Discussion in 'General Martial Arts Discussion' started by hongkongfuey, Mar 15, 2002.

  1. pesilat

    pesilat Active Member

    LOL :) IMO, techniques are just a way to illustrate underlying principles. When we discuss a given technique, we, really, are discussing the underlying principles or how a given art/system/style applies a particular principle.

  2. Andrew Green

    Andrew Green Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Standardisation

    This is only at the most basic level possible within the definition of the word punch. Basically what you are saying is that we define the word punch as being an impact with the fist. And then saying that any impact withthe fist is therefore the same.

    Red is a color
    Blue is a color
    Therefore Red and Blue are the same thing

    It just doesn't work

    Then you have a very narrow understanding of methods of generating power in a punch, they do not all rely on the same mechanics.

    If all you mean is that a punch is a punch, in only a literal sense, then yes, that is a tautology and I can't possibly argue with that. But if you want to say that all punches are more or less the same, you need to do a little more research on the subject.
  3. Andy Murray

    Andy Murray Sadly passed away. Rest In Peace.

    Posts seem to be getting jmbled from one column to another!

    If you want to make a judgement on the 'punch is just a punch' thread then please read the article on 'Miscellanous Philosophy' before you do
  4. pesilat

    pesilat Active Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Standardisation

    OK ... you explain the difference in body mechanics for generation of power between a Shotokan and a boxing punch.

    Here's my perspective:

    Power = Force * Velocity
    Force = Mass * Acceleration
    Acceleration = the change in Velocity / the Time it took
    Velocity = the distance travelled / the Time it took

    Body mechanics come into play, primarily, in getting Mass into the Force equation. There are only so many ways to do this ... and, in my (apparently narrow) understanding these all have to do primarily with the hips. The whole body plays a role ... but the hips are the primary key. They translate the power from the lower body to the upper body and add even more torque to it. The energy ends up being like the ball in Jai Alai and the hips are like the cesta in Jai Alai. They take the energy from the lower body and, through the use of torque, "whip" the energy into the upper body where it is directed toward the target by the shoulders.

    If I've got something wrong in my explanation, educate me (I'm here to learn). If I don't have anything wrong in my explanation then explain how there is a difference (aside from expression of these principles) in how any art/system/style generates power. Some apply the above principles better or worse ... but, as far as I can tell, they all use these same principles to generate power.

    The only other method (assuming it is a different method) is when you get into "internal" generation of power which takes us into a whole different world where my understanding and exposure is *very* limited and I would have to leave the discussion up to others with more exposure and understanding of that topic.

    Yes, that is basically what I was saying. I kind of sidetracked myself somewhere along the line ... this isn't where I intended this to go (probably what I should expect when I write some posts late at night instead of sleeping). But that's OK :) There's some interesting stuff here too :)

  5. Andrew Green

    Andrew Green Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Standardisation

    Well discussing power generation in text can be difficult, but I will give it a try...

    First I would suggest you stop trying to treat it as a physics equation. Otherwise you will have to take into account a lot more things then you have there.

    Not always, power comes from getting the whole body into it, fine. But the reason the hips come into it so often is because the are a central part of the body.

    Power can come from:

    Twisting, shifting forward, dropping, expansion, retraction, whipping and a few other that slip my mind right now, combining methods will obtain better results. Only one really requires the twisting of the hips, at least two don't use any hip movement at all.

    If all you want to do is punch the target on the machine and get a higher score, nothing.

    But a foreknuckle strike to the throat and a hook with a boxing glove work differently.

    Oh and what about strikes that hit on the returning motion?

    Strikes that hit solid vs strikes that "rake" accross the target?

    No, there are at least the 6 methods I listed above, all done externally.
  6. pesilat

    pesilat Active Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Standardisation

    OK ... what other things?

    Uh huh ... that's exactly what I meant by "The whole body plays a role ... but the hips are the primary key." You can isolate to exclude the hips. But for the most generation of power, you combine methods (as you said) ... and the most powerful (not necessarily the most "effective" since the effectiveness of a given strike will depend on the situation) strikes include the hips somewhere in the equation.

    This is semantics. A foreknuckle to the throat and hook with a boxing glove use the same dynamics to generate power ... the effect differs because the knuckle gives more pinpoint focus to the energy.

    Strikes that hit on the returning motion will still use the same principles ... just on a different line.

    Strikes that hit vs. strikes that "rake" are completely different critters. Strikes that hit require penetration. Stirkes that rake don't. The intention is completely different ... and therefore rely on different principles for their effectiveness.

  7. Andy Murray

    Andy Murray Sadly passed away. Rest In Peace.

    The technique is the equation. The body posture, and mechanics are merely the variables of the equation. I see no reason not to treat this as physics, as it is certainly not 'magic', 'the force' or any other mysterious energy.

    Andrew, when you talk about a foreknuckle strike and a boxing gloved punch having differences in their effect, are'nt you talking about a pressure equation? i.e. pounds per square inch, or PSI for short.

    You can only compare these energies if they are being applied to the same test material, as the effect is yet more physics, dealing with the transferral of energy E=Mc squared and all that stuff! ( Einstein forgive me ). A lit match transferrs it's energy more effectively to a petrol tank, than it does to a sheet of Asbestos!

    The confusion lies in our understanding of the conversion process involved in changing our bodies latent energy to kinetic energy. I would agree that the hips are an important part in that process.
  8. Thomas Vince

    Thomas Vince New Member

    standardized rules for semi-contact

    Hong Kong,
    Whats up? I wanted to mention that Ed Parker put together the first International Karate Championship in 1964 and it was held in Honolulu and Robert Culp and Elvis Presley were the MC's. The fighters came from all over the world and all different styles. Mr. Parker standardized the fighting rules so that all arts and styles could compete. Many competitors I will list a few of them for you. Many of the greatest champions stemmed from the IKC. Mike Stone, Chuck Norris, Joe Lewis, Darnell Garcia, Steve Sanders, Ron Marchini, Ralph Castellanos, Arnold urquidez, Glen Oyama, Leong & Robert Yagi, Stanley Sugai, Toshio Ikehara, Tak Kubota, Fumio Demura, Jhoon Rhee and many others more contemporary. The next IKC is being held in Boston, USA in 2003. Last year it was held in Madrid and is still open to all styles.
  9. hongkongfuey

    hongkongfuey Kung Fu Geek


    the trouble in my opinion is not that there are no open tournaments, but no 'universal open semi-contact tournament style'. I have competed in different open tournaments across the UK, but each has slightly different rules. Whilst it is not difficult to learn the new set of rules on arrival, if everyone could agree on a standard I'm sure a strong case could be put forward for much larger 'world championship' style events, or inclusion of a 'semi contact' category in the olympics.
  10. Andy Murray

    Andy Murray Sadly passed away. Rest In Peace.

    HKF, I agree, and we have probably been to some of the same Tournaments. The big opens, like MAI and Combat, set their own rules into place, but some organisations use different rules 'just' to be different.

    Personally, I didn't find the rule thing to be a problem. the key thing with Lau Gar's approach to combat, is that it is much more adaptable than most different systems. The reason being our fighters are taught to analyse and sense like fencers, probing for the opening. I have two TKD trophies, as they made a mistake, thinking they would invite some Kung Fu guys to their Nationals to show them up. I walked away with 1st in Semi, and 1st in continuous sparring. Oh yes, and we won Team 1st. The rules were bizarre to me, but I chose to compete, so I had accepted the rules!

    Now I remember, back in 1956', it was a cold Sunday Morning.............................blah, blah,blah....
  11. hongkongfuey

    hongkongfuey Kung Fu Geek


    I also am not concerned about adapting to various rules. My point was that if you are to make MA appeal to the mass public, then you need a standard form of competition that they can understand. One league and 'ranking system' would also show which styles excelled at semi-contact as opposed to 'we are world champions with the X organisation' - how many world champions have we all met? (I trained with at least 8 different world champions, although a lot of these were in open tournaments.)

    Not that I have any particular preference for semi-contact systems - I just think it would be nice if they could standardise so they could be compared.
  12. Andy Murray

    Andy Murray Sadly passed away. Rest In Peace.


    I hate to point elbows, but; A lot of these styles, can't get their own schools in order, let alone agree with another style. I think you hit on a key point when you said you have trained with 8 world champions. If you standardise things, then you can only have one world champion in each division. If you have a world title, would you go and put it on the line with the ideal of unifying all styles? Idealist? Realist? Capitalist?

    The truth is there are a lot of big fish, in small ponds!

    Look at Boxing! It suffers from the same thing.

    Perhaps we need something significant to happen. Something unifying. A Martyr perhaps.

    Crucifiction anybody?
  13. waya

    waya Valued Member

    I think things depend more on everyone opening their eyes and realizing that noone is better than any other student or instructor, and that no one art is perfect or necessarily better than any other art. Alot of people tend to think that after all their years of training, they have all the answers...... After 100 years of training you would still have another 1000 years of questions. The only way things could be standardized is for an individual. I can't test or train by the same standards in even the same art as any of you and the same the other way. Unity should be something we all want as students. We can all learn more from cooperating than we can by arguing who did what with who's twinkies behind what bush etc etc etc. Just my opinion.

  14. Andy Murray

    Andy Murray Sadly passed away. Rest In Peace.

    Tell us more about the Twinkies Rob, I sense a deep emotional scar! lol

    I agree with your post entirely. So does anyone have a suggestion as to how unity can be acheived, or is this just an Idealist fantasy?
  15. waya

    waya Valued Member

    I always have scars over food :)

    I think the only way this will be achieved is the pulling of the collective head out of the collective well, n/m ya get the picture. Noone is willing to admit they don't know it all, and that their art is not necessarily the right art for Joe Blow down the road. Also many people don't want to admit that what you learned from another instructor can benefit you in what you do in another art. If we could get past this egotistical closed mindedness alot could be done for all the arts.

  16. Andy Murray

    Andy Murray Sadly passed away. Rest In Peace.

    A logical question then, as an extension would be....

    Which arts have got their acts together in terms of standard management?


    err..... umm ...........duhh......???
  17. waya

    waya Valued Member

    From my own experiences I would say none do completely. At least not in the manner I am speaking of.
  18. Freeform

    Freeform Fully operational War-Pig Supporter

    The house of Judo is probably the most ordered house there is right now (unless you go to the Judo forum and read about IJF, BJA and SJF).

    In my opinion when you show up at a new school wanting to learn and its obvious you have prior experience, you should have to work your way through that schools grade system and learn all there is about that art and its philosophies (albeit at a slightly accelerated pace), when I moved into shotokan and judo I was still doing basics to start with (even though I thought I knew them ;) ), but I was doing them with the senior grades, after all, an advanced technique is merely the correct application of many basic principles!
    So this way your still working through their syllabus but your doing it at an advanced level.

    Last edited: Mar 22, 2002
  19. Thomas Vince

    Thomas Vince New Member

    Shotokan is such a cool art. I have had the pleasure of training with a State Police officer here in SC that is a black belt in Sotokan. Nishiama is his instructor and I know you know this guy. I am impressed with Shotokan because like my philosophy it is important to keep the real physical applications of the art strong!!!!!

Share This Page