joesteph

I've practiced hopping/scooting the rear leg up, kicking the angled roundhouse with the lead leg, then returning the lead and rear legs back to "start" with a hop. It's easier for me to use the instep, but sometimes I get lucky and the lower shin has gotten in there. My art's sparring is non-contact, so I have less margin for error in that limited between-the-legs area, that I can "strike" and pull back. But it works just fine picturing the WaveMaster's side as the opponent's inner thigh and making impact.

This video: http://www.ehow.com/video_2359090_concentration-kicks-tang-soo-do.html is titled "Concentration Kicks," but the basic idea (the wall for support, go slow, work the muscles) can be used for any kick. She's actually demonstrating a hook kick, but starts off referring to how she's chambering for the side kick first, so in that regard the video fits in with this topic. I think that if instuctors are watching students perform the side (or hook, or roundhouse) kick in this manner, it's easier to spot the little things to be corrected, not only for the teacher to catch but for the student to be aware of.

That was a really rapid--and a really body-twisting--hip movement from about 2:45 to 3:03. His firing off the snapping shot and snapping his body/hips back with the recoiling punch is unreal.

Isn't the rule of thumb about two inches for a punch, Tallgeese? I think it may be something like four inches for a kick; four inches for a punch strikes me as more of a push action.

An email from Clyde Surrett came to me later in the day about the magazine article published by the Brotherhood of Martial Artists in the May 2009 online issue. I was able to find an article about Mr. Surrett in the October 2008 issue, on pp. 6-9. This is from his response: 1. What was the level of experience/Knowledge of the one punching? 2. How many was punching? Answer: There was only person punching, and that was me. I have 20+ years in the martial Arts, I have trained and studied many systems and styles over the years, Such as Shotokan, Karakido, Judo, Jujitsu, Kickboxing and Boxing just to name a few. Over the years I have learn that it not so much how ones throws a punch, but knowing when to use a certain punch, recoil or follow through.* *The example he gave was: I would use a recoil punch if a person was standing with nothing around them for maximum effect. But if a person was let stay against a wall or on the ground I would use a follow through punch, and this is why, I punch would hit them and then as the power went through there body and into the ground, the ground would hit them again! With the same force that they hit the wall or floor with. I would say that the martial artist performing the punches was qualified. I don't doubt the results, but the scientific method requires that others repeat an experiment to see if similar results are achieved. This is why reports of experiments are published; they serve to inform and invite others to participate.

I sent an email to kempoinstructor@yahoo.com, explaining that the article generated discussion on the KarateForums.com web board, and that I'd like to get in touch with the author/experimenter for more info. I received an email from Clyde Surrett, who writes for the BHMA magazine, and whose wife, Jamie, wrote the article. I asked him for more info, quoting Bob in particular ("What was the level of experience/knowledge of the one who is punching?"), and asked my own question about the number of participants. Incidentally, I'm reading "Chinatown Jeet Kune Do" by Tim Tackett and Bob Bremer. I've read and I'm re-reading Chapter 3 ("Hand Tools") which starts off with a quote by Bruce Lee: "The best way to win the fight is to just reach over and knock him out." Easy to say/do if you're Bruce Lee or Jack Dempsey.

I went back to the Brotherhood of Martial Artists web site, Bob, to see if I could find an email address with the article, but there isn't one. I thought if I joined the BHMA message board, then I could ask about the article, but when I joined I found I have a wait ahead of me before I can log in. Finally, I sent an email to kempoinstructor@yahoo.com, explaining that the article generated discussion on the KarateForums.com web board, and that I'd like to get in touch with the author/experimenter for more info. For me, the main concern would be the number of martial artists involved in the five punches per type of punch. If it's one individual, in a sense it's the study of one person, even if the results would be true if there were a larger number of martial artists participating. Personally, I hope it was at least a dozen participants.

Your post caused me to check out the book at Amazon, Kuma, and I liked what I was able to "Search Inside." I wound up ordering it. Thanks!

At the web site of the Brotherhood of Martial Artists you can download their online magazines for free, or just read them online. I found the May 2009 issue to have a short but interesting article, "Recoil vs. Follow Through," by (this is how it's written) Jamie Surrett, Dr. Merrill PHY 110-D1, on pp. 23-25. Essentially, it compares/contrasts the punch that's rapidly whipped out to "snap" at impact, and is recoiled instantly, with the punch that "keeps on going" like an Energizer bunny, following through the opponent's body. Which does more damage? There are two charts, each one containing the physics of each punch. The physics favors the recoil punch. The article didn't get into whether the punchers were using a vertical or horizontal fist, a jab or cross, or by the first two or last three knuckles striking. It went by time, velocity, and force to arrive at results. Personally, I've found the vertical fist to be the fastest of the vertical, three-quarters, and horizontal choices, and the quickest to recoil. My first JKD lesson had me working focus mitts and concentrating on that snap. I could tell if I did it right by the sound made on impact.

It is a good read. As Tallgeese pointed out, understanding the principles gives you the larger picture, so what you may not necessarily have exactly trained for you're ready for anyway. I especially like the Evade, Stun, Unbalance, and Control divisions that blend one into the other.

I had my first Jeet Kune Do lesson tonight, my interest in studying it at this time coming from learning there's a JKD seminar in my hometown, Bayonne, NJ, on October 2, 3 & 4. I've posted about the lead punch before, but JKD relies tremendously on footwork from what I was introduced to tonight. I don't know that you'll ever "ground" and slug it out, and I found that karate blocks are gone in favor of parrying, redirecting, trapping, whatever you want to call it. I didn't do all of these, of course, but I did do a lot of simple footwork, low kicks, and the lead punch. I observed about the other aspects of the art. I'll still be studying Soo Bahk Do, even though I thought that taking a second martial art shouldn't begin until after reaching dan level, but I took self-defense classes in Vee Arnis JuJitsu earlier this year, and taking Jeet Kune Do for self-defense (it's like an assemblage of concepts and techniques) just seems logical. My SBD teacher knows, so I feel everything's fine. I don't know what can be said/posted concerning that JKD seminar, but you can email Mr. Patrick Cunningham at bayonnekarate@yahoo.com to inquire about the offerings and even where to stay that weekend. I understand that it's considered an important event and held in different locations in the US each year. This time it's the East Coast's turn.

This may be a case of refusing to let older forms go (historical) while recognizing the importance of ones developed over the years. In Soo Bahk Do, I found out that the organization is pruning the older forms for rank advancement, while retaining newer ones. Often, a newer form may reflect what was in an older form and give an additional (modernized? contemporary?) spin on things. I did learn that some forms that were once required for gup advancement have been moved to dan level requirements, probably reflecting the higher level of "art" and history once someone has reached that level. It really does seem like overkill when required all at once, especially if you have all those forms but little time for understanding (let alone practicing) applications within them. If a reason is given for learning a particular form, especially at dan level as DWx points out, they become more important and better appreciated. I think we all realize that forms were developed by conscientious people who had a particular plan/series of training steps in mind. But, as Storyteller's question can be interpreted, what is, and where do we find, the saturation point?

Hi Conrad! Welcome to the Forums!

An interesting insight, Ed. I also liked how you brought both Soho and Lee's perceptive references to water into your article.

I hadn't realized this, Isshinryu5. It reminds me of Confucianism, in that Confucius was very concerned about how people should conduct their lives in "this" world, not sounding like a religion during his lifetime. Doesn't the yin-yang symbol have a bit of the "other" half within each side? It's not as polar-opposite as one might first believe. I took the liberty of adding in [good and] to your quote because, personally, I give more weight to the intention, whether good or bad, although that doesn't mean none or a minimum to the result. BTW, I'm admittedly weak on Taoism.

This makes me think of a sparring exercise (one of the non-required fun ones, as I like to think of them), working with a partner on the first moves, then the next moves will be added on, and so on. I remember (from long ago) seeing a video of Fumio Demura instructing, and that he didn't say the high (or "rising") block was force-against-force, but pointed out that when the forearm reaches its uppermost height, it "rolled" the attack towards the end. I don't think it's something you train directly; I think it's something you pick up on and becomes part of you. When doing the first part of the sparring exercise, something seemed weak about the block I was to use before punching back with the other hand. Then something started having me dip down a bit while performing it, helping the "roll" along. It even made it easier for me to strike (to his midsection) much sooner after I'd blocked. (Ideally, I guess you'd do the two simultaneously.) I think this fits in with what Bob is saying about "receiving."

This looks like very good headgear, Malanovaus. It doesn't seem to restrict vision that much, and I see that the prices are for child and adult. You mentioned glasses; I wear rigid contacts, necessary for proper eyesight instead of soft. All I'd need is a shot to the eye to crack the thing in there. I guess the cage has its weight drawbacks, but eyes (and noses) have their value, too.

There's a saying that goes along with the above: The road to hell is paved with good intentions. There's the question, "Is lying always wrong?" Most would say no, should good intentions be the reason. In a philosophy text, it gave the example of an aging uncle; let's call him Uncle Bill. He'd led a hard life, one with tragedies, and was now diagnosed with a disease that would claim his life in two years. Wanting to spare Uncle Bill this new burden, the family chose to keep this from him, instead encouraging him to take his medication and look forward to better health. For the first year, he was in fairly good shape. After that, for the next six months, his health began to decline, but he was encouraged that these minor setbacks happen. Then when he was hospitalized, he was told the truth--and the reason for the lie. Uncle Bill was furious. He'd had a secret dream, one based on what others--particularly other senior citizens--had told him. The dream was to see Las Vegas. He'd even stashed some money in a special bank account, expecting that, when he recovered, he'd celebrate with that trip. He could have traveled during the first year of his illness. Now the good intentions of his relatives had destroyed his dream.

Hi Ranpu. Back to the forums and in good shape as well. Sounds like life's been good to you.

This reminds me of a painter who had his own TV show, Bill Alexander. He said that without light there is no dark, and without dark there is no light. He used a white canvas to demonstrate, flicking a bit of yellow paint on it. You could hardly see the yellow. Then he demonstrated painting a darker background with yellow on it. The yellow shone, and even made the darker background fulfill being dark. Firmness-gentleness, light-dark, teacher-student, doctor-patient, parent-child . . . An interesting observation on Lee's part.

Good point... jamming a side kick is often a good defense, and can set up counter-attacking opportunities or directly trip the kicker. Exactly that is seen against an intended gliding side kick here . . . Jamming - like any defense from within or the edge of striking range - requires some commitment and risk . . . Bob, Tony, what do you think of using your body, as in where it's positioned so close that the side kick gets jammed at about where it's chambered? I did this by accident (I was infighting) a couple of months ago against a fellow student's side kick. There are photos in the August 1999 issue of Black Belt in which this is seen in the top photo. The caveat is the second photo, if your opponent is onto you.

The only patch I have is the organization my school is affiliated with. I found out that when there are tournaments, they're "closed," and everyone is expected to wear an organization patch. But a school patch or school name on the back of the dobak jacket is frowned upon. My children chose extra patches, which are flags, one on each arm, but they're seven years old, and other children have these as well. Their teacher even gave my boys little one-line patches that say "Courage" as a morale boost. I think that if you're a teenager on up, you're in the adult world, and the fun patches should remain in the children's world.

I think part of "What's It Worth" includes a sincere "Thank you" now and then to our teachers. Last class I had before the weekend, there was a smaller turnout, so my teacher let me work with another student on some "odd" defense against wrist grabs. It was fun and I made sure I thanked her before I left. On her birthday, as she's also their teacher, I have my boys present her with a small box of chocolates and a card that they sign (well, at age seven, they print David and Patrick). Sometimes payment isn't made in money but in thoughtful recognition.

I know we're supposed to be talking about martial arts, but it's a rare case to find an auto repair job that costs just $50. Another thought is that cars today aren't designed to be fixed by their owners; they're usually hooked up to a computer and special tools as well as knowledge are required. Sorry, Bob, but I think Don handled it wrong. He should have had the guy come back later, then explained to him that the tralfaz was out of sync with the fabersham, which makes the veeblefetzer spin ante-clockwise. It was repaired by using a hammerfist.

On p. 100, photo 2, I can't say that I'd use the same block he used (I think of open hand; he's looking to deliver a shock), but it has the same effect of allowing the wrist seize and controlling/pulling his opponent into the strike (p. 101, photo 4). Separately, on p. 101, there's the move to grab the wrist for the twist and takedown. In Soo Bahk Do, one of the more basic techniques is to seize the wrist and then three more moves, but as you go up the belt chain, you're shown how to do exactly this wrist/arm twist (just one move, not three) to down the opponent. (Efficient as well as effective.) Comparing the two in the article, one is to pull the opponent into a "backfist as it slams against his temple, neck, or behind his ear"; the other doesn't require a strike (although you can kick, as in photo 3), in case you want to take your adversary down without hitting him. I'd opt for the latter if possible if dealing with a drunk instead of a mugger, especially if the police are called.