When the kata is applied to self defense

[JowGaWolf]

Join a Bjj or MMA gym and the peace will be eternal.

Dammit Hanzou.. you just couldn't resist lol.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Or just work out with those guys and spar them until you can jow ga their faces off.

I already got a plan

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

My guess would be that most striking martial arts have movement that is foreign to most people. As a teacher I would watch older students try to get their body to move a certain way and you can see them struggle with it. I've seen students rush through learning the movement and do horrible in applying the movement simply because their brain got in the way.

The problem of form first and application later is you may train something that's totally worthless.

This short clip contains the first 2 move of the 1st long fist form Lien Bu Chuan.

1. Your opponent punches you, you use your palm to push up on his elbow joint.
2. You then palm strike back on his waist.

I'll never use a vertical palm block to deal with a straight punch. I'll also never strike on my opponent's waist with a side palm like that. If I repeat that form 10,000 times in my life, I'll have wasted a lot of training time that I can do something more useful.

If I use the application first approach, I probably will never want to learn that form in the first place.

As a teacher, you (general YOU) don't want to force your students to learm something that he will never use for the rest of his life.

 

[JowGaWolf]

1. Your opponent punches you, you use your palm to push up on his elbow joint.
2. You then palm strike back on his waist.

I don't know the system so I can't really comment on what that movement is. However, I'm always eager to offer an outside view based on what I know.from my system and things that I've thought about. This will give you some a little understanding of how I analyze things and in turn discover things.

When I look at the video you posted I make the assumption that their is value in the techniques. The only thing is to understand where that value begins and ends, and in what context the technique is. Keep in mind that I could be totally wrong about the video. I can only base the following on what I think I'm seeing.

The first technique
The first technique don't seem as it's addressing a punch. The reason why is because it looks really open, if I were to trade strikes, it is likely that I will get punched in the face and trade a strike to the waist which in practice actually slips off if not done at the right angle. In the context of a moving opponent in sparring or fighting, that strike to the waist probably won't interrupt my opponent enough to stop his second strike. With this in mind I assume that I may have been told incorrectly or was given the worst example of use of this technique on purpose. This is the same process I use for Jow Ga. Sometimes applications get lost over time and as a result a teacher will learn the incorrect application. Other times teachers forget and try to piece things together without having real sparring or fighting experience. It's just a reality. So at this point I'm trying to figure in what context does the first technique make sense.

And here is what came up with based on looking and not actually doing, which is it's own risk and something I normally don't do.
So to address the big open appearance.
Possibility 1: The first technique is done to redirect to the outside of a punch. In this case you are addressing my right punch. This is the only way I can think of, that would allow you not to be at risk of getting punched with the other hand. I can't really tell what your hand is doing but it's got a strange movement to it, so I'm assuming that the movement. In this case grabbing and pulling down on my striking hand.

Concern #1: If you are grabbing and pulling down on my striking hand then my guess is that you would need to slow the punch down, so I'm thinking that this technique is one that "grinds" the incoming punch before the punch is fully extending. This is based on the knowledge of some things I do that work.

Practical outcome: If you can grab that hand and pull their arm downward then you can disrupt the other punch that is trying to come in. This will prevent you from being knocked out. If you are able to hold onto the arm even for a second, you will prevent it from reloading as the pull downward should create some imbalance in your opponents body.


The second technique - Palm strike to waist
This doesn't look like a Palm strike to the waist. In Jow Ga we target the same height as our own body. For example, a strike to the face would be my face height, A strike to the waist would be my waist height. If I apply that logic to what I see, then I would have to assume you are targeting the ribs as the strike is at your Ribs height. This makes more sense to me than a strike at the waist. In Jow Ga we have similar hand positions and that would definitely be at ribs. Normally it wouldn't be effective, but if you do technique 1 successfully with the grab and pull then you should be able to cause some very real damage. The effectiveness of the damage is because you are striking the ribs when I wouldn't be able to defend or prepare for the impact especially if I'm already off balance. In addition to that you are pulling me downward into the strike at the same time you are striking. This is good body mechanics so it should allow you to maintain your root in the process. If you notice in the video. One arm pulls me in at the same time you are sending the other one out. (Good form by the way, most people would have made that a 1 then 2 step vs, both going at the same time.). If you hit me in the ribs like this then I would feel it because I'm in the worst position to resist it.

I'm not sure but I'm guessing that when someone pulls you off balance unexpectingly the body breathes in. which makes the strike even worse because now you are hitting me while I'm inhaling.

The movement of the feet Stepping in
The stepping in looks like it's securing the root as well as closing the distance, which helps to reduce the effectiveness of a punch from your opponents left hand.

The dropping / Sinking
This looks like something is going on but I can't tell what the purpose may be. I would actually have to spar with you and take note of my own reaction to that movement to see if the motion is causing me to delay my attack, sort of like a feint. I'm lost with the goal and function of that one.

 

[JowGaWolf]

As a teacher, you (general YOU) don't want to force your students to learm something that he will never use for the rest of his life.

lol. pretty much 90% of everything in kung fu. lol. In my case even if I don't use it, I still want to pass that knowledge on. I may not use it, but that doesn't mean my student won't excel in it. Out of all of the class at my old school I was the only one that really used sweeps and foot hooks. Had the instructor thought it was useless and that I wouldn't use it, then I would have never had the opportunity to learn it.

 

[now disabled]

I've been thinking this for a bit, but you get too uptight and think too much about other people's responses. No one is offended by what you said, and I doubt anyone is concerned if you're offended.

More related to this, some people on this forum, if you make a claim they disagree with, want proof of it. That proof can be video, research studies, logic that they accept, or something else, but some sort of proof. If you have that proof, share it and continue, or if you don't have any way to substantiate it, say "I can't prove that point, nevermind. Otherwise it leads (has lead in the past) to absolutely ridiculous claims. The other option is what you've been doing, which is insisting that people accept your claims without proof, causing them to continue asking for proof, and it'll cause a back to forth for about 10 pages on each thread.

I am insisting on nothing at all

If you have that view then that is your right

your comments are noted

 

[DaveB]

That's a completely separate argument. I was responding to that point only vis a vis Silva/front kicks.

Which was a piece of whataboutism raised to distract from his selective approach to evidence.

 

[DaveB]

Where did I say that MA training was proven to be worthless? I said that there's little evidence to show that kata/forms training makes you a better fighter, and in fact the evidence appears to show that the opposite is the case.

Your dumb ideas are worthless, not ma training.

You were trying to argue that training not directly following the form used in combat is of little value. You were given a great example of this being rubbish so you threw up the Steven Seagal defence.

At the point that you dismissed an inconvenient fact you lost what little credibility you had with me.

And lastly, the vast majority of life is not on video.
If you can't work out why a few YouTube clips do not constitute proof of anything beyond the existence of YouTube, then my advice is to forget martial arts and work on your critical thinking skills. You will need them far more than you'll need to know how to fight.

 

[now disabled]

Your dumb ideas are worthless, not ma training.

You were trying to argue that training not directly following the form used in combat is of little value. You were given a great example of this being rubbish so you threw up the Steven Seagal defence.

At the point that you dismissed an inconvenient fact you lost what little credibility you had with me.

And lastly, the vast majority of life is not on video.
If you can't work out why a few YouTube clips do not constitute proof of anything beyond the existence of YouTube, then my advice is to forget martial arts and work on your critical thinking skills. You will need them far more than you'll need to know how to fight.

Fair point well made

Cherry picking things and ignoring other things seems to be the way and I agree vids are not everything and can and are taken out of context depending on how the person viewing wants to see them

 

[DaveB]

For the record.

The problem TMA has in not producing great fighters, is based in how most people, including masters of the arts, train.

Most TMA trains to develop skill in performing the key elements of the art. Karate performs striking techniques, aikido performs blending techniques, wing.chun performs Chi Sao, tai chi performs slow motion forms etc.

From a base of uncoordinated newb, Training twice a week for a couple of hours at a time just about gives enough time to learn these key points and some peripheral skills. Fighting takes a back seat to learning skills, and the pool of hobbyist students in a single school is the bulk of most clubs resources for fighting experience.

This creates lots of "masters" within these small self contained pools, most of whom got that level precisely because they were never much interested in fighting.

You'll find that TMA with a sport format are the ones that produce the most fighters because when you say fighters what you mean is sportsmen. If you follow Hanzou logic that means your Tai chi ufc fighter will appear with a big enough Tai chi competition scene.

As I pointed out though his logic is deeply flawed because if Tai chi people wanted to fight they either wouldn't be doing Tai chi or would already have a big competition circuit.

And this is the crux of the issue. We all know we can fight at boxing or kick boxing gyms etc. We do tma for other reasons. Not exclusively, but enough that most of us Don't Care.

And Yes, plenty "Masters" are deluded about what their mastery of tma skills can do in a match. The days when people fought with martial arts are long long gone because we have laws now and prisons. The people mastering those skills don't always realise they are not learning from people who fought or that.the last GM to train like a pro died 100 years ago.

The thing is, more and more of those in TMA are fully aware of this. Certainly everybody on a forum like this has figured out that building paths that.take their skills into regular sparring practice is essential, if fighting is what they want.

Some of us knew it 20 plus years ago.

But how much a given club or teacher focuses training towards fighting is not a reflection of the art or of the other training elements within that art. It is just a choice, made for a variety of reasons just like any other.

 

[Hanzou]

Your dumb ideas are worthless, not ma training.

You were trying to argue that training not directly following the form used in combat is of little value. You were given a great example of this being rubbish so you threw up the Steven Seagal defence.

I never said that it was of little "value". "Value" is a subjective thing, and in the grand scheme of things, kata has proven to be an unnecessary aspect of martial arts training if your goal is to become a competent fighter. Clearly, there are people practicing MA who aren't seeking to use their martial art to defend themselves or to fight off an attacker, and for those people, learning ancient kata is a way for them to connect to the culture and history of their classical art. There's nothing wrong with that. The problem is when their instructor starts feeding them nonsense about their ability to take down trained fighters utilizing hidden techniques within their kata or other antiquated training method. Or that if they just train more they can easily stop that MMA guy or wrestler trying to take their head off.

Further, a random boxer saying that he gained something from taking dance lessons is an irrelevant point that doesn't really change the general argument that martial arts that perform extensive amounts of kata have performed rather poorly against martial arts that don't perform extensive amounts of kata.

At the point that you dismissed an inconvenient fact you lost what little credibility you had with me.

Again, I dismissed that fact because it was irrelevant. I'm sure no one told that boxer that he could find hidden techniques, or learn to grapple like a Bjj practitioner from his dancing. However, that is exactly what is being told to martial arts students around the world about their version of dancing within their martial arts.

And lastly, the vast majority of life is not on video.
If you can't work out why a few YouTube clips do not constitute proof of anything beyond the existence of YouTube, then my advice is to forget martial arts and work on your critical thinking skills. You will need them far more than you'll need to know how to fight.

Again, Youtube is simply evidence to support an argument. You're free to use other types of evidence if you wish. For example, I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence that Uchi-Uke is being used in fights "everywhere" like you claimed. If it is, evidence of your claim should be easy to find. Don't worry, unlike you, I'm perfectly fine if you use a few videos to support that claim.

 

[Hanzou]

For the record.

The problem TMA has in not producing great fighters, is based in how most people, including masters of the arts, train.

Most TMA trains to develop skill in performing the key elements of the art. Karate performs striking techniques, aikido performs blending techniques, wing.chun performs Chi Sao, tai chi performs slow motion forms etc.

From a base of uncoordinated newb, Training twice a week for a couple of hours at a time just about gives enough time to learn these key points and some peripheral skills. Fighting takes a back seat to learning skills, and the pool of hobbyist students in a single school is the bulk of most clubs resources for fighting experience.

This creates lots of "masters" within these small self contained pools, most of whom got that level precisely because they were never much interested in fighting.

You'll find that TMA with a sport format are the ones that produce the most fighters because when you say fighters what you mean is sportsmen. If you follow Hanzou logic that means your Tai chi ufc fighter will appear with a big enough Tai chi competition scene.

As I pointed out though his logic is deeply flawed because if Tai chi people wanted to fight they either wouldn't be doing Tai chi or would already have a big competition circuit.

And this is the crux of the issue. We all know we can fight at boxing or kick boxing gyms etc. We do tma for other reasons. Not exclusively, but enough that most of us Don't Care.

And Yes, plenty "Masters" are deluded about what their mastery of tma skills can do in a match. The days when people fought with martial arts are long long gone because we have laws now and prisons. The people mastering those skills don't always realise they are not learning from people who fought or that.the last GM to train like a pro died 100 years ago.

The thing is, more and more of those in TMA are fully aware of this. Certainly everybody on a forum like this has figured out that building paths that.take their skills into regular sparring practice is essential, if fighting is what they want.

Some of us knew it 20 plus years ago.

But how much a given club or teacher focuses training towards fighting is not a reflection of the art or of the other training elements within that art. It is just a choice, made for a variety of reasons just like any other.

I have no issue with anything you said here.

Here's what I do have issue with; There are Tai Chi practitioners who do feel that their art of choice can be used for fighting, which is why we see Tai Chi practitioners enter challenge matches against trained fighters and get beaten rather quickly. Clearly they didn't get the memo, and that's occurring in the homeland of Tai Chi, China.

 

[drop bear]

Going to say though if you understand your martial art you should be able to perform it under some sort of impartial conditions.

Otherwise we may as well accept no touch as a valid defence as well. Cos that works like the business so long as the opponents are hand picked.

 

[Hanzou]

Going to say though if you understand your martial art you should be able to perform it under some sort of impartial conditions.

Otherwise we may as well accept no touch as a valid defence as well. Cos that works like the business so long as the opponents are hand picked.

So is the problem that many people simply don't understand their arts?

 

[drop bear]

So is the problem that many people simply don't understand their arts?

Yeah. I mean a judo guy can throw you a BJJ guy can submit you and a boxer can punch you in the head. Even if they are not about fighting.

You should really be able to do the thing if you understand it.

 

[now disabled]

So is the problem that many people simply don't understand their arts?

Many may not fully understand .... Many may not wish to fully understand ... Many may only practice in the arts for leisure or numerous other reasons.

Every person has there own path in MA and it is there path ... what they wish to take from it is again their own path, No person can say it has to be this way or that.

If as you see it things are wrong then that is your judgement, other's may agree, other's may not and that is the world we live in

 

[now disabled]

I have no issue with anything you said here.

Here's what I do have issue with; There are Tai Chi practitioners who do feel that their art of choice can be used for fighting, which is why we see Tai Chi practitioners enter challenge matches against trained fighters and get beaten rather quickly. Clearly they didn't get the memo, and that's occurring in the homeland of Tai Chi, China.

If a Tai Chi practitioner chooses to do that then that is his/her choice and from that you can't extrapolate that to which you are ....

You have issues with the TMA and so be it. I think we got that just be aware if you start citing things and saying things that are your opinion then say they are your opinion not that it is proven beyond all doubt

 

[marques]

This is why sparring and communicating with other styles is important.

Yep. That is gold.

I will not complain against this or that specific style, because diversity is fun and we have seen in combat sports that are the ones less vulgar that get the belts (and sell tickets).

But, when an art is all about cooperation (or even solo moves), it cannot be a martial thing, by definition. Martial implies opposition; and knowing (and learning from) the opposition (arts or artists) is a smart move.

 

[Hanzou]

Many may not fully understand .... Many may not wish to fully understand ... Many may only practice in the arts for leisure or numerous other reasons.

Every person has there own path in MA and it is there path ... what they wish to take from it is again their own path, No person can say it has to be this way or that.

If as you see it things are wrong then that is your judgement, other's may agree, other's may not and that is the world we live in

The problem with this argument is that I can go to a Bjj gym, Kyokushin dojo, or a Judo dojo and the vast majority of students understand things just fine. Why does this "understand" "not understand" mumbo-jumbo only apply to TMAs?

If a Tai Chi practitioner chooses to do that then that is his/her choice and from that you can't extrapolate that to which you are ....

Actually I can. I've observed how they train, and I've observed the results of practitioners who have tested their art against other systems, and I've formed a hypothesis with a predicted result. It's simple science really. Granted the sample size of the latter is small, but thus far the results are arriving at their logical conclusion.

 

[now disabled]

The problem with this argument is that I can go to a Bjj gym, Kyokushin dojo, or a Judo dojo and the vast majority of students understand things just fine. Why does this "understand" "not understand" mumbo-jumbo only apply to TMAs?

It does not and I never said it did solely apply to TMA (again we can discuss what you are deeming to be TMA), And again your saying that the vast majority understand, I would add to that depending on what stage they are at

Before I say more about TMA what is your definition of same as that might differ from mine