Some traditional kung fu self defence techniques

Self defence techniques from Southern Shoalin - hung gar kuen kung fu.

the key to self defence is

• to avoid fighting unless you decide that it is necessary to protect your life or those you care about.
• to avoid escalating the level of violence in a fight in order to best protect yourself and others.
• to escape from a fight when possible.

The techniques are arranged in order of increasing escalation from the attacker.

Note some of these techniques employ kicking the opponent when they are on the ground. This is done to give the defender the opportunity to get away. When possible it is best to stomp on the muscle of a limb. this will make it easier for you to escape. Never kick or stomp to the head of anyone who is on the ground. This can kill.

01 Self-defence escape from a wrist grab.



02 Self-defence escape from a wrist grab then counter with an arm bar.



03 Self-defence block or slip a punch trap leg and take down.



04 Self-defence block or slip a punch and kick to groin.



05 Self-defence block or slip a punch and slap to groin.



06 Self-defence evade kick and kick standing leg.

06 Self defence evade kick and kick standing leg

07 Self-defence trap punch with butterfly and armbar.

07 Self defence trap punch with butterfly and armbar

08 Self-defence headbutt.

08 Self defence headbutt

09 Self-defence throw from head control.

09 Self defence throw from head control

10 Self-defence throw with cranes wing. Note the kick at the end is to the collar bone.

10 Self defence throw with cranes wing

 

01 self defence from a wrist grab - relaxed break off

 

Is there anybody here ?

 

What is your observations on these techniques, and do you think there are any items that could be modified to make more efficient?

 

1. techniques are performed for demonstration purposes. Space was left to see what was going on. in application some of these (but not all) should be performed much closer to the body of the attacker. The cranes wing throw for example. The techniques are not demonstrated with percussive impact. this can have a considerable impact on the effectiveness - e.g strike to carotid sinus to set up the head control during the cranes wing throw.

2. In terms of efficient - depends what you mean. the break off from a wrist grab efficient in terms of ergonomics. it is efficient in that it allows the defender to break away, to set up a defensive wall and not to escalate. it is also the only one that i personally used to defend myself in the real world.

3. slip the punch, while slapping the groin, and running like hell is efficient ergonomically. it is efficient tactically. it is simple and places little load on the brain so is efficient in using limited thinking capacity in a stressful situation.

4. the head butt only works in this way for a short person against a tall one but it is ridiculously effective for use as a balance break.

Happy to hear your thoughts on - how to refine or alter techniques shown, or suggestions for alternatives that you feel could be as good or better.

 

Swings and roundabouts - I chose slideshows as good way of slowing down the techniques and breaking them into steps to see what is going on. I take your point about my cinematography on board. But I was more interested in actually discussing the techniques themselves.

 

The defender has slid out and back. note the pick up is right hand to right hand.

Standing leg is well planted. kicker is in balance. target is off balance.

Yes this is a potential risk. it depends on getting the target off balance. if they are off balance great. if not then do something else.

Yes. but the defender has slipped to the side. if the attacker moves in the defender has the option of a side attack to the knee or to run. as you point out

It might be a fault with my camerawork but the defender is off line, in balance, and has the attacker off balance. This is as good a time as any to kick the attacker in the groin.

 

stepping in and going for a balance break grapple straight away is a lot of commitment. it also requires a good level of technical skill to apply. if it goes wrong it leaves the defender in a lot of trouble.

in the original option. the defender slips off line and backwards. as long as they get one part right the punch misses. they go for a soft intercept of the striking hand. if it goes wrong they are off line and out of range so again they dont get hit. if it works they get to go for the grab. if that works they get to pull the opponent of balance and if that works they get to kick the opponent in the groin. it is simple. it is practical and has a lot of built in fail safes.

 

Absolutely no offence taken. this is a discussion forum. it is where one would expect ideas to be analysed and discussed. Your comments showed that you have taken the time to look at the videos and to carefully craft a response. thank you for this.

 

A GENERAL POINT MADE ON OBSERVING COMMENTS FROM A NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS SITE OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS AND A SUGGESTION.

Healthy criticism is vital for the survival of any discussion site. Recently the activity on this site has declined significantly. I suggest that this is because of the balance of the criticism. It is essential to point out weaknesses, and the threats posed by weaknesses in martial arts. Failure to do this puts peoples well-being at risk particularly in the area of self-defence.

I am happy and grateful to hear all observations from members of this site. Including the negative comments. I am grateful that people take the time and effort to frame a considered response to my posts.

At the same time it is important to get other people to want to post on the site. If there is a perception that the site is overly negative it will put people off and people will stop visiting. To counter this I suggest using the S.W.O.T format for analysis of the techniques on this thread.

S - Strengths are the immediate actual benefits that an action brings.

W – Weaknesses are the immediate actual harms that an action brings.

O – Opportunities are the potential benefits that the action could lead to in the future.

T - Threats are the potential harms that an action could lead to in the future.

This approach can still produce an analysis that on balance is negative. But because it is balanced and transparent it appears fairer to the reader. I suggest this would be less of a deterrent to other people thinking of posting.

In terms of looking at the techniques posted above I would also suggest making a point of distinguishing between

· The appropriateness of the choice of technique for self-defence. Often under discussed.

And

· Technical proficiency of application. Always to be improved.

 

It is because I do not look at techniques as a one stop shop that I think is appropriate to label some techniques as for self defence rather than others.

All techniques have there own strengths and weaknesses, all techniques create their own opportunities and threats. As you point out context is key. Compare a low roundhouse kick and a high roundhouse kick for example. Landing a single high roundhouse is likely to end a fight, not so for a low round house. but. a high round house requires significantly more skill to perform correctly. A poorly delivered high roundhouse can servery compromise the defenders position, not so for a low round house. Therefore given the strengths weaknesses opportunities and threats of the techniques i would argue that a low roundhouse is more appropriate for a self defence situation. It can therefore legitimately be described as a self defence technique.

 

While I disagree with your criticism I recognise and thoroughly agree with your underlying point - it is important to emphasise that self defence techniques are not one stop shops.

 

thanks for the reply. Many good points. I understand the approach that you have taken and why you have taken it. A strength of you approach is that it forestalls certain criticisms. an opportunity of your approach is that it leads to a wider discussion of self defence in context, situational awareness use of voice etc. A weakness of your approach is that each technique has its own strengths weaknesses opportunity and threats in different situations your approach does not overtly recognise this. A threat posed by this is that a student might chose a technique that gets them into trouble rather than one that doesn't.

My approach is to overtly call some techniques self defence techniques. a strength of this approach is that it allows the student to build a core group of techniques that they know are appropriate for given situations. An opportunity of my approach is that it can encourage the student to think, learn and understand for themselves about what makes a technique appropriate in a given situation. I recognise the weaknesses and threats that you point out of my approach.

when it comes to a improving a students ability to prevent harm to themselves or others I believe the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of my approach out weigh the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of your approach.

 

Rather than posting compliant demos, which you yourself say are not how they would be done for real, and then asking people what they think of the efficacy, seems like a bit of a backward approach.

Why not show these techniques being done in a less scripted, more alive context, with actual intent shown by attacker and defender? That way you can skip the whole "how does this look to you, in theory?" and go on to people making suggestions as to how the methods by which you sort the wheat from the chaff might be improved.

I honestly think most people didn't comment out of politeness. There's not much to be said about this kind of compliant arm-hanging stuff without seeing it in a live context.

 

my question about efficiency was in response to axe lbs post bellow. he/she asked about efficiency and I asked him/her to follow up with his / her thoughts.