Based on another thread, I'm thinking that there is some differences in opinion on what are the functional ranges in unarmed combat. Let me start in controversial manner by stating there is only one functional range in unarmed combat, and it is associated with close combat. This range overlaps between medium clinch and medium punch ranges. I call this area the red zone and is a sort of sweet spot for striking. What defines it is two factors I believe are true for this range: 1) Ease of learning to be good at this range. 2) Where the most damage is done typically in unarmed combat. Of particular emphasis is the ease of learning. People naturally gravitate to this range for learning power and speed with striking. If not taught otherwise, fights could end up at this range in a slugfest. What this means for a skilled fighter is that to stay in this range is very dangerous because even if you are a master in martial arts, any opponent in this range could be equally as good or better than you since it is a natural range to strike at. Martial arts develop to avoid long exchanges in this range because anyone can come out on top and trade blows at this range... it is dangerous. Some martial arts emphasize moving in closer than this range, where it takes more skill to be good. Moving closer tends to take the power and leverage away from opponents that aren't as skilled. Some martial arts emphasize moving away farther than this range, when it takes more skill to be good at the longer ranged striking. Here is an example of boxer's strategy against a wrestler. A wrestler will build up skill in grappling, but more than likely the punching skill of the wrestler will be best only in that red zone. The boxer would avoid long exchanges in the red zone where the wrestler's punches could be as good as the boxer's punches. Instead move further out where the wrestlers punches won't be as good as the boxer's or move closer in where the wrestler's punches won't be as good as the boxers. Of course if the range ends up closer, the boxer will need good takedown defense and will want to know some wrestling themselves. Alternatively, the wrestler's strategy is about the same, only more extreme on the ranges. Wrestler wants to avoid that red zone because even a bad boxer can have good punches in the red zone. The wrestler wants longer range outside of punches or even closer range, inside of clinch. If the wrestler punches, it will most likely be in the red zone where they naturally have better punches, but still a skilled wrestler would not want to say in the red zone for long. The only ones that seem to want to stay in the red zone are either those that want to exchange blows. Sometimes this is unavoidable, but if it is avoidable, I'd like to know why being in the red zone would be preferred by any skilled martial artist. Thoughts?
I don't really use 'ranges' per se but when explaining to people initially; For punching I don't think in terms of explicit range. I think in terms of degrees between : Maximal extension - turned totally sideways with the arm fully extended Minimal extension - punching with no, or very little body turn. Can still knee and stomp kick the knees/groin in this range. Very close to clinch range. In between these you have a whole range of punching techniques. A few inches closer than minimal extension is range for proper hooks, uppercuts, elbows, head butts, and the max range of clinch work. Body to body is the closest possible. A few inches farther than maximal extension is range for most common kicking techniques. That's how I break it down, kind of, because there aren't hard and fast demarcations. I can do wing chun low kicks inside punching range. I can grapple at the same range I can still throw tight hooks punches. And at the end of the day it's one of those things you pick up, play with, and then toss when you understand it naturally.
You don't have to "exchange blows" in red zone. Sometime I wonder what's the goal of the "light contact sparring" (no take down allowed). If your opponent punches you, you punch him back. If your opponent kicks you, you kick him back. What do you intend to develop in that process? Is your goal just to hit more than your opponent can hit you? When you add grappling into your sparring, your goal can be more clear. You want to use your - kick to set up punch, - punch to set up clinch, - clinch to set up throw, - throw to set up ground game. Since "clinch" is what you are looking for during stand up game, when your opponent punches at you, you don't have to punch him back. Instead, you can - extend your arms between his punching arms and his head, - wrap his arms, and - obtain the "clinch" that you are looking for. The following clip shows that instead of "exchange blows", you will need to have a "goal" in your fight. [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceIRkUhH3Mc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceIRkUhH3Mc[/ame]
Yes agreed YKW. For any skilled martial artist, one goal should be to avoid exchanging blows with your opponent. Particularly, I will add, exchanging blows in the red zone most dangerous. I will also add that while exchanging blows isn't a good idea. Learning to accept a blow (take a hit) and minimize the damage from it is useful. Sometimes the drilling in accepting blows overlaps with exchanging blows. Sifu Ben, do you have any particular lessons/tactics on avoiding exchanging blows and does it involve changing the range?
Back when I did Shotokan, the idea of sparring (as I was taught and also as I observed from those better than me) was to stay "out of range". You would only move "into range" in order to try and land a blow (including doing stuff to create an opening). This meant that we focused on two strategies in the main: 1) Dart in, land a hit, then escape back to a safer distance; 2) Block an incoming attack and counter before the attacker escapes. Ultimately what fighters seem to actively try to avoid is to stay in the red zone and/or lengthy exchanges of blows. I used to call sparring "fist fencing" Edit: just to clarify, our Shotokan sparring was light-contact points sparring with no explicit takedowns.
One kind of sparring that I like to do in my school is: 1. If you can punch my head, you win that round (the body shot doesn't count). 2. If I can wrap your arms (obtain a clinch) before you can punch my head, I win that round. Repeat this for 15 rounds and record the result. It's amazing that if a student uses "rhino guard", he can win by wrapping his opponent's arm almost 15-0. If you can protect your head in such a way that your opponent's fist will have no chance to land on it, when do you want to wrap your opponent's arms is all up to you. The "rhino guard" strategy further prove that to exchange punches with your opponent is not needed.
Or very good grapplers, John's posted clips of his students winning in full contact Sanda matches so they can't be that bad...
The escape to a safer distance is something that is very hard to do and even counter productive at times. I think point sparring rules promote this type of tactic. IME, if you look at most karate, Shotokan included, it teaches footwork like that of a bird of prey. You know how a bird of prey circles then, dives in, exchanges, and separates passed. So what I'm saying is that karate (not point fighting) tends to promote circling just on the outside, where the opponent needs to reach for you. When attacking, the range is closed, but doesn't stop at punching range but instead continues inside of clinching range, then like the bird, flies by to separate. So rather than escape (which implies retreat), it is more like passing by (doing your damage and separating). The difference is getting inside of clinching range is a norm in karate. This is one way to avoid exchanging blows in the red zone. Circling just on the outside is another way. I'm not saying that escape to a safe range doesn't happen by retreating, it does. What I'm saying is that it isn't the norm outside of point sparring and light sparring (it happens in light sparring because you want to give your training partner a chance to recover, it happens in point sparring because the rules promote it). Here is an example of different footwork. One of which is the bird like footwork that I've heard some karate was known for in the early days. The other is the cat like stalking and burst in (charge) footwork. [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6_r4-Flh1U"]Masatoshi Nakayama. Jiu-kumite. - YouTube[/ame] Here is and example of the charge footwork (that is like a cat) that I used to use a lot in karate sparring: [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCcDoasK0Yg"]1965 SKA Shotokan Jiyu-Kumite - YouTube[/ame] The range almost always goes inside of clinch range with karate. The key was to do damage and be able to separate before getting grabbed/grappled. This was karate fighting to me.
