delta1 Posted June 23, 2004 Author Share Posted June 23, 2004 are you talking about accuracy of 'hitting a target' or accuracy in 'executing a technique'? Both. You have to hit the right thing the right way to get the right results. Freedom isn't free! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta1 Posted June 23, 2004 Author Share Posted June 23, 2004 ican build my power faster and more easily than i can speed...same with accuracy. im not saying its at all more important im just saying that for me personally my power and accuracy would increase at a greater rate(even with the same hours of training) than my speed. more time and effort would have to go into that to gather the same effect. Ah, ok. Thanks for the clarification. Freedom isn't free! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunken Monkey Posted June 23, 2004 Share Posted June 23, 2004 well, i ask cos some guys here are purely thinking about hitting a specific target when they say 'accuracy'. my point being, that i'm pretty sure if we are talking about accuracy in executing a technique, most people would put that at the top in order of importance.... post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenStar Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 No, just improving my odds. I disagree. you are aiming at target that may or may not end a fight. I am doing the same thing, essentially. my cross to your jaw may end the fight. your strike to my groin may end the fight. throwing more strikes period is increasing your odds, but not necessarily target choice. I have the same odds of dropping you as you do me. I disagree here (not just playing devils advocate now). Aiming your strikes doesn't guarantee a hit, but I think it is obviouse that it radically improves your chances of hitting what you want. I actually agree with that. but when aiming for small points, there is too high of a chance for error. chances are you're gonna miss. Sometimes the case, but you commit the falacy of exclusion here- there are many more types of fights than brawling for your life. And, even in a brawl, it is possible to create an opening or take advantage of one that occurs. no fallacy - if you have time to do all of that, chances are you didn't have to fight in the first place, unless maybe you're protecting someone else. No, I don't have the same chance of hitting your skull if I aim for your temple, because I can still control and adjust or change my strike. unlikely, especially at such close range. if it were that easy, you'd see way more knockouts in boxing. penetration will depend on a lot of things: power, true enough speed, both as a component of power and in its own rite target and weapon selection and configuration accuracy angle of incidence of the strike in some cases, the relative fitness of your opponent proper form and technique and probably many others that my somewhat fogged brain doesn't recognize I agree with that. accuracy is a component of it, but is not a significant enough component to place penetration under the category of dependence on accuracy. This bunch? Naahhh! Good discussion, though. Glad to have opinions from you mud rollers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta1 Posted June 24, 2004 Author Share Posted June 24, 2004 Good points. And you're not too far wrong, actually. you are aiming at target that may or may not end a fight. I am doing the same thing, essentially. my cross to your jaw may end the fight. your strike to my groin may end the fight. throwing more strikes period is increasing your odds, but not necessarily target choice. I have the same odds of dropping you as you do me...but when aiming for small points, there is too high of a chance for error If ican't get a good shot at a more effective target, I can strike general targets as well. They may open up a shot at a better target. And if I aim at a knee and only get a leg, I still got the leg, so what have I lost?if you have time to do all of that, chances are you didn't have to fight in the first place, Sometimes you may have to just react and won't be able to et a good strike in. But why train to do that every time? We train to increase our skill and our options.if it were that easy, you'd see way more knockouts in boxing. Boxers don't just throw punches and hope they land. They try for specific targets. And it is true that they don't allways get that target. But they are fighting a trained fighter who is about their size and skill level, and about as tough. Far diiferent than a street tough who was probably depending more on surprise and intimidation than real skill. Or say an angry coworker that takes a awing at you. Or a crazed grappler that throws a wold flurry of punches at you in hopes of hitting you (or more likely setting you up to go down- the @#^*'s).accuracy is a component of it, but is not a significant enough component to place penetration under the category of dependence on accuracy. In my view, they are interdependant. This discussion is sort of what I had in mind, getting viewpoints from different styles and people on how they relate, and where your focus is, It's interesting, and probably predictable after reading WW's thesis, that someone who is primarily a grappler would focus more on power, even in his striking. And my focus on accuracy may be one reason I get destroyed on the ground- ok, that and the fact I'm not that good at ground fighting. Any how, good discussion, 7. But over 200 views and onlt 20 some odd replies? There has to be more viewpoints than just ours! Freedom isn't free! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sansoouser Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I'd say power is the worst, to start out with. Now don't get me wrong, you need power. But for instance a huge big football player takes a swing at you in a huge arcing circle. Now, because he has a huge wind up, lots of mass you know it's gonna hurt, but those are the easiest hits to defend from. They do the western movie style wind up while you can just step in with a fist or elbow or whatever to their face. I'd say speed is most important, especially for small guys, speed generates power so if you get enough speed you will develop power. The amateur shoots his hands out ferociously, but lacks any true power. A master is not so flamboyant, but his touch is as heavy as a mountain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravencroft Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 that is right to an extent. does speed qualify for punching speed? or just foot speed because when punching greater velocity does mean less dodgeability and greater impact force. but of course a little power behind that punch never hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenStar Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 I'd say power is the worst, to start out with. Now don't get me wrong, you need power. But for instance a huge big football player takes a swing at you in a huge arcing circle. Now, because he has a huge wind up, lots of mass you know it's gonna hurt, but those are the easiest hits to defend from. notice that technique isn't an option, only power, accuracy and speed. I think it's a safe bet to assume you have technique. consequently, power is a good first option. I'd say speed is most important, especially for small guys, speed generates power so if you get enough speed you will develop power. that's true but think about it... the big guy isn't gonna be too much slower, unless he's HUGE...how fast do you have to punch? we know that a freight train hits hard. and we know a ferrari is fast. how much faster will a ferarri have to travel in order to have the same impact as the train? Same thing goes for humans. If it didn't matter, we wouldn't have weight classes. But we do, because we know that tyson would knock the mess outta de la hoya, even though de la hoya is faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenStar Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 Good points. And you're not too far wrong, actually. HEY!!! Why do I have to be the one that's wrong? If ican't get a good shot at a more effective target, I can strike general targets as well. They may open up a shot at a better target. And if I aim at a knee and only get a leg, I still got the leg, so what have I lost? like I said, that thought process works both ways. My aim is a large, general target. If I happen to get a knee, that's just icing on the cake. Sometimes you may have to just react and won't be able to et a good strike in. But why train to do that every time? We train to increase our skill and our options. I agree with that. but you were saying if you don't see openings, do something to create them. that's different. That, you will likely not have time to do in an altercation. Boxers don't just throw punches and hope they land. They try for specific targets. And it is true that they don't allways get that target. But they are fighting a trained fighter who is about their size and skill level, and about as tough. Far diiferent than a street tough who was probably depending more on surprise and intimidation than real skill. Or say an angry coworker that takes a awing at you. Or a crazed grappler that throws a wold flurry of punches at you in hopes of hitting you (or more likely setting you up to go down- the @#^*'s). wrong question - my answer about the boxers was in reply to you saying you can just change the trajectory of the strikie in mid throw: "No, I don't have the same chance of hitting your skull if I aim for your temple, because I can still control and adjust or change my strike. " In my view, they are interdependant. they are. that's why I wouldn't say that it's dependent upon accuracy, as WW did. Any how, good discussion, 7. But over 200 views and onlt 20 some odd replies? There has to be more viewpoints than just ours! It looks like we're the voice of the people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunken Monkey Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 But over 200 views and only 20 some odd replies have you seen how many members there are here? how many of them post? and the ones that do, how many actually have anything good to say....? i wonder how many accounts that kid 'natural practice is the flamesong' set up, just so that he can talk to himself...? ooops, shouldn't mention that should i....? post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts