FMA for a new guy

moving blocking hitting simultaneously

 

Blocking is boring. And overrated. Counterattacks ftw.

 

Hey it's Douglas! I wish he'd post here.

 

Well it may be boring but its worked for me on numerous occasions. It's only overrated if it doesn't work. Can't fault it when it does.

 

Blocks have numerous disadvantages:

- they may collapse when met with too powerful strikes.
- their inherent staticness make them liable to become targets, especially with edged weapons.
- for the same reason, an attacker may hook/trap the blocking limb to facilitate further attacks.
- the attacker may "bounce" off of the blocking arm in order to attack a different opening.
- if the attacker has any noticeable degree of skill, he's liable to use feints, in which case you're toast when attempting to block a perceived attack.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r4NI5qmnf0&list=PLF9C2E1CAF6F74DFC"]Surviving a Knife Attack - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB2zFBkKXvM"]Pekiti-Tirsia Kali - Key Training Principles - YouTube[/ame]

And this is all over and above the simple fact that action beats reaction. If, instead of blocking, you proactively force the opponent to react to your own attack (i.e. displacing yourself and counterattacking), you also take away his ability to attempt misdirections - because something painful is heading his way.

 

And at least in my opinion, this concept is not unique to Filipino arts. Have a look at how Kuroda sensei controls the situation by provoking an attack, rather than purely reacting to what the opponent does.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXsMSoXrNgo"]Mind Body & Kick Ass Moves - Death on a beach Kuroda - YouTube[/ame]

 

I would sat that its difficult to separate out what comes from where, but I feel that doing so is something to leave to the martial art historians! For me its a secondary consideration compared to becoming functional at the different ranges of combat.

I trained at Bob Breen's for a while a few years ago. I think that there should be more Kali on the curriculum as in 2004-2005 there was only one class a week.

I meet people in central london to teach and we go through: Long, medium and short range tactics, footwork, 12 angles of attack (attacking and defending), empty hands applications, sambrada (counter for counter), and sensitivity exercises like hubud. There is a curriculum and an idea of how the student will develop and put it all together, like the ABC's. In fact Abecedario or ABC is another drill that you might encounter!.

So my advice is look for a structure that emphasises different ranges, good footwork and some element of sensitivity and a group that trains safely!

 

OK lets take this one point at a time:

Blocks have numerous disadvantages:

- they may collapse when met with too powerful strikes. Only if you do them wrong and do not use your core to have a power base behind them.

- their inherent staticness make them liable to become targets, especially with edged weapons. If you do them wrong yes, but correct blocking is never static, a block if done correctly is also a strike, but if used solely as a block will instantly over commit the attacker to the blow and open up a window for you to counter strike with more efficiency.

- for the same reason, an attacker may hook/trap the blocking limb to facilitate further attacks. Only if you over commit your arm in blocking in which case your doing it wrong. When blocking correctly you are encouraging your attacker to not only over commit to the blow but also if he wishes to hook/trap your weapon or limb he will have to over commit to the reach.

- the attacker may "bounce" off of the blocking arm in order to attack a different opening.Only if he is not committed to the attack and as I said before a correct block does not stay static and the attacker will also have to take into account the pending counter attack, and of course if they bounce to another area which is common in FMA you too bounce to counter.

- if the attacker has any noticeable degree of skill, he's liable to use feints, in which case you're toast when attempting to block a perceived attack.If the defender as any degree of skill he will read those feints and not bother blocking them. I teach all my people that the attack is not committed until it is just inches away from you, and if they are selling it, don't buy it.

I consider myself pretty dam good at feinting or baiting and show my guys how to recognise them. But I'm pretty good at blocking too and have used them to great effect on countless occassions, the skill in good efficient blocking is to know when to use them and when not to use them.


And this is all over and above the simple fact that action beats reaction. If, instead of blocking, you proactively force the opponent to react to your own attack (i.e. displacing yourself and counterattacking), you also take away his ability to attempt misdirections - because something painful is heading his way.Yes true but only if the reaction is poor, reaction can cause the attacker to stall for just a moment and this too can lead to a good defence / block turning in to a more efficient attack.

I think your also looking at blocking as a purely defensive tactic and are not considering that blocking can and often is in FMA an aggressive tactic. I use them quite effectively to step into the attack and put the attacker on the defensive, blocking in its self if used correctly is a dam efficient entry.

So really I disagree with you based on actual expeariance, both in tournaments of which I have fought in over 400 bouts and in reality working on the doors for over 15 years and being brought up in a not so polite area.

Best regards

Pat

 

Which still does not change the fact that they are reactive in nature and do not serve to get you any further out of the bad situation in which you've found yourself. To me, and generally within PTK, blocking is also a type of mentality:

"The entire secret of arms consists of only two things: to give, and not to receive." - Moliere

I'd prefer to look at it the other way around; a strike if done correctly will also protect you, i.e. counter-offense rather than defense.

That is based upon the assumption that the attacker will behave in a certain manner, not to mention ill-advised against edged weapons for reasons demonstrated a minute into this video: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYTfb1gJf0Q"]Pekiti-Tirsia Kali - Military CQC Course - Patikul, Sulu, Jolo - YouTube[/ame]

I beg to differ.

I'd say that's assuming he's not big on footwork.

Which he very well may not be and still pose a threat. It's been said that this is easily forgotten when people fight with too much protection equipment - with the padding, you never really learn to appreciate bridging techniques, or that's referred to in JKD as Progressive Indirect Attack.

That is still a bigger gamble than forcing the opponent to choose between defending himself from your attack and getting clocked in the head.

Not something I'd bet my life on. Again, reaction is action's submissive Thai bride.

In which case blocking is sort of a misnomer.

And I know people with even more experience who'd disagree with you. I suggest we refrain from heading down that route.

 

I never thought I'd do this, but what the hell - for purposes of clarification, what I'm referring to with the problem inherent in blocking is exactly what Matt Thornton is demonstrating at 01:56 in this video:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imjmLWj5WCU"]MATT THORNTON ALIVENESS - martial arts most important thing Straight blast - YouTube[/ame]

 

I see where you're coming from, but I just do not agree with that assessment. Again, it's also a difference in mentality.

But I don't endeavor to. No more than I would ever consider trying to *stop* a full power strike from high or shoulder load dead in it's tracks. It's got gravity on it's side, and it gets even more obvious if done with forwards momentum.

 

Which still does not change the fact that they are reactive in nature and do not serve to get you any further out of the bad situation in which you've found yourself. To me, and generally within PTK, blocking is also a type of mentality: Everything in a real fight is reactive. You react to the situation because if you dont your stood still. Oh and bearing in mind one of the first systems I trained in was PTK so to say they dont block, Yes they do, I trained it long enough. A block by any other name is still a block

"The entire secret of arms consists of only two things: to give, and not to receive." - Moliere
There are no secrets just training and practical expeariance/


I'd prefer to look at it the other way around; a strike if done correctly will also protect you, i.e. counter-offense rather than defense.If do it correctly and a block if done correctly will protect you, all a matter of perspective, but if you don't train blocks they wont work in the same that if you don't train disarms they wont work either.



That is based upon the assumption that the attacker will behave in a certain manner, I never assume, but if you understand body language and body mechanics and how to manipulate it you can force certain reations, after all is that not what feints do?

I'd say that's assuming he's not big on footwork.Not at all. Why would you assume that the defender is not big on footwork either?



Which he very well may not be and still pose a threat. It's been said that this is easily forgotten when people fight with too much protection equipment - with the padding, you never really learn to appreciate bridging techniques, or that's referred to in JKD as Progressive Indirect Attack.
Hey I fought many times with protection (too much), with limited protection (head guard and gloves) and Without Protection well saying that I had my stick. So I have an idea of the pros and cons of each method of fighting.


That is still a bigger gamble than forcing the opponent to choose between defending himself from your attack and getting clocked in the head. Only if you let him clock you in the head, he has to get past your guard first, and if he cant get past each attempt he has to ensure his own safety from your attacks, you seem to be assuming that the person defending with a block is only going to do just that? It may simply be his entry to the attack, all options have to be taken into account.



Not something I'd bet my life on. Again, reaction is action's submissive Thai bride.Well I had a few close shaves and I am happy with my reactions so far



In which case blocking is sort of a misnomer. Or not denpending on your perspective.


And I know people with even more experience who'd disagree with you. I suggest we refrain from heading down that route.I train with people with far more experience than me and they are pretty dam good at blocking when the need arises.

 

Maybe this litle video will give you an idea where I am coming from.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4hT6zJH1Os"]RA CROSSADA - YouTube[/ame]

 

I don't agree.

Mmmmm...no they don't. They say third time's the charm - there's a huge difference in mentality between blocking and counter-offense.

A block done correctly will protect you against that particular attack and nothing else. A strike done correctly will protect you against that particular attack and also diminish the risk of further attacks due to a cracked skull on the other guy's part. The best disarm is a hit.

Absolutely, and that is what counter-offense is all about - forcing the opponent to deal with your attack so that attacking you again becomes a secondary priority.

I'm sure you do. And I'm not being sarcastic.

I think you misread that part.

Nope, but if there is a discrepancy between what he considers to be attacking and defending, respectively, then that can be taken advantage of.

I do the same, and they counterattack instead of blocking.

 

I don't like that initial entry. Seems too difficult to stop an attempted blueworm whilst having the right arm in that position. But that's me.

 

You don't have to like it. But its worked for me and a few others who work or have worked in high risk environments and no blue worms yet...

Like anything if you don't train it then it wont work, and if you dont train it and pressure test it then yes you will see no value in it but if you do train it, it has a better chance of working and nothing and I mean nothing is infallible, Your best teacher is all down to actual experience.

There are times when you will have no choice but to block as you can never ever assume your faster and better than the other guy, if his timing is better, if his reactions are faster, if his footwork and body mechanics are better honed then you may find yourself needing that block you don't think works and that one little skill you chose to ignore because you've been told its no good could be the difference between surviving or being carried away.

The true skill is knowing when to use it and when not to.

Regards

Pat

 

I work in high risk environments as well. That in and of itself has no bearing on anyone's martial arts abilities.

Just as there are times when you're going to get hit. That's not going to stop me from preferring counter-offense over blocking.

If he's much better then odds are that you're screwed. Blocking instead of counter-attacking won't change that fact.

 

I work in high risk environments as well. That in and of itself has no bearing on anyone's martial arts abilities. Of course it does if its your martial abilities that get you out of the corner successfully, otherwise there is no point in training in any martial art is there?



Just as there are times when you're going to get hit. That's not going to stop me from preferring counter-offense over blocking.Of course your going to get hit your a fool if you think any different, but because you have a preference for one aspect does not devalue another aspect that if used correctly will give the same results. Preference is not validation for better. Its not what you use, its how you use it that is more important. You can give a knife to a fish but he cant make you a sandwich.



If he's much better then odds are that you're screwed. Blocking instead of counter-attacking won't change that fact.
If you have that mentality yes your on a looser for giving into his perceived better skills. All real life fights are a game of chance anyway. I have seen skillful guys go go down for one error and less skillful guys succeed simply because they took advantage of one error.

Perspective. And like I said if you don't train it then yes its useless to you but if you do train it and pressure test it then their is a dam good chance it will be a value.

Just because you don't prefer something does not make it any less valuable in the right situation.