Broken Bones and Wrist Locks

[Taylor]

In Tae Kuk Mu Sul joint locks are a HUGE part of the training, but ever since my knee injury, and I attempted to pursue this aspect of the art further, I found that there was something lacking in the practical applicaton of them (I was a bouncer for two years, so I had a lot of opportunities to practice). I also trained with a guy at that time who was a prison guard at Folsom prison, and he made the same determination. Sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn't, and sometimes they "half-worked." Given, we worked with joint locks for hours and hours every week and I was a second degree black belt and he a first at the time. He had 7-10 years experience, I had 10-13 years. Even though our technique was very strong, comparatively, there was something missing in the training that made the techniques less effective.

So this is why I switched to the Aikido dojo I'm training in now.

The key is body dynamics and timing. Body dynamics and timing is the most important key to the effectiveness of joint-locks in a real fight, and this is an extremely subtle skill to learn. As many observed in relationship to Aikido, that's "the idea" in Aikido, however, unfortunately many Aikido dojos also miss this point as well. I searched a long time to find my current dojo, and I had enough practical experience to know what to look for by the time I went looking.

I see a lot of Aikido schools that claim to be "martial" and they do weird, unrealisitc resistance to grabbing that never happens in actual physical confrontations. This creates an illusion of competence, but rarely applicable, from what I've seen. Other Aikido dojos become more spiritual and less martial, more like a dance class. The mistake we made in Tae Kuk Mu Sul is that we trained with static energy the whole time. If you want to really master joint locks you have to train in how to deal with diverse energetic approaches. You start with an opponent grabbing your wrist in joint-lock training not because this scenerio is necessarily realistic, but because it is the best way to learn to determine and connect to the energy that is approaching you. By energy, I don't mean anything "froofy," I simply mean: Static, dynamic, moving through your center, moving off to the side of your center, moving into you tentatively, moving into you strongly, moving away from you, and so on and so forth. Ultimately you have to learn to apply the joint lock that matches the energy of the opponent, and you have to learn to time it perfectly. So, practically speaking, if you want close to 100% effectiveness with joint locks, you have to train this way... and that applies to whether you want to break or control (though control is admittedly harder).

[bushido_man96]

You start with an opponent grabbing your wrist in joint-lock training not because this scenerio is necessarily realistic, but because it is the best way to learn to determine and connect to the energy that is approaching you. By energy, I don't mean anything "froofy," I simply mean: Static, dynamic, moving through your center, moving off to the side of your center, moving into you tentatively, moving into you strongly, moving away from you, and so on and so forth. Ultimately you have to learn to apply the joint lock that matches the energy of the opponent, and you have to learn to time it perfectly. So, practically speaking, if you want close to 100% effectiveness with joint locks, you have to train this way... and that applies to whether you want to break or control (though control is admittedly harder).

I agree. When I do my DT training at times, a buddy of mine is really good about adding in resistance, so we have to really work at some of the locks. Sometimes, the resistance causes you to abandon your original strategy, and you have to go another direction. The Judo, Wrestling, and BJJ guys have done this for quite some time in grappling, and joint lock training should go along the same lines.

[joesteph]

From Tallgeese:

I think the term joint lock is a bit of a misnomer, espically when it comes to wrist locks. They're not locks at all. They are intended to be breaking manuvers.

I think this is true of wrist locks. As my instructor has had us go into them more, I've realized counters that the supposedly controlled opponent can utilize quickly, turning the tables on you, meaning to me that in a real-life situation, I'm not going to control through the wrist, I'm going to break it.

From Taylor:

If you want to really master joint locks you have to train in how to deal with diverse energetic approaches. You start with an opponent grabbing your wrist in joint-lock training not because this scenerio is necessarily realistic, but because it is the best way to learn to determine and connect to the energy that is approaching you. . . . Static, dynamic, moving through your center, moving off to the side of your center, moving into you tentatively, moving into you strongly, moving away from you, and so on and so forth.

I agree with Taylor, although perhaps the resistance-countering would be as the belt level goes higher, since lower belt students are learning to apply the lock properly in the first place. I myself have to "put on the brakes" with the wrist joint locks I've learned. As Taylor is referring to there being a struggle by the opponent against applying the lock on him/her, say, in this case, a wrist lock, an inexperienced student might try to force that lock along, instead of flowing into it, resulting in an injury.

I'm interested in joint locks, especially since they can be so powerful; but the training problem with them is just that--that they can be so powerful!

[bushido_man96]

From Tallgeese:

I think the term joint lock is a bit of a misnomer, espically when it comes to wrist locks. They're not locks at all. They are intended to be breaking manuvers.

I think this is true of wrist locks. As my instructor has had us go into them more, I've realized counters that the supposedly controlled opponent can utilize quickly, turning the tables on you, meaning to me that in a real-life situation, I'm not going to control through the wrist, I'm going to break it.

Taking this a bit further, I prefer the term joint manipulation as opposed to lock or break. When you attempt to manipulate/control a joint, like the wrist, then it is up to the person who is being manipulated to go along with the controller, so as to not cause a break. But, as the controller, you always have the option of breaking, should you get them to the proper spot where they can no longer move with the manipulation to relieve pressure.

[tallgeese]

It should also be noted that the fact that they only sometimes work, or only partially work is to be expected. They are a tool, nothing more. I see alot of guys get in trouble by trying to continue in their application ater it becomes apparent that it's not going to happen. Time to let it go and move on. I consider them weapons of oppertunity. I take them if they are there, I don't go fishing for them.

I do think that they are good tools, and I've used them in actual encounters. They are not; however, a movement that I would attempt to "set up" or "go for".

Also, let's not forget that any sort of joint manipulation, from wrist locks to arm bars, work better with the heavy application of striking just prior to the joint work. This serves to stun the opponant momentarily and make the joint manipualtion work more efficiently. And by stun I do mean "hurt as much as possible". It's not just a single little strike I want. If I can knock a dude half silly, break up his knee or lower leg, or get him sucking wind with a groin strike, I will. Not suprisingly, joint manips seem to fall into place easier when this happens.

Again, even with the above in mind, remember that they are weapons of opportunity. If your strikes knock the baddie down, then there is little need to fiddle for a joint position. It's just another tool to advance your goal of controlling the attacker.

[bushido_man96]

Also, let's not forget that any sort of joint manipulation, from wrist locks to arm bars, work better with the heavy application of striking just prior to the joint work. This serves to stun the opponant momentarily and make the joint manipualtion work more efficiently. And by stun I do mean "hurt as much as possible". It's not just a single little strike I want. If I can knock a dude half silly, break up his knee or lower leg, or get him sucking wind with a groin strike, I will. Not suprisingly, joint manips seem to fall into place easier when this happens.

I agree. I fall into this school of thought as well. Striking first helps to seperate the mind from the body, allowing you to procede with the technique.