karate blocks

[TangSooGuy]

It's not useful unless it works pretty early (considering it's taught early).

 

I actually happen to disagree with this mentality, to a degree. Can I teach someone quickly to be able to defend themeself against the average schmoe? yes. Can teach them to be reaally proficient against a good fighter in a short time? No.

 

A lot of the development has to do with timing, speed, etc. I could have the earliest beginner hurt someone with a block, but against a good fighter, they probably wouldn't have the chance to block.

 

You need time to be able to learn the correct timing, and ability to add counters to your techniques.

 

I won't guarantee anyone I'm going to make them into a great fighter within 6 months, and frankly, I don't want students who have that attitude.

 

We're probably just misunderstanding one another, which is pretty common on message boards.

 

If I attacked one of my 6-month students, they probably wouldn'tr hurt me with a block because most of them don't have the correct timing or accuracy yet. I'm not trying to sound egotistical, I'm just faster than they are, since I have close to 20 years of experience on them.

 

Take two fighters of an equal skill level, and yes, the blocks will work as described, causing the pain which was mentioned.

 

I hope I clarified my point a little, but I might just be talking in circles.

 

Most students in the early phases of their development just don't get the idea that you nedd to be moving simultaneously with the attacker, that your block intercepts their attack at the point at which they are committed to, but not finished with, the attack, and that you are hitting them with at least one counter before their initial attack would ever have been finished.

 

If you have 6 month students who are able to grasp that concept and execute it, I salute you. I seem to find guys who are too stiff to move quickly without hurting themselves. It's hard enough to get them to just loosen up in order to move fluidly, let alone get them thinking two or three moves ahead of where they are now (maybe I need to see if any of them play chess ). Some of them at 6 months have trouble just stringing two or three techniques together, let alone dealing with applying them.

 

I guess overall my goal is to make my students proficient in dealing with anyone. The techiques they learn early on will help the defend themselves, no doubt about it, but a good fighter will still pick them apart until they learn more advanced concepts. I don't happen to think there is anything wrong with that. I'd rather end up with good black belts than just good fighters, and the last thing I want to is to develop someone's skills too quickly. All that does is makes them dangerous to themselves and others.

 

I absolutely welcome opposing views. This is just mine.

[JerryLove]

Of course, I'm not arguing that a 6-month student should be able to take a more skilled fighter (or that anyone should be taking more skilled fighters, that's the point of being more skilled). It seemed from the post tat, perhaps, it was only the instructors that could make the blocks work in the manner described... a (relative) beginner should be able to use a basic technique succesfully; but that does not mean he will be able ot pull it off against a superior opponent; my apologies if it seemed I was saying otherwise.

 

It sounds like we are in relatively the same place, and I was merely confused by what you said regarding the effects of strike-blocks and at what point a practitioner would learn to use them effectively. My siutation is similar, at 6 months a student can perform our closest equivelant and injure someone; but they will still have problems against (for example) me, because of my better understanding of what they are doing and because I can avoid givint them the opportunity (usually).

 

As a side-note, one of the clips on my website is either 6-month or 1-years students; if you are curious what they look like from my school, feel free to take a peek .

[TangSooGuy]

Yes, I think we are in agreement, and I can see now you would get that impression from what I wrote in the first post.

 

What I was trying to get across is that if I was the one attacking, one of my instructors is enough better than me, personally, to still make the blocks work, even though I've been doing this almost 20 years.

 

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that even though I guess I have "veteran" status in my martial art at this point, I still don't want to have to deal with a fighter as good or better than me using tradiional blocks, because they do work,and they do hurt.

[JerryLove]

:nods:

 

On a side note; I would love sometime to see how you or one of the instructors in question performs said blocks. My (limited) experience with Karate and TKD schools has them teaching a block which is not effective, but in a manner that could be fixed. It would be great to have a counter-example.

[Treebranch]

Outside, arms length and inside. Some blocks are useful, but they need to be accompanied with a counter similtaneously. In my experience of TKD, Lima Lama which both derived from Karate, are taught very mechanical ways of fighting. Karate blocks and attacks are usually always linear which is a limiting way of fighting. If you have time to think about blocking, why not just move offline and shift back in with a kick or strike, etc... Never understood the Karate mentality that's why I left.

[tokeabowl]

I think some are useless, but some are good.

[Rich]

I'm gonna be blue in the face from repeating this so many times- go back to the bunkai. Originally what you see as blocks can be many many things but generally arent just the simple blocks you see all too often.

 

Take gedan barai- lower block. The actual blocking motion is sometimes a strike and sometimes a sweep of the arm, plus other things. The 'preparatory' motion could just be the parry itself.

 

In actual encounters blocks dont generally work very well- why because the rule of any form of combat is the initiator is quicker then the reactor given that he has good ma-ai. Now I'm not saying blocks wont work sometimes and in some situations but if the aggressor is closer than your out stretched arm then why havent you taken him out with a strike already? If you want to guarantee your safety think proactive not reactive- the original karate masters did.

 

What most schools of karate from whatever country teach is so diluted that its a joke- go back to your origins on Okinawa- before the Okinawans diluted it to teach at schools and certainly before the mass Japanisation of the art for the masses.

 

Regards

 

Rich

[cymry]

Buy 'Bunkai-Jutsu' by Iain Abernethy. There is chapter on blocks.

[delta1]

...Originally what you see as blocks can be many many things but generally arent just the simple blocks... The actual blocking motion is sometimes a strike and sometimes a sweep of the arm, plus other things. The 'preparatory' motion could just be the parry itself.

 

I'll second that!

In actual encounters blocks dont generally work very well- why because the rule of any form of combat is the initiator is quicker then the reactor ...Now I'm not saying blocks wont work sometimes and in some situations...

 

I see your point, and agree to an extent. But blocks can work to open him up or check his weapons and they can get there in time if you move the target. And since blocks are the same motion as many strikes they can do double duty. Also, as you move and block simultaneously, you can set him up for lessons in pain tolerance if your blocks have an angle of disturbance- in other words it affects his ballance, even slightly, so that you momentarily have positional advantage. Blocks also can position him if he commits to a strike and your block, with movement, has an angle of deflection. That doesn't just mean the 45' angle of your arm, but also the angle of the path of the block. Example: he thrusts a hard right front kick to your mid section. You move left and back to @7:30 and deliver a right downward block to the kick at the same time. If that block travels diagonally back toward you at @45' it will both pull and move the kick to your right, causing him to drop instead of retracting, with his right side and back exposed to you. You moved the target off line, so the block wasn't necessary for protection. But the angle of the block gave you a positional advantage. You, of course, should be there with your counter assault before his foot lands- momentary advantages are just that, quickly lost if you don't follow through.

[kempocos]

I would recommend a book by Rick Clark called

 

"75 blocks", it show 75 valid use for what we refer to as a down block.