly something that would help me improve my Muay Thai. Thanks mate!
There is something about this post that strikes me as very strange. On the one hand, we're told that
When I hear an instructor talk about stopping or catching a punch I know that he has never been in a street fight.
On the other hand, we're also told that
A hay maker that you see coming, a drunk sure, that block is great.
What I find weird about this juxtaposition is that unsought violent encounters with an untrained, dangerous assailanta pretty good working definition of a streetfight for most of us, I think!virtually always, from my own experience, begin with an attempted `John Wayne' roundhouse. Some guy is in a bad mood, is proably a bit of an aggressive jerk, or else is a pathological bully, you cross his path due largely to bad luck, and... there you are, in a streetfight. So to say that blocking doesn't work in a streetfight, but then add that it's great to do when facing a haymaker, is like saying that you don't enjoy travelling by automobile, you'd much rather get where you have to go by car... so I just don't get what the OP is saying here. People like Patrick McCarthy and Bill Burgar, who've done serious research on common street attacks, have observed that in almost every case such attacks begin with what PMcC calls `habitual acts of violence', and that such such acts heavily reflect variants of grab-and-strike actions that TMA deflection/strike combinations work extremely effectively against, if they're trained in a realistic manner. Once again, for the zillionth time, the TMAs have all you need to defend yourself effectively but you have to be willing to train under simulated street-violence conditions, and therefore to be willing to risk non-trivial injuries.
But there's a lot more that needs to go into a serious reply to the OP. As far as the practicality of blocking goes, sure, if by blocking you mean just standing there ignoring an aggressive display by an obviously dangerous guy and letting him close the distance, and thinking that you can react fast enough after he throws the punch from a position where your's basically standing there with your hands in your pockets... well yes, blocking is not going to be very effective there, as every single discussion of realistic TMA applications has emphasized repeatedly. But no one who's been well trained just stands there. I'll leave out the pre-emptive strike option, which is advocated on extremely sensible grounds by traditional karateka and TKDists alike; just talking about purely defensive reaction, every single CQ oriented SD system, from military-style TKD to Combat Hapkido to reality-based karate application expects you to be in a specific preparatory mode which has been discussed in greatest detail, under the name `The Fence', by Geoff Thompson, probably the most celebrated professional streetfighter in the UK, a career club/doorman bouncer with decades of experience and something on the order of 200 documented violent altercations on the `pavement arena', which have earned him a level of fear and respect in those circles pretty much unparalleled in the world. And GT, btw, is a high ranking Shotokan karateka, one of the people in Abernethy's realistic combat TMA `experimental' group, who has worked out the use of The Fence over years of the nastiest streetfighting you can imagine. And guess what: the whole point of the fence is to allow you to block a punch or other hand-based strike (though it also nips graps and other attack-preparatory moves in the bud).
Most of the people on MT probably have some experience with the fence, an innocent looking projection of both arms in a kind of conciliatory posture which nonetheless allows the defender to easily intercept a punch directly at, or off, their centerline, deflecting it while the defender closes the simultaneously closes the distance and strikes to the attacker's face with elbow or palm-heel strikes or throat with knifehand strikes, at the same time trapping the deflected attacking arm while targetting weak points on the attacker's neck and head; arm pins are also straightforward to apply. And these techs are in many cases already built into the kata, hyungs or hsings of traditional MAs. So far as I can tell, The Fence counts as a blocking tactic. So to the extent that people like Thompson, Peyton Quinn, Lawrence Kane, John Pelligrini and other bouncers, security managers and other types with vast documented first-hand experience in violent encounters advocate deflection/interception defense tactics like The Fence, based on their own fighting experience, to that extent it seems clear that blocking does work.
But it works in other ways too. Check out the following article at Iain Abernethy's website:
http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/Lawrence_Kane_8.asp
Kane's article, `Shock blocks' (free, and downloadable, like all 60+ terrific articles available at Abernethy's site) recalls the following incident from the life of Anko Itosu, in his lifetime one of the most formidable fighters on Okinawa:
famed Shuri-Te karate master Itosu "Anko" Yasutsune traveled to the port city of Naha in the summer of 1856 to find relief from a particularly long period of heat and unbearable humidity. He found a large rock that provided some relief from the sun, settled down to enjoy the ocean breeze, and was about to doze off when he overheard several of the local villagers cracking jokes and disparaging Shuri karate.
Insulted by this banter, he decided to uphold the honor of his style by challenging the local champion, Naha-no-Tomoyose, to a duel. Making his way to the challenge area (ude-kake-shi), he made himself known to the crowd by quickly defeating three lesser practitioners in order to attract the local champion's attention.
When Tomoyose arrived on the scene, Itosu discovered to his chagrin that he faced a much larger, more powerfully built opponent. He realized that he would need to end the fight quickly or risk becoming overwhelmed by Tomoyose's superior size and strength. As the fighters began to circle each other, members of the crowd observed this disparity too, wagering at odds of ten to one against the challenger from Shuri. Tomoyose threw the first blow, a mighty lunge punch (oi tsuki). As Tomoyose's fist came screaming toward his head, Itosu shifted aside and blocked with a sword-hand technique (shuto uke), neatly breaking his adversary's arm. The crowd heard a loud snap, like the breaking of a branch, and the fight was over. This great victory, won through a basic block, solidified Itosu Yasutsune's reputation for all time.
Kand discusses ways to ramp up a basic check/control CQ defense response to the point where extreme limb damage results, taking the assailant out of the fight at its very inception. And yes, in response to the OPer's repeated insistence on the role of multiple strikes in making blocking useless, Kane specifically discusses in this article how training to administer shock blocks, whose tactical payoff is typically a severe joint break, basically takes further strikesor any other use of the attacker's limbout of the picture. In this connection I find the following post very suggestive:
Makes sense to me! Just another example of what seems to me the incorrectness of the OPer's main claim.
Superb point-making, my friend. One might almost say "Well blocked!" 
.
I logged in with the intentional of putting a reasoned rebuttal in this thread ... now I see I don't have to.
However, my central hope was that I could help the OP see that belligerent, unsubstantiated and overly blunt disagreement with a group of people quite knowledgeable in the field under debate was not going to do his reputation anything but harm.
.I logged in with the intentional of putting a reasoned rebuttal in this thread ... now I see I don't have to
.However, my central hope was that I could help the OP see that belligerent, unsubstantiated and overly blunt disagreement with a group of people quite knowledgeable in the field under debate was not going to do his reputation anything but harm.
Superb point-making, my friend. One might almost say "Well blocked!"
Rep for that alone, Mark :lol:
I logged in with the intentional of putting a reasoned rebuttal in this thread ... now I see I don't have to
However, my central hope was that I could help the OP see that belligerent, unsubstantiated and overly blunt disagreement with a group of people quite knowledgeable in the field under debate was not going to do his reputation anything but harm.
You should say everything you were originally intending to say, M. I'm interested in your take on the whole issue (both the tone of the OP and the issue of blocking in general... the latter is really complex and important and there's a lot more to be said, I think. Curriculum issues, for example: how should effective blocking be taught so that it becomes a habit, and at what point in the curriculum, and who should be how old to learn what... that sort of thing. I've been thinking a lot about curriculum issues lately (`worrying is maybe a better word') and any thoughts you have on any of this stuff would be of great help and interest to me and others....)
Sadly I don't have time to put up anything cogent as I'm off to iai ... running late already in fact :O.
I'll certainly try and formulate a 'take' on the subject, from the kung fu perspective, this evening tho'.
I'll certainly try and formulate a 'take' on the subject, from the kung fu perspective, this evening tho'.
Looking forward to it! Meanwhile, though, I have to issue an IOU for rep to you as you're still on my rep stack. But that too shall pass...
Okay, great iaido session complete, lawn mowed, borders weeded, Star Wars IV watched (so my missus could see the stormtrooper bang his head on the control room door scene ) and a fine bottle of Wolf Blass on it's way to being defeated :yum:.
I've re-read Post 1 again to refresh my memory as to where the past three pages (not counting deletions) came from and I have to say that I'm a little bit confused as to the line of thinking those few sentences convey.
I've ground it through the mill of my aging grey cells and have concluded that the OP might be suffering a little from some propagandised misapprehensions brought on by whoever he's being instructed by (or by taking what's in kung fu movies as being actual combative truth).
When we speak of 'catching a punch' we're not talking about an Arnie style fist grab that stops the attack dead.
Very difficult to try and describe in words as it's a rolling, receeding, deflection that involves both forward then backward movement of your own arm, a twist of the shoulders and hips (and of the feet if necessary at the end) whilst your own wrist rotates to push the strike off target and allow you to drop your hand onto the extended wrist of the attacker.
It takes less time to execute than a strike as the distance you have to travel is much less and the muscle power needed is much less also (using 'quick twitch' fibres rather than strength ones).
It keeps your own posture unbroken and gives you the lever you need to either break the opponents posture, control his movements or break the arm if you need to. The one time I had to use it was against someone wielding an improvised weapon and I did all three with frightening ease considering he was quite a bit bigger and stronger than me.
As to 'Blocking', altho' we speak of what we do in Lau as 'blocks' they're generally really no such thing. Again I'm wondering if that somewhat confusing terminological quirk has affected the OP's thinking on the matter i.e. that part of the scorn comes from misconception?
The block (might as well stick to the term) is a deflection of the strikers power brought about by as minimal a contact as you need on the extending limb. This contact involves a rolling of your own arm to apply accelerative leverage to the limb, pushing it further off line and usually ends with the fist curling in to deliver a numbing strike of your own onto the limb to discourage further use of it. If you need to, you can use that contact to assist the evasive move that is simultaneously performed as the block is merely the precursor to an attack of your own - plus the positional change makes it harder for the attacker to apply a combination of strikes.
The important thing to realise that it is not a static defensive move. In Lau, other than the point of stability you need as a strike impacts, you're never static anyway.
If mobility is denied you by qeography, for example if you're stuck in a corner, then the blocks do become more 'solid' as you seek to deflect the incoming punch using an actute angle contact and rebound from that contact into a strike of your own (fist to the throat/solar plexus or palm to the jaw/floating ribs are favourites here). Again, speed is not an issue. Your hands are up already and to succeed you need only move a few inches up and out. Hardly difficult to do that quicker than a punch that has to reach out from the attacker and across the space between you to score a hit.
Having put in a few clarifying paragraphs, a question to the OP may be in order. Rather than us trying to convince you that blocking is not in fact a futile tactic, perhaps you can explain to us why you think that it is?
I definitely garner the impression that what is in your minds eye is different than what is in ours and perhaps we can undo some of the ill-will you've drawn in by clarifying what you mean.
) and a fine bottle of Wolf Blass on it's way to being defeated :yum:.I've re-read Post 1 again to refresh my memory as to where the past three pages (not counting deletions) came from and I have to say that I'm a little bit confused as to the line of thinking those few sentences convey.
I've ground it through the mill of my aging grey cells and have concluded that the OP might be suffering a little from some propagandised misapprehensions brought on by whoever he's being instructed by (or by taking what's in kung fu movies as being actual combative truth
).When we speak of 'catching a punch' we're not talking about an Arnie style fist grab that stops the attack dead.
Very difficult to try and describe in words as it's a rolling, receeding, deflection that involves both forward then backward movement of your own arm, a twist of the shoulders and hips (and of the feet if necessary at the end) whilst your own wrist rotates to push the strike off target and allow you to drop your hand onto the extended wrist of the attacker.
It takes less time to execute than a strike as the distance you have to travel is much less and the muscle power needed is much less also (using 'quick twitch' fibres rather than strength ones).
It keeps your own posture unbroken and gives you the lever you need to either break the opponents posture, control his movements or break the arm if you need to. The one time I had to use it was against someone wielding an improvised weapon and I did all three with frightening ease considering he was quite a bit bigger and stronger than me.
As to 'Blocking', altho' we speak of what we do in Lau as 'blocks' they're generally really no such thing. Again I'm wondering if that somewhat confusing terminological quirk has affected the OP's thinking on the matter i.e. that part of the scorn comes from misconception?
The block (might as well stick to the term) is a deflection of the strikers power brought about by as minimal a contact as you need on the extending limb. This contact involves a rolling of your own arm to apply accelerative leverage to the limb, pushing it further off line and usually ends with the fist curling in to deliver a numbing strike of your own onto the limb to discourage further use of it. If you need to, you can use that contact to assist the evasive move that is simultaneously performed as the block is merely the precursor to an attack of your own - plus the positional change makes it harder for the attacker to apply a combination of strikes.
The important thing to realise that it is not a static defensive move. In Lau, other than the point of stability you need as a strike impacts, you're never static anyway.
If mobility is denied you by qeography, for example if you're stuck in a corner, then the blocks do become more 'solid' as you seek to deflect the incoming punch using an actute angle contact and rebound from that contact into a strike of your own (fist to the throat/solar plexus or palm to the jaw/floating ribs are favourites here). Again, speed is not an issue. Your hands are up already and to succeed you need only move a few inches up and out. Hardly difficult to do that quicker than a punch that has to reach out from the attacker and across the space between you to score a hit.
Having put in a few clarifying paragraphs, a question to the OP may be in order. Rather than us trying to convince you that blocking is not in fact a futile tactic, perhaps you can explain to us why you think that it is?
I definitely garner the impression that what is in your minds eye is different than what is in ours and perhaps we can undo some of the ill-will you've drawn in by clarifying what you mean.
Steel Tiger
Senior Master
Exile, Sukerkin, two very good posts there my friends. You've made me think about this in more depth.
I have a feeling that a lot of this 'blocks don't work' thinking stems from a confusion brought about by traditional ways of training defensive techniques. I can well understand how someone might come to the conclusion that blocks don't work if they always come from the waist, as you will often see them being trained in Karate or TKD. Of course, they are not meant to be used from that position.
Exile mentioned the place of defence in curriculum. From my own point of view it is very important. I think along the lines that it is actually quite easy to hurt someone (doing so effeciently is another matter) but not so easy to defend ones self. As a result defensive techniques are a fundamental part of every class.
We have five blocking or parrying methods, named and defined by the five elemental agencies of Asian tradition. We train them constantly so that they become second nature. The interesting thing I have noticed is that while we train all the techniques equally, individuals develop a preference for a particular type, which they find easiest to do or understand.
Of these five methods only one could really be called a block. Something I define as intercepting and stopping an attack. As opposed to a parry which deflects an attack but does not significantly reduce its energy but directs it past you. Both are effective, but I prefer parries because they tend to hurt me less.
This brings me to catching attacks. I think Sukerkin is right that some think this involves grabbing a fist and stopping an attack dead. We have a parry called Fire which is a defensive technique that leads into qinna. It is called Fire because fire is supposed to have the property of clinging. The technique works from a deflecting parry and a grab (I think Sukerkin described it quite well actually).
A last point about blocking is what we call mousing and other arts call Gunting or limb destruction. This is using defence as attack. Others have mentioned it and it is very effective. We have a specific parry called Metal which is very similar to the deflecting punches seen in Wing Chun. It called Metal because metal, in the form of a blade, cuts.
I have a feeling that a lot of this 'blocks don't work' thinking stems from a confusion brought about by traditional ways of training defensive techniques. I can well understand how someone might come to the conclusion that blocks don't work if they always come from the waist, as you will often see them being trained in Karate or TKD. Of course, they are not meant to be used from that position.
Exile mentioned the place of defence in curriculum. From my own point of view it is very important. I think along the lines that it is actually quite easy to hurt someone (doing so effeciently is another matter) but not so easy to defend ones self. As a result defensive techniques are a fundamental part of every class.
We have five blocking or parrying methods, named and defined by the five elemental agencies of Asian tradition. We train them constantly so that they become second nature. The interesting thing I have noticed is that while we train all the techniques equally, individuals develop a preference for a particular type, which they find easiest to do or understand.
Of these five methods only one could really be called a block. Something I define as intercepting and stopping an attack. As opposed to a parry which deflects an attack but does not significantly reduce its energy but directs it past you. Both are effective, but I prefer parries because they tend to hurt me less.
This brings me to catching attacks. I think Sukerkin is right that some think this involves grabbing a fist and stopping an attack dead. We have a parry called Fire which is a defensive technique that leads into qinna. It is called Fire because fire is supposed to have the property of clinging. The technique works from a deflecting parry and a grab (I think Sukerkin described it quite well actually).
A last point about blocking is what we call mousing and other arts call Gunting or limb destruction. This is using defence as attack. Others have mentioned it and it is very effective. We have a specific parry called Metal which is very similar to the deflecting punches seen in Wing Chun. It called Metal because metal, in the form of a blade, cuts.
Selfcritical
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2006
- Messages
- 90
- Reaction score
- 1
Are we here differentiating between blocking and covering?
It's not really clear. The OP was pretty vague on that kind of point. I've been assuming that what was intended was any kind of interception of a strike. There's a whole spectrum of possibilities, but the OP made no distinction amongst them, so.... ?
Munkyjitsudo
White Belt
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 0
bla bla bla bla bla... all I hear is philisophical theory non-sense... if the style of blocking you guys are talking about it would of been in the old game of pugilism a long time ago due to it being all arms and hands... I want to see you block a crushing blow from someone who knows how to throw a good hook or cross and tell me that aint gonna cause damage to your arm if your even lucky in getting it in the path... but hold that statment... it's gonna spark someone in talking about iron training... yeah if you have all day to beat yourself with sand bags 3 times a day... those of you who are talkign about the redirection of a punch... that isnt blocking... thats a parry... blocks are what are used in systems like karate, tae kwon do, and kung fu... the whole upward downward block bs... all this theory is leading to the same place... put up or shut up... reason why eastern martial arts besides like muay thai or doing well in NHB events you can say rules all you want but you take NHB athlete and take away the rules your in for some trouble... you dont think they train in cheap shots... just like professional boxers dont train in em either huh? the argumemnts will always be the same but your arguement will always be nothing more then philisophical theory bs... just like time travel... it dont exist till it's proven... and sure hasnt been proven...
My friend, everyone is entitled to an opinion and not everyones world view is the same.
Nonetheless, if you're going to espouse a position in an internet forum it's probably best to do it in one where there is a slim chance that someone is going to agree with you.
Myself and several other people far more qualified than I have tried to explain things as clearly as we can from an informed point of view. Many of us have actually been forced to use our training against just the sort of thing you're talking about and most of us have black belts we use to hold our trousers up.
If that doesn't persuade you, then what is the point of posting further? A simple "I don't agree and you can't change my mind" would serve you better.
Nonetheless, if you're going to espouse a position in an internet forum it's probably best to do it in one where there is a slim chance that someone is going to agree with you.
Myself and several other people far more qualified than I have tried to explain things as clearly as we can from an informed point of view. Many of us have actually been forced to use our training against just the sort of thing you're talking about and most of us have black belts we use to hold our trousers up.
If that doesn't persuade you, then what is the point of posting further? A simple "I don't agree and you can't change my mind" would serve you better.
You can block a stong roundouse kick with multiple points of contact.
Sean
