Discussion in 'Karate' started by davidp123, Jun 28, 2013.
I see what u said,im not suggesting the words 'internal power' here are talking about chi.
I saw someone pushing in - a change in the angle of pressure would make things different..guess what that change is?
Liao Wu Chang used to do a similar "trick" and it was solved in the same way
I believe you misunderstood what I meant by watered down. Watered down has nothing to do with the effectiveness of a technique. Watered down means that details have been removed or LOST.
The critique I had of the techniques in the video have nothing to do with how effective they are... the critique I had was that I did not see particular details I was looking for. If you see such details to indicated that the techniques were not watered down, please tell me where you see them and what it is I should be looking for.
I was looking for particular grips, holds, hand positions, vital targets, etc. There is no one way that is best but ANY number of ways I was looking for.
The best take down is a knock out... then a choke out... etc. -- All of these follow the same combat principles...
The devil is in the details. Take any experience fighter and you will see that they know a lot about the details of how to take someone out quickly...
Unfortunately, we have generations of folks that never learned these details or they never passed these details on... this leads to watered down martial arts.
What we have in some cases is martial artists that only know the watered down martial arts and believe they are masters... then you compare them to ones that know these details... take the Gracies... they know the details on how to take someone out quickly... not so watered down.
Edit: The details aren't all about combat either. Some could be about health and healing. It is the loss of these details that I'm concerned about.
I was referring to chen's 'punch' at the end.
It's another variant on the 1" punch really
yes it is and i find it interesting.
What specifically? The mechanics? The form? The universality?
The mechanics and the form yes.
It'd be really nice if you could elucidate a little.
Actually, it'd be really nice if you could elucidate in a whole load of detail, with diagrams, videos and PowerPoint presentations, this being a Discusion forum and all
they'll recognize you. remember i already posted a pic of you with my hair before.
also, can't have a thread about internal krotty power without showing these two guys:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufuJUdLqBok"]Taira Sensei Makiwara - YouTube[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gn8PmVt3Yw"]Masaaki Ikemiyagi Moscow seminars 2009 - YouTube[/ame] (although ikemiyagi has done kung fu, so probably got most of it from elsewhere)
as far as nei gong type stuff, there isn't much, but existing stuff can be modified to be more like it if one knows a bit about the subject (such as having done nei gong in another style before), and one can always just get good at nei gong elsewhere and then apply the jing to karate movements.
The Taira sensei video is very similar to something my sifu showed me. There are many techniques where you pass the guard. You can then use short power to drill into an opponent. So for example you might strike with the first set of knuckles, then the second and then the head of the Ulna.
Rebel wado do you think this clip shows effective technique?
I know you weren't asking me, but this form has a quite a bit in common with Mabuni Sensei's' Tenshin Happo-which is very effective. It's white crane, yes?
that's the current style head of chen style taiji...
No, I don't think the clip shows effective technique.
The clip shows great technique and shows technique that is not watered down. Proper use of pivot points, structure, etc. Awesome stuff.
Effective technique can only really be shown in a context. For example, what is an effective technique for placing handcuffs on someone on the ground.
What the video does do is describe what effective technique is built from... the principles and components for developing effective technique. It is planting the seed for people in the know to further investigate.
ok, I think you have set the bar rather high for what you want to see to demonstrate effective technique but i do see where you are coming from.
Agree with you on this. He has good Fajin, body connection, Shenfa, ... but his application was not the "most effective".
- At 4.16, His solo move was "outside crescent kick" with right knee pointing upward and kick to his right side. His application at 4.31 was "horse back kick (front cut)" with knee pointing downward and kick to his back. His solo move did not match with his application.
- At 4.50, His solo move was "double pulling", a horizontal move. At 4.58, his application was "cloud hand (arm locking)", a circular move. At 4.58, if he used his right foot to block/sweep his opponent's low left leg by using 3 contact points instead of just 2 contact points, the technique will be much more "effective". By using only 2 contact points (left hand on his opponent's right wrist, right forearm under his opponent's right shoulder), without controlling his opponent's leg, he gave his opponent too much leg freedom.
I'm not sure if I set a bar that high, but rather seek to set a way of comparing technique based on different criteria.
Effective technique = High percentage in a context/situation (e.g. by the book)
Practical technique = Effective technique that works for you
Watered down technique = Loss of important details/knowledge compared to the original
Good technique = Good mechanics, timing, structure, form, fundamentals
The effectiveness of a technique is situational but what I look for is high percentage by the book technique. As YouKnowWho pointed out... something can be effective, but there could still be more ways to make it MORE effective. It is hard to judge effectiveness without seeing the whole thing from pre-encounter, first contact... all the way to strong finish. Single excerpts or incomplete technique often used in demonstrations often do not show effective technique.
Practical technique is what works for each individual based on their natural instincts and intentions in a given situation.
Watered down technique can be both effective and practical. However, what it comes down to is "missed opportunities". Watered down technique is missing the details (refined and subtle movements that cannot be easily seen with the naked eye) and thus, opportunities for a quicker finish can be lost. For example, rather than just a punch to the jawline (watered down), the particular angle to strike for maximum knockout potential (not as watered down)... compounded attacking is another good example of technique that is not as watered down.
Good technique is having good fundamentals... great technique is having great fundamentals.
Float,sink, swallow, spit or Pu, Tim, Tun, Tao are kind of the internal aspects are some Chinese styles which influenced Goju Ryu and so are in Goju.
More interesting movement from Chen Xiaowang
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkd2KvUoxuY"]Chen Xiaowang Explosive Demo from 2003 - YouTube[/ame]
Separate names with a comma.