Rediscovering trapping range.

[MasterPain]

The change of range is, to me, what makes trapping work. If you try to stay there, grappling happens or they back away to a farther range.

Yes, ranges do blend, or at least they should, but the specific distance where you can reach someone with your elbows, but your torsos are not touching is the approximate range we are talking about.

I can't be convinced that it is the same as largo mano.

[JusticeZero]

I understand the constant flow of changing ranges, but atleast for a split second, you or your opponent must get close enough for the weapon to reach the target. One does not simply stand on the outside and land a headbutt. The range must change.

Yes, but that change of range is an integral part of the application of the technique itself. One does not separate a punch into "the part where you extend your arm" and "the part where your fist connects". The movement and the technique are not separate.

We do not, like some sort of tank, move, then stop in place and shoot our technique out. Our technique is an extension of movement, it is a form of movement, and it is used to conform with a set of openings and opportunities that have come available at that moment.

If you throw, say, a hook punch, it will be reflected in your feet. It is not a matter of moving your feet, stopping, and then finishing the punch; your feet shift and turn as your punch launches as an integrated part of your system of delivering the strike. If the target was close, that movement will retreat slightly, if further it will advance slightly, and this was not done in isolation from the strike itself.

[Groinstrike]

I understand the constant flow of changing ranges, but atleast for a split second, you or your opponent must get close enough for the weapon to reach the target. One does not simply stand on the outside and land a headbutt. The range must change.

Yes, but that change of range is an integral part of the application of the technique itself. One does not separate a punch into "the part where you extend your arm" and "the part where your fist connects". The movement and the technique are not separate.

We do not, like some sort of tank, move, then stop in place and shoot our technique out. Our technique is an extension of movement, it is a form of movement, and it is used to conform with a set of openings and opportunities that have come available at that moment.

If you throw, say, a hook punch, it will be reflected in your feet. It is not a matter of moving your feet, stopping, and then finishing the punch; your feet shift and turn as your punch launches as an integrated part of your system of delivering the strike. If the target was close, that movement will retreat slightly, if further it will advance slightly, and this was not done in isolation from the strike itself.

I don't disagree one bit, the ability to control the range in a fight is incredibly important. The reason i am becoming partial to trapping range is the ability to deploy weapons that will allow you to end a fight in the quickest and most effiecient way possible.

[JusticeZero]

And there you are not talking about a range, you are espousing a tactical doctrine, which speaks of controlling range but which by definition will include a lot of work outside of that range in order to enact the doctrine.

[MasterPain]

And there you are not talking about a range, you are espousing a tactical doctrine, which speaks of controlling range but which by definition will include a lot of work outside of that range in order to enact the doctrine.

Actually, we've been working on getting in that range and staying there a while. You're talking about entries, which, while vital to gaining initial advantage in the in-fight, is not the same as the in-fight itself.

We are defining the trapping range as the distance where you can grab and strike, but not so close that it's a wrestlers clinch. Many people pass right through this range and never use it, preferring to grapple or strike from the outside.

[Liver Punch]

A fight can start in the trapping range just the same as it can start anywhere else. If the fight begins with someone larger than me, particularly someone who it may be dangerous to clinch with, then I'm standing in trapping range. I can't meld my techniques with outside entry because there is no outside entry and I can't move forward into a clinch because I'll get destroyed. My only option at this point is to trap, control and evade - particularly is moving backwards isn't an option. The best or even only option may be fighting inside a range (albeit for a brief moment) until you can move inward or outward.

[bushido_man96]

I'm not even certain that "trapping range" exists as a real distinctive thing.

There are punches that range further than some kicks, and grapples that range further than some punches; there is not even a real, distinct "punching range" or "kicking range" given the flexibility of motion available, beyond the obvious "very long reaching kicks probably have you out of punching range". Even then, does anyone just stand with their feet glued to the floor and attack in place? Space is always being renegotiated.

"Trapping range" doesn't really have any special claim to range that I can see. They may be great techniques, but they aren't possessed of a special space of their own.

I think that trapping as a "range" certainly does exist as the "in-fighting" range. This is the range were elbows, knees and headbutts come in handy. It is tough to headbutt somebody from kicking range.(unless you are E. Honda) Yes, you may have to use other tools to get the fight to this range, but once there, the combatant who is the aggressor wants to keep it here. Headbutts, knees and elbows are better "fight enders" than punches and kicks IMHO, therefore i believe that if a combatant is proficient in establishing the fight in this range, he or she has a distinct advantage.

I can see both sides of the coin you two are flipping here, and how it makes sense to each of you. I think tallgeese posted something up a while back in regards to "ranges" in combat, and how some of the thoughts to some have shifted in regards to the ideas behind ranges.

That being said, I think the crux is the actual trapping, as opposed to the range it occurs in. I've done some trapping in Combat Hapkido, and transferred it over to some DT very nicely in some spots. I think what's important is not trap for the sake of trapping, but to do so with intent to follow up or gain an advantage of some sort. Just because you can trap, doesn't always mean you should trap.

[Groinstrike]

I'm not even certain that "trapping range" exists as a real distinctive thing.

There are punches that range further than some kicks, and grapples that range further than some punches; there is not even a real, distinct "punching range" or "kicking range" given the flexibility of motion available, beyond the obvious "very long reaching kicks probably have you out of punching range". Even then, does anyone just stand with their feet glued to the floor and attack in place? Space is always being renegotiated.

"Trapping range" doesn't really have any special claim to range that I can see. They may be great techniques, but they aren't possessed of a special space of their own.

I think that trapping as a "range" certainly does exist as the "in-fighting" range. This is the range were elbows, knees and headbutts come in handy. It is tough to headbutt somebody from kicking range.(unless you are E. Honda) Yes, you may have to use other tools to get the fight to this range, but once there, the combatant who is the aggressor wants to keep it here. Headbutts, knees and elbows are better "fight enders" than punches and kicks IMHO, therefore i believe that if a combatant is proficient in establishing the fight in this range, he or she has a distinct advantage.

I can see both sides of the coin you two are flipping here, and how it makes sense to each of you. I think tallgeese posted something up a while back in regards to "ranges" in combat, and how some of the thoughts to some have shifted in regards to the ideas behind ranges.

That being said, I think the crux is the actual trapping, as opposed to the range it occurs in. I've done some trapping in Combat Hapkido, and transferred it over to some DT very nicely in some spots. I think what's important is not trap for the sake of trapping, but to do so with intent to follow up or gain an advantage of some sort. Just because you can trap, doesn't always mean you should trap.

Well Said.

[OneInchPunch]

when it's all said an done, the concept of 'ranges' creates an easy rule-of-thumb for begginers or people new to fighting can grasp. Like everything in martial arts, there are exceptions and adaptations to the rule of thumb.

For instance, it'd be easy for me to teach a new student 3 techniques from 4 ranges (kicking, boxing, trapping/clinch, and ground) because it'll teach the student awareness of distance, and the awareness that some techniques don't work as well if the opponent is too close, and other techniques won't work if the opponent is too far, or some techniques lack effectiveness on your back.

to the topic at hand, many contemporary jkd circles combine wing chun and kali trapping with the muay thai clinch, and consider both within the same range. in theory, my fight can close into a trapping range, i do the traps, and the hands are immobilized long enough for me to gain a muay thai clinch and do some real damage with elbows and knees.

the other bonus with learning trapping is developing the attribute of sensitivity, where you can feel the energy of the opponent's limbs and do something very quick and smooth to counter. MMA coach Greg Nelson was known for using the hubud energy drill from kali to help him improve his wrestling, where you have to 'feel' where your opponent's limbs are going more than you can see.

[TravsintheMartialArts]

when it's all said an done, the concept of 'ranges' creates an easy rule-of-thumb for begginers or people new to fighting can grasp. Like everything in martial arts, there are exceptions and adaptations to the rule of thumb.

For instance, it'd be easy for me to teach a new student 3 techniques from 4 ranges (kicking, boxing, trapping/clinch, and ground) because it'll teach the student awareness of distance, and the awareness that some techniques don't work as well if the opponent is too close, and other techniques won't work if the opponent is too far, or some techniques lack effectiveness on your back.

to the topic at hand, many contemporary jkd circles combine wing chun and kali trapping with the muay thai clinch, and consider both within the same range. in theory, my fight can close into a trapping range, i do the traps, and the hands are immobilized long enough for me to gain a muay thai clinch and do some real damage with elbows and knees.

the other bonus with learning trapping is developing the attribute of sensitivity, where you can feel the energy of the opponent's limbs and do something very quick and smooth to counter. MMA coach Greg Nelson was known for using the hubud energy drill from kali to help him improve his wrestling, where you have to 'feel' where your opponent's limbs are going more than you can see.

I like where you're going here, OneInchPunch. I'm definitely in agreement that "ranges" are more a guideline and learning tool, and can tend to de-organify and restrict the more dynamic reality of a combat situation.

I'm interested in hearing more about the use of the Clinch as something in trapping range in JKD. I have only had minimal training in both JKD and Wing Chun, and some slightly more serious training in Muay Thai, but I have never tried melding the two. In my mind, I have always found the Muay Thai clinch a little too incautious for a street fight, given how vulnerable I feel (admittedly not a high level Muay Thai fighter) to groin strikes, eye gouges, foot stomps, chin na, and other close range methods illegal in competitive fighting while I'm in the clinch. While the arsenal of techniques I was taught from the clinch was indeed fearsome, I would be hesitant to try clinching with someone with more trapping experience than myself; I get the feeling I would get hit in quite a few ways that aren't allowed in the ring. Not only that, but as I was taught the clinch is to be emphasized at a -really- close range (so close the opponent cant get a solid hit on you, sort of "smothering" him/her) and trapping perhaps a little more space than that. If you could elaborate on this a little more I would love to hear what you've learned.

Thanks,

TravsinMA