How effective does Hapkido ,other martial arts like ‪Aikido‬,Judo work on big person

Discussion in 'Hapkido' started by Bubble99, Jan 29, 2015.

  1. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Well, yes, you do indeed strike with your muscle strength, guided by the structure of your technique. If you didn't use muscles, you wouldn't move at all ;)

    Your core muscles and legs are providing the strength required to accelerate your fist, even though the upper body is relatively relaxed before impact. I am talking about functional strength, as opposed to raw muscle power.

    Yes, a video would be cool. The Hapkido punching I've seen just looks like Karate.

    However, don't concern yourself with the techniques the guy in the video is doing, only the principle of leading with the fist or leading with the hips and then allowing the fist to catch up. I very much like his analogy of a water-skier vs. a surfer.

    I'm not trying to "debunk" you. I'm just pointing out that your simple model is so simple as to be pretty much irrelevant in terms of how mass comes into play when striking. Plus, Ben gave the correct formula for kinetic energy:

    It's not a matter of blurring anything. The mass is not constant. If I hit you by only pivoting my arm at the shoulder, you are hit with less mass than if I keep my arm fixed but rotate my body around the axis of my spine.
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2016
  2. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    Hmmm... easy to find one half or the other of the experiment, but I will have to search some sites to find what I was talking about. I'll see if I have the time later tonight.
  3. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    K.E. = 1/2 m v2 is the correct formula, yes. my point was that E=MC2 is much easier to show the relationships between mass and speed as it applies to impact. I stated in that original post that all it was, was a simple way of showing that...

    "The mass is not constant." - but it is at the point of impact David... and Impact is what we are talking about here. I see that you are saying that it is not 'constant' while you are in the 'act' of striking... different beast there, but, as we are talking about, we do have our 'constant' (not the term I would use, but it will suffice ;)) Does not matter how the strike is generated or thrown, the end result is at the point of impact...
  4. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Moved on MAP 2017 Gold Award

  5. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    You've lost me. I don't see how the mass at the point of impact is not variable. It is coming across to me that you are only figuring-in the mass of the fist?

    PS. I'm happy to drop the term "constant" :)
  6. PointyShinyBurn

    PointyShinyBurn Valued Member

    Perhaps you want the momentum, which is Mass X Velocity? mc^2 is the amount of energy you'd get if you collided your fist with the fist of your antimatter twin...
  7. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Wait, just caught that. Now you've completely lost me.

    Energy equals mass times the speed of light times 2? :eek:
  8. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    "only figuring-in the mass of the fist?" -No, we strike with our bodies mass moving with/into the strike...

    I am not arguing the mechanics of the strike David... how we strike definitely varies in both body function, styling, application etc.

    Ignoring all this, for the purpose of putting a value on our point of 'Impact', I am simply stating that we do have a point where impact can be measured... which in essence becomes our "Constant" in the equation.

    Thus, we can vary different aspects of the strike, like speed for example, and be able to measure it at the PoI (Point of Impact...) making this our common frame of reference, or Constant. At this point, every thing that went into the strike can be measured... it is measured essentially in a static state for that instance. This is the point where all the contributing factors are no longer in a state of flux, but are "Constant". Making the mass involved, at this point, constant.

    I believe we are discussing two different things here, lol... I am still attempting to show that mass and speed plays integral parts in creating Impact, while trying to point out why mass in your instance is still a measurable contributing factor...

    I think you are arguing the variable of mechanics involved in the 'act' of striking... please correct me if I am wrong though...
  9. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    bushidoka bushidoka is online now
    Valued Member
    How hard you hit = your mass times the speed it is travelling, and speed is the key component. the simple atomic formula shows this very easily

    LOL... now I know y'all are either not reading the thread, or you are just picking and choosing what you want to very selectively... I am aware of which formula I am showing, but I have also explained WHY I chose this one, that being, again, to show a simple relationship between mass and speed as it applies to mass. The alternative of course, is to do the complex math and show the work each time you change a variable in the K.E. = 1/2 m v2 formula. Which, btw, is not the correct formula either for determining Force... you have only determined how much work the TARGET has to do to stop the punch with that formula...
  10. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Yes, you are correct that I am talking about how to deliver the most power into a target.

    So all along, you were just saying that it is possible to work out what forces go into a strike? That's a bit of a non-sequitur in terms of the OP isn't it?

    I'm not a scientist like you, but I was under the impression that Newtonian physics would show that the energy required for the target to stop the punch would be identical to the energy of the punch?
  11. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Moved on MAP 2017 Gold Award

    Stop talking physics right now. You are talking out your ass. Making it up. You're making yourself look very stupid. Please stop.
  12. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    No, I am saying that size does matter... that impact is determined in great part due to mass and speed... of two people of the same skill set, the larger , stronger will win... my original posting in this thread.

    The rest is just trying to negate all the other factors that are being brought up to say this is wrong...

    Nor am I a physicist David, but i have been in the fighting sciences for 35+ yrs... almost 30 of that in HKD. I have been a Kinesiologist for 25 yrs. I have run my own schools, fought semi-pro, trained, and been trained by, fighters, so none of this stuff is new to me. I have explored and argued it many times. More so now a days with this thing called the internet, lol. It makes misinformation so much more readily available ;)

    In the equation above, you are exploring Kinetic Energy... which is what? It is energy possessed by an object due to motion... KE is not defined by its objects mass (only as it relates to its mass)... nor it's initial inertia (though that can be factored in), nor any of the other variables you have been pointing out... BUT, the equation itself Energy=m x v2 is for demonstration purposes, the same as E= m x s2... just that over the years, I have found it much simpler to demonstrate the relationships easier with the simpler formula... and they both show the importance of SPEED when striking.

    And, yes, action and equal reaction and all that exist, but now, you need VERY complex equations to discuss the roles of deceleration upon impact, absorption and dispersal of force, etc, just to equal the amount of force applied. And, they will of course be expressed in different equations...
  13. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    "Stop talking physics right now. You are talking out your ass. Making it up. You're making yourself look very stupid. Please stop."

    LOL, I don't want to talk about it Chadderz... I am just addressing the posts as they are being made, defending my position on the subject.

    And, for all it is worth, I don't care what your opinion is of me, it has no value to any one but yourself :) And I am sure you must have heard the saying which relates opinions to *******s...
  14. ned

    ned Valued Member

    He ( Ian Sinclair) has some great stuff on youtube .
  15. bushidoka

    bushidoka Valued Member

    Yeah... always meant to check out Tai Chi, but never have :( Perhaps as I get older...

    He does have a lot of content for sure :)
  16. Tom bayley

    Tom bayley Valued Member

    Is talking about talking about phsics metaphsics? And if we are getting metaphysical about hitting people isn't it time someone mentioned Ki?

Share This Page