Bushido-Ruach

What I meant TG is that they were developed in a day and age where life and death struggles were the norm, when civilizations were more "rough" than the one we live in today. Bach then, it was kill or be killed much more often than we are used to. Being that as it may, when nerve and pressure point knowledge was being built upon as it came to hand-to-hand fighting, they were proven in actual combat. As far as scientific evidence, still, the best I can suggest concerning this would be to get with an accupuncturist that is also versed in such systems as Eagle or Tiger styles of kung fu. These systems, along with White Crane, Snake (particularly cobra chuan fa) and Mantis styles, are all based upon nerve and pressure point attacks. As proof of this, look at the hand formations...tiger claw...OK, for a tiger, it works...but for a man trying to hit or scratch you with his finger tips???? Doesn't make much sense. But when you realize that both Tiger and Eagle style claws are actually grasping and applying huge amounts of pressure to nerve clusters and pressure point areas, it makes a lot of sense. Look at the Mantis hand formation...your index finger slightly curved...to actually HIT someone with that? Come on, now, you just broke your finger...unless you are hitting with less power than you and I are today with our hands and fists...and hitting weak points on the body. That makes a lot more sense. Anyways, that's my suggestion to all who may think pressure points or nerve targeting techniques are bologna, because this seems to be the historical origin of nerve attacks - or better yet, Dim Muk striking points. They are based upon the science of accupuncture, where certain (not all) accutpunture points can be used to attack and damage the body instead of for healing. These same points can also heal, but they also have martial combat applications. See ya around, guys...gotta go to bed!

Sorry, I didn't give a good accounting of myself in the beginning...we still train for responsive spontinaity because, as you have rightly acknowledged, a fight is a "living, breathing animal" that can change and move with every different response that takes place. The purpose in our training so many one-step techniques is in developing effective counter responses in the event you can carry one out...but we also train in such a way that if a one step can't be initiated, a proper spontaneous response can still be accomplished. What I have found in practicing multiple one steps vs. not practicing one steps, is that one-steps gives you a better hand (in my opinion) on an effective response than can end the fight before it goes too far. Also, our one-steps aren't rigid and fixed so that any deviation from the way it is practiced totally destroys the ability of the defender to complete the technique. What I find is practicing one-steps helps one learn body mechanics and learn - spontaneously - techniques they can use in actual combat vs. techniques that are virtually useless in a street fight. Respectfully!!!

You have any proof of all this? Kodenkan Ju-Jitsu, from which my humble martial arts history began, has many such points. There is another point along the stomach meridian located near the bladder that when struck will cause the attacker to begin heaving, as if vomiting, I have personally seen this one many times...it seems to be a favorite amongh black belts sparring one another...seeing who can tag the other first. Some systems still retain such anatomical point attacks, but as I said in my response to Bushido-man, most have purposely stopped teaching such techniques for fear of misuse. Good evidence can be found in any black belt of a system still retaining such knowledge, you would just have to find such a system near you. I have had some of the less dangerous ones done to me, kind of like when Polise Officers have to be tazed when they are being tazer certified, they have to know what it feels like in case they ever have to use it. They aren't fun to experience...but they are real and they do work.

How do they portray the fact that this amount of pressure will cause the heart to stop? Have they tried it, and then recussitated someone? Or is it based off other data? I am assuming that the information accumulated down through the experimental stages of developing such systems of attack, such as those developed in India where tradition says most of the nerve or pressure point systems developed. Chinese history concerning acupuncture developed in an age when the individual was sacrificed for the good of the country...and along with the development of some of those points into attacking points. Acupuncture is thousands of years old, as well as many of these pressure point targets. Most of them do have recussitation techniques that were developed at the expense of many human lives, only in such an atmosphere and age of brutality could such a system of fighting be developed. The recussitation techniques were developed in order for practicing these points on one another. Most martial arts, in making their way to the US, lost such pressure point attacks because of the fear of such knowledge being misused...a very valid fear!

I like this series of videos, Bushido_Ruach, especially the computer-generated "see-through" fighters. I knew that a solid shot to the armpit hit a nerve center, and I've thought of a strike to the neck using the forearm like a club as blunt force trauma. It might stun someone enough to knock him out. There was some "media hype" about the hammer fist blow to the chest and dim mak, but I think of that strike to the sternum as a valid one. I've practiced on BOB using a palm heel, instead, for a greater chance to be precisely between the pectoral muscles. I've wondered if a really strong strike there could fracture the sternum. Interesting video. I liked the see-thru aspect also, it was pretty cool.

The ninja guy dancing around like he did as the voice over occurred also made it hard to take seriously. But then, it's hard to take any "dim mak" talk seriously. Whenever I hear Dimmak I think of Jean Claude Van Damme in bloodsport...haha That's the biggest hindrance to dim muk teaching here in the states...Hollywood has so distorted the truth behind the technique that no one takes it seriously. Here is another example, in my own words so that I don't infringe anyone in the same field...along the Stomach meridian is points 16 and 17 (about an inch above the nipple and on the nipple, respectively), if either one of these points are struck hard enough (or both simultaneously - "hard enough" being 12 pounds of pressure or greater), they will shock the heart and it will stop functioning. The attacker won't have a heart attack, it will simply stop pumping. There are numerous acupuncture points along the body, some of them can be used to cause great damage along with healing...there are a few that, if struck hard enough, or in a certain succession, can cause KO and/or death.

First thing I would do is block it with an elbow jam stop-hit block, if all goes well, his cross won't be coming because he is in too much pain from breaking his fingers on my elbow. Then I would follow up with a finger slap to the eyes so that he can't see very well...and finish him off with a front kick to the gut. There are other scenarios, of course, but that's my favorite.

In our class, first degree regime is as follows... All ten forms done correctly (each one following the belt stage one-step form applications: basic one-steps, one-steps utilizing simultaneous block/strikes, joint locks, take-downs, multiple hits, pressure points, joint dislocations, breaks, vital point (dim muk) strikes, weapon (their choice, either knife, dagga, pen, or escrima). Rolls and falls. All blocking and cleansing techniques. All belt specific targets. Body mechanics as it has to do with reaction to hits, balance disruption, etc. Defense against weapons (un-armed and armed). Proficient in sticky hands forms (basic, balancing, pressure point, vital point) All 1,023 one-step techniques (rank specific) - each rank has between 101 and 136 one-step techniques. All vital point strikes: the target, the affect, the counter measure (if any). Must demonstrate the ability to proficiently defend themself against an attacker (me!). Must demonstrate the ability to teach and lead others. Must demonstrate the 12 tenets of the Code of Bushido (benevolence, bravery, respectful, devoted, faithfulness, honesty, integrity, honorable, upright, self-control, self-discipline, and sincerity).

One important technique to remember, no matter what you physically do (scenario #1), is to kai as loudly and as sharply as you can an instant before you make your move...directly into the face of your attacker. If you have never experienced this before, try it out in class one night. Most people, even when they know it's coming, are taken back by the sudden influx of auditory information suddenly shocking their senses, it momentarily short curcuits the person, even causing them to jump upon the impact of the sound upon their eardrums...they freeze. That second of temporary emobilization can mean the difference between success...and a body bag. Scenario #2 isn't hopeless in the way it is given here...but if your attacker knows what he's doing and pulls you back off balance against his knee, leaning you backward...you are pretty much toast.

Coming from the background of going through Marine Corps bootcamp, discipline in my school is found not so much in punishment, but in drills. I try to instill in my students that they can accomplish things that they don't think they can...a certain amount of push-ups when they don't think they can do another one...holding their side-kick out, even when it's three inches off the floor...basically letting them discover the "eye of the Tiger" that lives within all of us and learning how to bring it out when needed. They don't like it while they are going through it, but afterwards they have that glow...the "Did you see what I did!" glow of extreme accomplishment. If they ever do tick me off, however, everyone's on the floor, on their backs, feet six inches off the floor until I see tears. I have only had to do that once....

To me, wearing your top with the belt outside running around town is a challenge...it looks like you are out showing off, asking for trouble. Of course, there is always the ocassional exception....like getting a call in class telling you someone went to the hospital...(God forbid)

I'm just curious...in another thread (I can't remember which one or where), the number of one-steps within a system came up in the conversation. Someone said, if I am remembering correctly, that they only had something like 37 one-step techniques total by the time the student tested for black belt. In my self defense class, just between Yellow Belt and it's first degree we have 60 one step techniques, 33 from basic escapes, 27 from punches (besides basic sticky hands training). By the time someone picks up their black belt in my school, they have a total of 1,033 one-step techniques filling their brains. Our philosophy is as follows...a fight, when broken down to its simplest constituents, is an attack followed by a blocking or cleansing technique, followed by a counter attack. Basically, a fight is one one-step followed by another, followed by another, ad infinitum until one of the two combatants is taken out. Since a fight consists of such, 10% of our training is learning the basics, and the following 90% is all learning one-steps and then drilling them into the student's brains and reactions. My questions to ya'all is this...how important is one-step techniques to your training? What ratio to one-step training does your school practice in comparison to kata, basics drills, and sparring? And, #3 - do you feel this is adequate in your ability to defend yourself against an attack?

I myself have never heard of breaking the neck with a chopping technique, the most I have heard is attacking the side of the neck where certain nerve centers can be struck as a knock-out. These nerve centers react to being hit really hard by sending so many pain signals to the brain that the brain is actually being overwhelmed by the electrical information to the point that it has to shut down...aka, "KO"

Hey guys, I found this on youtube, and even though it isn't what I was talkinga bout in the other forum topic where this was mentioned, I thought I would put it out there for you anyways...especially for Bushido-man since he asked about hard data on the subject... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMZZr94WFRc Yahoya-te!!!

I think that it is safe to say that there isn't really a satisfying answer to this question. It could take only one blow to take a person out...then it could take five blows to take the next one down...then it could take three for the next......seven for the last. It simply depends upon where the attacker is hit and how hard (sometimes at what angle, also). As someone said...there are a lot of variables to be considered.

I like and agree with what ps1 wrote... I think he (or she, whichever the case may be) said it all, and said it rather good!

As far as I can tell from experience and the limited literature that I have been able to find, most of them work on everyone because they are based upon specific points on the body USUALLY in the weak spots where one muscle or tendon overlaps or meets another. Some also work because of the wave reverberatons you may be familiar with that originate from certain strikes we use against the body and body caveties - where the vibration waves actually put certain parts of the body into shock from the purcusion created by prolonged contact (the difference between a quick jab to the body versus the hit that you hold momentarily...like a snapping side kick vs. a hard hitting side kick). Most of the points that don't work on everyone are pressure points...I have hit people on the forearm on Lung 6 and some respond and some just look at me like, "Was that supposed to hurt?" Most of the points that are actually listed as "Dim Muk" points do work and are very dangerous, especially since some of them don't have recucitation techniques. Most of them do have recucitations, but some do not. They are definitely nothing that I would ever teach to an immature individual!!! Greetings!

One of my favorites is the final fight scene in the Protector with tony Jaa, just because he uses a lot of dislocations and actual technique...although there are some that are obviously not! The other is the first fight scene in Fist of Legend, for the same reasons... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyDgkiZb9Aw

Great question...and some good answers too! I would have my students work on blocking drills, first stage being just getting the technique down, second stage in practicing blocks while mobile, until they are second nature. Then I would add one-step drills, in the same stages. Once the one-steps are second nature then they can be practically applied in a mobile situation to help in an actual combat situation. If most dojo's that I've visited trained like most Aikido schools do (application wise, I mean, after the technique is learned), then I think they would really prosper more than some do that I've seen. Sparring isn't always the best place to work your one-steps in to because most street fights don't run the way sparring runs. Sometimes, in my opinion, sparring actually hurts the students advancement rather than helping.

I would say that it depends upon the law in your area. Here where I am (central california) if you strike first you ARE the aggressor and will be charged as such if arrested. However, I think we also need to address the main point...allowing the aggressor to strike first - this does not mean that you have to let him hit you, it only means that you have to let him try to hit you first. The very fact that he struck out at you gives you the legal right to protect yourself, it doesn't matter at all if he ever tagged you or not. I don't know about other states or cities, but here, if you are defending yourself from an attacker, you are patted on the back. Here's where it gets tricky...it is considered an assault on a person just by spitting upon them because of the threat of such things as A.I.D.S.....I don't know if you would get away with beating someone down just for spitting on you....just don't spit on a cop, that's a felony!!!

Hi guys & gals...I don't think we really answered the question here...or at least one of the questions. . . . One-hit kills DO exist...a basic one is the temple or the middle of the forehead or the base of the skull...however, as someone so avidly recognized, you must be willing to suffer the consequences of utilizing such a technique - both in your own mind and any legal implications of applying deadly force if such force isn't deemed a necessity for self-defense situations. (emphasis added) Since you returned to the OP, Bushido-Ruach, I think it's important that we re-examine the words I put into bold in both the OP and your posting. That OP bold can be seen as "who wants to hurt/kill and be jailed for it" or "who wants to hurt/kill" and "who in his right mind wants to go to jail." I think it's the latter, that there are two questions here, and, looking back at your posting, I think you've treated it as two, referring to "in your own mind" separate from "legal implications." You've also got that very important caveat, "if such force isn't deemed a necessity." Personally, I expand "kill" to "harm" and "maim." They can also weigh on the mind and/or have legal implications. Let's limit the setting to one attacker, not multiple, to simplify. It isn't open season if someone accosts me. I have to size up the situation and determine the appropriate course of action. I may have to strike first, as his very accosting me can be considered an assault; it might be that he put a hand on me. Examining just what I've been exposed to as an orange belt, I can see that much of it is overkill. I suggest that if my opening counter to the hand on me (a joint lock that's supposed to break the wrist) doesn't do more than surprise and remove his hand from me, then I move into the next move(s) (e.g., the kick, then, if need be, the elbow strike I can perform according to the technique I used). If I break his wrist and he falls to the sidewalk in pain, I feel I'm obligated to stop right there. (I didn't say not to remain vigilant; I can remain so while I pull out my cell phone and call in the cavalry.) If he gets up and runs, I remember that I'm not a police officer, so I don't chase after him; instead, I report it. I'm aware that I said, "I feel I'm obligated to stop right there," which is something that I'm commenting on regarding my own peace of mind, not legal ramifications. If my attacker is a larger man, reacting as I've described above, I say it holds true for me, for my mind. If he's larger (and I'm in middle age, so it's likely he's younger), I could likely legally "get away with" the additional kick and elbow strike, causing a lot of harm, but ought I? If I break his joint and he's still fighting, then that's another story; I'm fighting for my life and will have to continue with the technique. When the police show up, they do not know what the situation was. It will be examined, and if I decided to maim or kill, the situation had better warrant it from both a moral and legal point of view. I agree with you, Joesteph, we do have to take into account how many and so on, also what kind of technique we use. But one has to make up their mind today, before any such attack ever takes place IF it ever takes place, exactly how far you are going to carry through. Here is my mind, living where I live and experiencing the things I see on a daily basis, if I am accosted by one single individual, then I am confident that I can handle the situation without ending in him dieing. Now lets change it up a bit, there are multiple attackers, and they are wearing gang colors - you have just entered into my world. You do not know if anyone is packing a gun or not, or how many may (in the old days it was usually only one, the group leader, now a days all four may be packing in a group of four), the point is - YOU don't know what they have. In my experience you have to treat such a case as they all have weapons, so in this scenario, it is either kill or be killed. If I am to be a victim, I am taking out as many of them as I can. You also need to understand that where I live gang bangers shoot 16 year old girls just to get initiated into the gang. I don't have the pleasantry of living in a nice little house with a white pickett fence...I have gang bangers selling drugs just down the corner from my house. So far, I have been able to beat the odds with two attackers by breaking a wrist and an arm, and one of them had a baseball bat. I don't say that to say that I'm good, I say that to give you some idea of why I say what I say. Do I want to hurt people? Absolutely not...I am also a minister. Will I do whatever it takes to defend myself and others from people who are hell-bent on hurting others? Yes, I will. I believe that this is also part of the Code of Bushido - defend the weak and helpless. If I go to jail for a couple of days until all things are straightened out, then so be it. At least the innocent didn't die, the attacker did. Nuff said. Hasta!

My question is, how much actual scientific evidence is out there to support that these are actually "killing" techniques? There is evidence but most of it follows principles of meridians and acupuncture, acupressure points along the meridians...and since western medicine denies such things and calls them myths, they really don't explore them very much. There are points where when hit, shock the heart into stopping, which is where we get our modern day heart starting techniques from (pounding the chest of a heart attack victim, for example, to re-start the heart). There are others, based upon artery attacks and such. The problem is, there has been much damage to the idea of such techniques from movies making them to be super-techniques that they aren't. But they are out there. The best treatise I have come across in dealing with them is by Erle Montaigue and Wally Simpson out of the UK. Wally is an acupuncturist who knows his stuff, and he collaborates with Mr. Montaigue to put together the first english manuscript on such points.

In my mind, if a street fighter practiced utilizing the hay maker as a part of a practiced system of responses to attacks, whether that system of responses were his own or from a traditional style of MA, then I would say yes....but to just walk up and hit someone with a haymaker, or be involved in a fight and throw out a haymaker.....I guess it depends upon your definition of a street fighter. If we are just talking about joe blow on the street who just happens to get jumped and whips out a haymaker in self defense...but he doesn't make a practice of fighting...then I would say no. If a street fighter is one who regularly practices going out and starting fights just to see how good he is or to practice fighting...then the answer is yes.

In my mind, the martial arts are defined as systems of training one for combat situations, whether armed or unarmed. The key point here, however, is in PRACTICING. Therefore, to me, a MA technique is a technique that is practiced until it becomes second nature and can be applied skillfully. That being said, I don't think that a street fighter utilizes MA techniques if he doesn't practice what he's using on the street. What he does is natural reaction, not practiced responses. Cheers

Hi guys & gals...I don't think we really answered the question here...or at least one of the questions. Many believe in one-hit kills because they do exist - however difficult they may be to execute properly, they do still exist. However, most of them have very little to do with being able to hit with such force that you can break bones, its more a matter of practicing being able to hit in the right spot...and then practicing on being able to hit that spot on a moving target. One-hit kills DO exist...a basic one is the temple or the middle of the forehead or the base of the skull...however, as someone so avidly recognized, you must be willing to suffer the consequences of utilizing such a technique - both in your own mind and any legal implications of applying deadly force if such force isn't deemed a necessity for self-defense situations. Happy new year!!!