The art of blocking

[AngelaG]

One notable exception is the X-block. Many experienced fighters would not encourage its use, as it ties up your other hand for an immediate or simultaneous counter or in blocking a simultaneous limb attack, and is potentially injurious to the person's blocking arms as it meets the force head on. However, since the blocking arm is heavily reinforced, using two instead of one arm, the potential damage is minimized.

Gene

I have to disagree with this. The "X-block" is absolutely terrible to use as a block, and in fact will weaken the block, placing the arms against each other like that (Just ask the guy that came to our dojo having broken both his wrists at his previous dojo when his sensei told him to block a mae geri with X-block).

If you check my previous post, I was referring to the X-block as an exception to the more popular way of blocking which is tangential, at right or acute angle to the direction of the attacking limb. Angela, are you disagreeing with this? Or, are you possibly disagreeing that it is an effective block which I never stated. I may have been misunderstood, eh?

As my quote reveals: "many experienced fighters would not encourage its [X-block] use..." You are probably one of them. I too would not encourage its use for blocking because it meets head-on or directly the oncoming attack with attempted full stopping, or if I may use an analogy, head-on collision, and not tangentially.

Had the guy who came to your dojo who broke both his wrists at his previous dojo when his sensei told him to block a mae geri with X-block may not have been around as proof of the X-block's inefffectiveness or injurious effect to its practitioner, master Itosu would have scrapped the use of X-block (juji uke) when he constructed his famous Heians 4 and 5 that we all practice now and probably replaced them with, at least, augmented forearm blocks (pun intended).

X-block is a great technique - just not as a block. As a grab and strike, or a strangle though it is brilliant. I think half these problems with bad bunkai is the English translation of everything to "block" regardless if it means that or not.

By the way the bit I was disagreeing to was this:

However, since the blocking arm is heavily reinforced, using two instead of one arm, the potential damage is minimized.

In that using the two arms actually weakens the technique as a block and makes it more dangerous, as the two arms crunch into each other.

[White Warlock]

an X block is actually a reasonably strong block, but it is a horrible one to use. Not only are you using two limbs to counter one, but you are subjecting a sensitive part of your arm as the counter. It also has very little flexibility and requires a significant amount of time to present. The opposition has to be telegraphing for a week and a half in order for you to be able to present this kind of block. To add, it places your arms in an immediate 'trap,' in that the adversary can switch actions and entrap both arms, leaving you vulnerable for a longer period of time.

So much wrong with this block it's rather amazing that schools still teach it as a feasible defense.

[lgm]

X-block is a great technique - just not as a block. As a grab and strike, or a strangle though it is brilliant. I think half these problems with bad bunkai is the English translation of everything to "block" regardless if it means that or not.

The Japanese term for X-block is juji uke. It is originally intended to be the uke that it really is (meaning block) and not as an uchi (meaning strike). As a blocking technique, therefore, there is no reason why the x-block can't be an effective block, with the same as or even more reliable sturdiness than an augmented block. Personally, I cannot accept the somewhat "wild" bunkai interpretation of some so-called bunkai experts on Heian 4 and 5 wherein they insist that it is an uchi or strike to the neck or something and not a block to an attacking limb. In JKA Shotokan, such a technique has always been designated as "uke" and not "uchi" in these Heian kata. But, of course, anyone can always interpret or misinterpret it that way if they want to, it's a free country

By the way the bit I was disagreeing to was this:

However, since the blocking arm is heavily reinforced, using two instead of one arm, the potential damage is minimized.

In that using the two arms actually weakens the technique as a block and makes it more dangerous, as the two arms crunch into each other.

In the x-block, the two arms need not crunch into each other. This would happen if, instead of blocking, you are striking with it. Then the force of the top wrist will exert on the bottom wrist and crunch the latter, if the force being blocked is a harder, more inelastic object or body part.

However, in the correct use of an x-block, the force of the downward attacking arm (or to a large extent the upward kicking leg of the opponent) should be equally met with the proper angle created by the two crossing wrists so the impact force is distributed more or less equally both wrists and not only one. The top wrist is not supposed to exert force only on the inner wrist, but both wrists should more or less exert equal force in meeting the attacking limb.

Further when using the x-block, one must block as the attacker's limb is just beginning on its attack trajectory, if possible closer to the root/take off point, so less force is absorbed as the attacking limb is just beginning to accelerate and has not yet reached its maximum speed. That means one should preferably move or step in closer to the attacker and not move or step back to execute an x-block as the attack comes in.

[lgm]

an X block is actually a reasonably strong block, but it is a horrible one to use.

As to an x-block being a strong block, I must agree. Two wrists or arms are stronger than one.

As to its being horrible to use, that's pretty controversial. One major disadvantage is that you tie up both your arms for the defense, instead of only one and having the other free for immediate or simultaneous counter, and the only weapons obviously available for you to use during the moment of x-blocking is the use of your feet. However, the x-block also has significant uses for defense in a certain limited number of fight situations and should not to be totally discarded as an ineffective defense tool.

[White Warlock]

I disagree in the use of it for defense. It is far more exploitable than any other type of block or counter. Combine that with the two limbs vs one limb, and you really have a bad technique there. We add to that the 'small' block area, the other things i noted including the blocking surface (brittle), and it's not merely a bad technique, it's a really bad technique. It is one of the techniques that should have been dropped from the karate training ages ago. As a block it is not about whether it is effective, but whether it is a 'bad' idea. I consider it to be so.

[AngelaG]

Sorry Gene but I still disagree (but no shocks there, right ). First of all "receiver" does not necessarily mean "block" this is just sloppy thinking IMO. I can receive an attack with another attack. There's nothing that says I have to black and then attack, all this does is give them extra time to come in again. Why would I want to do that? This might not have severe repurcussions in kumite, but it may well do in a real fight.

Not can I be automatically impressed by what the official JKA Shotokan version is. The problem is that the Japanese altered the original meanings of the kata (or were not taught it in the first place), and then the whole University system completely skewed it. Techniques became kumite based rather than reality based. You are incredibly unlikely to ever have to face a kumite style attack on the streets, and therefore thinking in terms of kumite style blocks is erroneous. The only time I would expose my face and/or centre line deliberately in a fight would be when I already have the opponent in MY control. To me this just seems logical.

[lgm]

Sorry Gene but I still disagree (but no shocks there, right ). First of all "receiver" does not necessarily mean "block" this is just sloppy thinking IMO.

I don't really get what you are disagreeing against. But, I would say rather that "block" doesn't necessarily mean "receive" and not the other way around. "Receive" as meaning given to "uke" is only its etymological or literal, not its conventional and contemporary lexical meaning in English (which means "block")

I can receive an attack with another attack. There's nothing that says I have to black and then attack, all this does is give them extra time to come in again. Why would I want to do that? This might not have severe repurcussions in kumite, but it may well do in a real fight.

Of course, the best defense is an almost simultaneous counter attack to an attack or if it were humanly possible to effectively pre-empt an attack by attacking split-second first before an opponent launches an actual attack. In comparison, blocking and then attacking is a 2-step action which is much slower and less efficient. I don't see where we disagree.

Not can I be automatically impressed by what the official JKA Shotokan version is. The problem is that the Japanese altered the original meanings of the kata (or were not taught it in the first place), and then the whole University system completely skewed it.

I think the above statements are biased if not prejudiced somehow unless you can show convincing documentary evidence that any other nationality knew the original meaning of the kata in contrast to the Japanese.

Are you referring to the Okinawans who taught the Japanese or the Chinese who taught them the genotype of karate or the Hindu who gave the Chinese the rudiments of the yet unnamed art in the time of Bodhidarma (only legend, of course). Who do you think holds the right to the original interpretation of a large number of these ancient kata?

Techniques became kumite based rather than reality based. You are incredibly unlikely to ever have to face a kumite style attack on the streets, and therefore thinking in terms of kumite style blocks is erroneous.

Shotokan karate is not all kumite-based. As far as I know, there are two main developments of shotokan karate: sports-oriented karate and SD-oriented karate. I practice now only SD-oriented karate, although I had had taste of sports karate in my younger years.

But, although I'm not partial to sports karate, I believe it can train people regularly in terms of timing, tai sabaki, distancing and overall fighting fitness, but unfortunately it conditions fighters to control too much even in an actual streetfight or hit non-vital body targets which is a no-no in fighting thugs. On the other hand, SD karate aims to teach street fighting, but tends to spend too much intellectual bunkai-analyzing, trying out applications on cooperative partners rather uncooperative/freeely resistive ones, and make lots of presumptions or assumptions that their techniques will work in theory or in limited pre-arranged kata kumite tyrouts, rather than going out into the streets and put these to a field test (pun intended).

[JusticeZero]

Ofcourse there is a dodge ie. boxing style, but this seems like somthing anyone could do and is usually a persons immidiate reaction when you throw a punch at them anyway, it just seems abit crude and could backfire easy, its also harder to counter attack.

Speak for yourself. Teaching people to evade attacks is hard, the timing takes a lot of practice to master, but the angles you get access to afterward are delicious. Blocking is a much more natural movement, to me something anyone could learn that isn't advisable for the reasons you mention, but then, i'm not from a blocking art. The blocks we -do- do, we meet force -before it's had a chance to blossom- with force - stuff the attack when it's still weak - or deflect it away from targets, instead of just interposing limbs.

[KarateKid6781]

two hand blocks are the most useful in my opinion, because if the opponent is pushing you, you can break free

[White Warlock]

???

two hand blocks are the most useful in my opinion, because if the opponent is pushing you, you can break free

Could you clarify what you mean by that?