head movement in Karate

[bushido_man96]

You will have to fill me in on what "todome" is. I'm not well-versed in other languages.

[todome]

Just my opinion, I doubt it ever worked that well.

The best you're hoping for in any combat in this kind of arena is some sort of mutual wounding. Any sort of evasive tactic would have value. Thus, avoiding the one punch, heavily damaging blow from the un-gloved opponent. You probably saw a lot more unorthodox evasion than you'd expect when the stakes were that high.

I agree. But I'd expect them to rely more on keeping their distance and relying on good stance work than movement that can be timed. That's not really a strategy that works well in boxing.

[todome]

You will have to fill me in on what "todome" is. I'm not well-versed in other languages.

Thanks for asking.

The term has a couple of meanings. Generally it means "finishing blow". It can also mean something more along the lines of "disabling an attacker" but "finishing blow" is the more common intent.

I train traditional Shotokan. Nishiyama school. The goal is develop the ability to go from zero to kill at the moment of kyo and do it every time. Maybe it isn't the best thing for the streets. Doesn't matter to me. Its the art that keeps me coming back. That and the fact its at the top of my list for lifetime activities.

[tallgeese]

Which one? Because both are used quite a bit in boxing. Distance is important both offensively and defensively and dictates what you're going to pull out of the tool box to use.

Stance work is also important, but not in the sense that most karate people will think of it. Stance in boxing goes hand in hand with distance and keeps one mobile. Additionally, it's critical in creating angles, which again, is important both offensively and defensively.

The head motion, which started this tread, is a major component in boxing so I think that goes without saying.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that boxing is the ultimate art, just that they have a great grasp on the science of throwing hands, better than most karate users. I'm also willing to give on the fact that the large gloves do alter defensive paradigms, just bear in mind due to the lighter gloves used in competition, and the use of boxing guards we've seen in the UFC with minimal hand padding (let's face it, to prevent the fracture of hands not head trauma) it's still valuable.

Like bushido man, I'm not familiar with the term "todome". I ran it thru an online translation service and it came back with "finishing blow". That leaves some room for interpretation given the conversation that led to it. Perhaps you could help us out with the connotations of the term before we comment.

[tallgeese]

Ok, I can get the zero to kill mentality. I think the question is always whether one should train to the assumption that one strike will kill. I've always doubted it and hence put my faith in combination striking.

I get that people are into their arts. This is a good thing and no one should feel pressured to do anything that is not meeting their goals. I think that too many schools out there are teaching outside realistic goal setting for their people and are, hence, doing them a disservice.

The most common trend for this that I see is self defense being preached and yet little in the way of combat preperation actually being done. A newer trend, and I think that kcs might agree with me, is the idea of all of these karate schools going into the "MMA" advertising because they get a wrestling program or a distant jiu jitsu affiliation. Or worse because they have a couple of different karate based arts out of the place and a wrestler who teaches grappling there. Major problem with the concept there just to cash in on the popularity of mma.

[todome]

tallgeese:

I meet up with a couple of boxers from time to time in the studio I practice in. We've talked a bit. I wish I had their footwork and they wish they had my reverse punch. But their footwork won't do me any good if a 5th dan gets a bead on me and my reverse punch won't do them any good if they have to land it twice.

It's a trade off and we each see the merits in what the other is doing.

Maybe I should have explained what I mean by "karate" when I piped up. Land one and go home. Like swordfighting.

[todome]

I think the question is always whether one should train to the assumption that one strike will kill.

You've probably trained long enough to know that if you train long enough you can quit assuming.

Gotta go. I'll try pick this conversation up later.

[tallgeese]

Their foot work won't do you any good if you don't train it and then train to integrate it. Not a blanket won't work. It's an important distinction.

That doesn't mean that you should or shouldn't put the time in. But I bet that an accomplished boxer v. the 5th dan could in fact do just fine. Because he's used and trained those tactics.

As to the idea of striking once and going home, I have to respectfully disagree. I think the idea of mentally training that this will be the case is dangerous. It lends itself to mental freeze if the single strike does not end the confrontation. I'm not saying you should not train each strik in you arsenal like you want to kill someone with it, but that you can't get into your head that this will actually happen. It puts you behind in the OODA loop should your plan not work. This is bad in actual conflict.

Again, I'm talking about this from an optimized street application standpoint. That's not the only one, just the one that it seems to be that we're leaning to the most in this thread. there are plenty of ways to look at ma's. Each is valid for those concerns. If we are talking about focusing one's mind like a moving meditation, you're looking at a good application of mindset. If we are talking about self defense however, my opinion is that this idea of a single strike and ending the conflict is a dangerous habit to get into.

[todome]

An important aspect of todome is that kime is instantanious and the state following it is shizentai, the state of complete readiness. Failing that one is not training properly, a mistake that leads to precisely the error you're describing.

[tallgeese]

I get the idea. For me, when we're talking combatives, I just wonder why go to a ready state in the first place. If the level of threat has risen with me striking this individual with the intent of disabling him, then why downshift until the threat is gone. Why strike and wait in readiness. Strike until the threat goes down, then go to ready. Why rely on a single to strike to do the job and see if it worked when I can strike in combination until the threat is neutralized, he physically goes down under my blows. Then there is no question and my readiness can be directed to the rest of the environment to check for threats?