Yesterday was a great day for trips. It was also a great day for weapons.
Like I've written, time and again, Karate is more than just kick and punch. It has alot of takedowns. Though, there is something specific about karate takedowsn that distinguish them from judo, catch-wrestling, or any grappling. Karate takedowns seek to end the fight with a strike, one, hard, swift strike. For the karate-ka the takedown isn't to continue the fight, it is to end it.
Now, that isn't to say that the karate-ka is out of options once he hits the ground. He has an entire aspect of groundfighting striking to conside. There is a sleu of techniques that consider one to be on his or her back. These are mostly kicking techniques, but effective nonetheless. Likewise, there is no rule in the All Ruling Handbook: Ultimate Guide to the Mystic Art of Karate that says the joint-locks and strikes used in stand up cannot be used from being on the ground.
As for the evolution of groundfighting and oriental martial arts, that is for another blog. Onto the nature and importance of tripping. The foundation for art of tripping is a single principle: place the opponent on the ground and retain the superior position.
In the karate mindset: standing is always superior to not-standing. There is another rule that comes into play, however: Being able to reach when you opponent cannot reach you is a superior position that must be used to the advantage (if the fight must continue). This is why I mentioned the groundwork of karate, above.
I've mentioned the principle that puts ground work right into karate curriculum, but there is one other thing to beware. Many people thing tripping is easy. It is not. You cannot strike the foot and you cannot collapse the knee with your leg. It won't work or you'll be trapped. That being said, there is one place that you can find great videos that detail correct examples. You Tube.
I am presenting this clip from the first karate kid movie. It's a movie? Sure is. But so many techniques from both forms and ippon kumite (one-step sparrings) use "takedown-finish" combinatinos, and you hardly see them applied. This movie just used them very well. Attacking an opponent on the ground is not easy ( as you see in the final fight), but it is easier to attack a rolling opponent than one trying to kick you in the face. I'll leave this with you to digest.
In addition to trips and takedowns, I teach striking while on the ground and I view it as an essential fighting mode. I also view learning how to stand up properly and not provoke an attack from your opponent while you are defenseless nearly as important as falling properly. But that is for another time.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Karate - A Mixed Martial Art
So what is a mixed martial art? I ask myself that question with humorous simplicity. "It's a blend of different martial arts, right?" But let's consider what that means: Boxing and Kickboxing, trained together, make you trained in mixed martial arts.
But wait, boxing and kickboxing are the same thing. I imagine that we would run into the same issue if we took a combination of Judo, Jiu-Jitsu, or Wrestling. Okay, I'll give that. So let's try something a little more distinct. Take Western Boxing and the Chinese Wing Tsun. These are definitely different:
But wait, boxing and kickboxing are the same thing. I imagine that we would run into the same issue if we took a combination of Judo, Jiu-Jitsu, or Wrestling. Okay, I'll give that. So let's try something a little more distinct. Take Western Boxing and the Chinese Wing Tsun. These are definitely different:
Start watching at 14:20
Start anywhere ; )
Granted. These are distinct. But wait. If you say to Bob and Weave, you can't plant your feet in a solid stance and simultaneously make contact, if you are suppose to stay away and be light on your toes, bouncing around. So while these are definitely different martial art, they are not mixable.
Let's try another composition. Muay Thai and BJJ. A popular concoction. There are punches, elbows, knees, kicks, grabs, throws, takendowns, holds, joint locks, and chokes/strngulations all with some groundwork! This is a great mix. But, each one of those can takes years to master. So in order to gain proficeincy it is best to take a little from each, extend the time of training to master longer, but shorten the combined time for proficiency. We end up with a limited number of joint longs, escapes, strikes, and movement (footwork/groundwork).
A friend of mine suggested: (Due to the limited number of arts and those which are "mixable") MMA is nothing more than a title for an introductory course of simple locks, groundwork, and some kicking and punching. I can't disagree too much. This really eliminates the "MMA" aspect to MMA.
But perhaps we should reconsider what art arts. The Traditional art of Karate considers striking, joint-locks, throws, breathing, meditation, breaking, weapons (each one individually), forms, and sparring, all their own distinct art form
If we think of MMA broadly, it is a shame we don't treat the old MMA with the same respect.
I train MMA. I train Karate.
Train True. Train Hard.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Mahki: The Block
Karate will not be Karate until the block is more than a block; the punch is more than a punch; and the step is more than the step- without this, "karate" is only advanced boxing, with basic footwork.
Today I would like to write on what the block is. And what it is not. A block is the interception, attacking, bearing, and redirecting of another's attack on oneself. It is not a single movement of the body. As I type these words I hear the objections flooding my mind's ear: "But, Christopher, no one is saying that. There are any types of blocks, and each block can do everyone of those things!"
My inside-outside mahki is a movement of the body. But it's blocking power. This is more complicated. Have I brought my arm from below to upright? From a punch to vertical position? Did I start it at the hip or the solar plexus? Does it travel horizontally, or in a corkscrew? Am I pushing against the grain with it, or only side-breaking the attack?
If the above questions aren't making any sense for you, this post is for you.
When I am blocking, I am not simply engaging in an efficient motion or raw statistical data of what is effective or able to weather the best. When I am blocking I am living natural principles, learned studies of physics, even. A strait punch from a sunfist is push toward my chest. Do I intercept? Yes. But how? Do I receive, work against, or simply re-orient?
My example: The middle/inside-outside block twists the fore arm.
Now, as you execute your own, with your body, think about the translation of your WHOLE body. Am I receiving the blow, am I pushing against it, am I simply rolling it to the side?
Try this experiment. snap the block as shown in this video, but step your whole, balanced body backwards. Then step your whole, and balanced body forward. Now execute it standing still (try "Sanchin Dachi" - "Hourglass Stance.") and feel your body leaning and its weight/power shifting through that blocking arm.
The first is one that drives the block inward, to where you want. The second pushes back. But, you must overcome their power. The last redirects the opponent's energy, but without your control once the arm is directed away from you. What is your intention? Which of the three blocks are you executing with your "inside-outside block?"
Train hard.
Today I would like to write on what the block is. And what it is not. A block is the interception, attacking, bearing, and redirecting of another's attack on oneself. It is not a single movement of the body. As I type these words I hear the objections flooding my mind's ear: "But, Christopher, no one is saying that. There are any types of blocks, and each block can do everyone of those things!"
My inside-outside mahki is a movement of the body. But it's blocking power. This is more complicated. Have I brought my arm from below to upright? From a punch to vertical position? Did I start it at the hip or the solar plexus? Does it travel horizontally, or in a corkscrew? Am I pushing against the grain with it, or only side-breaking the attack?
If the above questions aren't making any sense for you, this post is for you.
When I am blocking, I am not simply engaging in an efficient motion or raw statistical data of what is effective or able to weather the best. When I am blocking I am living natural principles, learned studies of physics, even. A strait punch from a sunfist is push toward my chest. Do I intercept? Yes. But how? Do I receive, work against, or simply re-orient?
My example: The middle/inside-outside block twists the fore arm.
Now, as you execute your own, with your body, think about the translation of your WHOLE body. Am I receiving the blow, am I pushing against it, am I simply rolling it to the side?
Try this experiment. snap the block as shown in this video, but step your whole, balanced body backwards. Then step your whole, and balanced body forward. Now execute it standing still (try "Sanchin Dachi" - "Hourglass Stance.") and feel your body leaning and its weight/power shifting through that blocking arm.
The first is one that drives the block inward, to where you want. The second pushes back. But, you must overcome their power. The last redirects the opponent's energy, but without your control once the arm is directed away from you. What is your intention? Which of the three blocks are you executing with your "inside-outside block?"
Train hard.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Footwork
Observe the footwork. Just observe it.
Now Observe this footwork.
What's the big difference? They are both bouncing. They are both inching their way to the attack. They both use first-strike and counter-strike methods. What's the deal, here?
The deal is the purpose of the bouncing. Bouncing does not make you a better fighter, or more agile. It DOES lock you into a predictable rhythm- this makes it possible for your opponent to gauge when you will be in the air and strike at that time, where you have only jump or flying attacks to utilize, at less power.
The purpose of the bouncing in the first clip is the kind that makes you light on your feet, and more mobile... but not more agile or effective.
The bouncing in the second clip is the kind that hides your footwork. When you use a proper bounce and stances you must retain your schooled footwork. How many steps are you taking, what kind? Where is your balance starting? Bouncing hides this fact. The drawback is that you are in the air 1/2 the time. If your opponent learns your rhythm and overcomes you by that, you need to stop bouncing. It's okay to do that, and you can still "win," if that is your goal. In a fight, bouncing can be dangerous due to the lack of rules on grappling. The footwork needs to be your principle concern in training. No bounce and learned footwork will beat out bounce with crazy footwork (by crazy I mean chaotic and undisciplined/uncontrolled). How do you secant the circle, dodge to counter, side step, switch in step, move in or out of range appropriately? Bouncing doesn't teach you that- it just looks athletic. Using a static stance- remaining on your toes, not on your heels!- can be more effective.
Bouncing right is a huge advantage. Don't get me wrong; it can increase your speed and hide telegraphs. Having said that: being in the right place and seen selectively is better than being unseen in all the wrong places at once.
Train hard. Train right.
Now Observe this footwork.
What's the big difference? They are both bouncing. They are both inching their way to the attack. They both use first-strike and counter-strike methods. What's the deal, here?
The deal is the purpose of the bouncing. Bouncing does not make you a better fighter, or more agile. It DOES lock you into a predictable rhythm- this makes it possible for your opponent to gauge when you will be in the air and strike at that time, where you have only jump or flying attacks to utilize, at less power.
The purpose of the bouncing in the first clip is the kind that makes you light on your feet, and more mobile... but not more agile or effective.
The bouncing in the second clip is the kind that hides your footwork. When you use a proper bounce and stances you must retain your schooled footwork. How many steps are you taking, what kind? Where is your balance starting? Bouncing hides this fact. The drawback is that you are in the air 1/2 the time. If your opponent learns your rhythm and overcomes you by that, you need to stop bouncing. It's okay to do that, and you can still "win," if that is your goal. In a fight, bouncing can be dangerous due to the lack of rules on grappling. The footwork needs to be your principle concern in training. No bounce and learned footwork will beat out bounce with crazy footwork (by crazy I mean chaotic and undisciplined/uncontrolled). How do you secant the circle, dodge to counter, side step, switch in step, move in or out of range appropriately? Bouncing doesn't teach you that- it just looks athletic. Using a static stance- remaining on your toes, not on your heels!- can be more effective.
Bouncing right is a huge advantage. Don't get me wrong; it can increase your speed and hide telegraphs. Having said that: being in the right place and seen selectively is better than being unseen in all the wrong places at once.
Train hard. Train right.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Balanced
So, the form looks like more kick and punch, but let's take a moment to really look at what is happening. There are two principles at work in Bassai So/Sho
1. The Follow. The follow is what I used to describe the second hand of a two-handed technique that could've been done with one hand. The opening move, for example, could have been achieved with one hand. The second hand serves two purposes, one immediate, one distal. The immediate application is the hand re-enforcing the first. The distal application is understanding the hand to be in a position to strike through the opening made by the first. This is like following close enough behind a stock-car in the Daytona 500. The first makes the work and resistance converge and break on it. The second take quick advantage of the weakness of the opponent's defense that naturally occurs in the blocking of the first hand.
2. The Grapple. Karate has stand-up and take down grappling. Yes, it does. Here is an ideal instance of the stand-up type. In the last 1/4 of the form, the side punches end with a hand rotate and grab. The Grab initiates and maintains contact and adds "roping" power to the succeeding punch. Roping is the description of pulling one's opponent toward the attack you launch, using the body's natural rhythm and counter-balancing. This is often seen with Muay Thai Fighters:
Train Hard, Train Creative.
1. The Follow. The follow is what I used to describe the second hand of a two-handed technique that could've been done with one hand. The opening move, for example, could have been achieved with one hand. The second hand serves two purposes, one immediate, one distal. The immediate application is the hand re-enforcing the first. The distal application is understanding the hand to be in a position to strike through the opening made by the first. This is like following close enough behind a stock-car in the Daytona 500. The first makes the work and resistance converge and break on it. The second take quick advantage of the weakness of the opponent's defense that naturally occurs in the blocking of the first hand.
2. The Grapple. Karate has stand-up and take down grappling. Yes, it does. Here is an ideal instance of the stand-up type. In the last 1/4 of the form, the side punches end with a hand rotate and grab. The Grab initiates and maintains contact and adds "roping" power to the succeeding punch. Roping is the description of pulling one's opponent toward the attack you launch, using the body's natural rhythm and counter-balancing. This is often seen with Muay Thai Fighters:
Train Hard, Train Creative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)