Martial Arts

scutchy · 11-07-2001 5:21pm #1

This started of on the "Are Women Getting More Violent?" thread - probably best to read that before this or it won't make sense.

Blocks.

It is perhaps most useful to begin this post with a definition of what constitutes a block in the martial arts context. As with all words, there are multiple definitions; we will examine a few and choose which one is the most appropriate.

Some define a block as any technique used to prevent the successful completion of your opponent's technique. Personally, I find this definition so broad as to be useless - if you are attacked with a jab and counter with a pushing sidekick to your opponent's chest, his attack will not be successfully completed. In fact, virtually all techniques could be considered blocks by this definition. A more appropriate term, in my opinion, would be "counter".

Let's try and be more precise - there are those that say a block is only valid if it is responding to the immediate threat; the limb that is moving towards you. So we could provisionally define a block as any technique used against an active limb to prevent the successful completion of that limb's technique. But this is still a broad term, and includes many other established terms. For instance, parrying (diverting - sort of) the arm / leg / head would be considered a block. Grabbing the arm and continuing into a break / lock falls within this definition. Kicking someone in the knee as they try and kick you - also a block.

We need to be more accurate...
We must subtract any techniques that already fall under established terms. Therefore, we can remove strikes from our definition. A forearm strike to the arm is not done with the primary intention of stopping the arm, it is done to put that arm beyond use. A lock or a break has as their primary intention restraint or breaking, not stopping the attack. Parries are used to gain openings, remove your opponent's balance, or lead on to trapping / grappling.

So... what's left? It is perhaps useful, now that we've done the rough hewing, to bring in the Complete Wordfinder, a fairly heavy dictionary with 18 definitions (and numerous subdefinitions) of the word block. Ignoring definitions that relate to land, grouping, inanimate objects, the Australian government and cricket, we are left with:

(1) an obstruction; anything preventing progress or normal working

(2) a stolid, unimaginative or hard-hearted person

(3) a block (often followed by 'up') obstruct (a passage etc.) (the road was blocked; you are blocking my view)

Dropping (2) for obvious reasons, we are left with a common theme - an obstruction. A block does not attempt to stop an attack as such; it obstructs it. (I accept that there is a significant overlap). So, to block, we place something in the way of the attack. Were someone to hook me, I could put my forearm against their elbow, upper forearm and lower biceps, and obstruct the continuation of their hook. If someone kicked me, I could put my forearm in the path of their leg's trajectory.

So, for the purposes of this post, let us define a block as an obstruction used to prevent an attack reaching it's conclusion.

And now we go back to re-evaluate my comment: "Blocks don't exist. If you've been taught a block, you've been taught a heap of shyte"

As previously stated, that was a generalisation, and an unfair one.

Storytime: Let us go to Okinawa, home of the various Okinawan Karate styles. To the best of my limited knowledge, not one of these styles contain blocks. They do, however, contain particularly vicious forearm strikes designed to put arms beyond use for the duration of a fight, or longer.

So, why do so many styles that have roots in Okinawa teach blocks?

Picture the scene. You're Okinawan. You're sitting on your nice little island, when a group of American GI's wander over and ask can they train. The thing is, you don't like Americans, they seem to have a nack of blowing things up and shooting people.

So what do you teach them?

First off, they don't get the real punch. They get the training punch that you use while sparring so you don't injure your opponent. Look at about 98% of people punching - they do so with their radius and ulna crossed. (the radius and ulna are the two bones of the forearm - radius being the one on the thumb side). As any architect will tell you, a crossed structure will not transfer weight particularly effectively. Rotation at the shoulder and wrist joint will result in a lot more power, once you get in the habit.

The fist they were taught, with base knuckles forming a line parallel to the ground, did not fit neatly into the solar plexus like the proper one.

And they weren't taught forearm strikes. They were taught blocks.

So what's wrong with blocks?

Think about it - you're opposing a powerful, moving target with a stationery one. If you aren't stronger than them, you loose. And as for blocking a kick - nah. Put your forearm out and get someone to kick it full force - see if you can hold it still. If you can, ease up on the steroids.

Forearm strikes, on the other hand... hit a moving target with your forearm properly and the muscles will go limp. Problem solved.

So, in the context of Okinawan (and Korean) styles, I feel I can honestly say "Blocks don't exist. If you've been taught a block, you've been taught a heap of shyte"

However, not all martial arts are Okinawan in origin, and some use blocks quite effectively. Some examples include: If someone punches you in the face, you can move your head to take the punch on your forehead. The forehead is the strongest bone in the body and can break unconditioned hands using this method. (Bare knuckle boxing). On an unrelated note, there is an African style, called Testa, which consists almost entirely of headbutts.

Muay Thai practitioners condition their shins to such an extent that it causes their opponent damage if they are foolish enough to kick them there. Therefore, they often block quite powerful kicks with their shins, and laugh at the guy as he falls over with a broken leg. (There's an Mpeg of that knocking around somewhere - looked nasty).

The last time I used non Muay Thai blocks was when some strange individual tried to pick a fight with me at the bus stop. Not particularly enamoured at the prospect of brawling in front of about 6 kids, I occupied myself by stepping out of the way of his wild haymakers. Eventually bored with this strategy, and noticing that my soothing words were having little effect, I let him punch me twice in the head.

He was happy, I was happy, there was no way the cops could have said anything to me (even if he did break fingers) and hence no legal problems with me leaving for Germany the following morning.

scutchy · 11-07-2001 5:35pm

Wushu:

"Now, society values the exhibition and practice of wushu in different ways. You have massive Olympic events broadcasted to half the world for entertainment. You have action movies in which characters express themselves through fluid martial arts motion. Now, wushu can pave the way to a career that earns big bucks. Big bucks translate to a higher standard of living..."

From Jet Li's site. (Quite the Wu Shu genius and a great actor.

Wu Shu literally translated means "War Arts". Kung Fu means Hard Work. When I refer to Wu Shu, I think of some of the practitioners on www.bilang.com - fantastic athletes, great dancers, wonderfully expressive - but their focus is not combat.

Also from Jet Li:

"Finally, on the issue of self-defense. My knowledge and experience in this area of martial arts are limited, as my focus and training have been on the other three aspects of wushu practice."

Once more the definition problem. I refer to Wu Shu as a style you learn to look good in films and demos, he uses it to mean "Martial Arts" - I heartily suggest a look at the Wu Shu practitioners on www.bilang.com for further information on this style.

K!LL!@N · 11-07-2001 10:57pm

Interesting stuff, Scutchy.

I admire how you let that guy have a couple of digs at you, just to end things quickly.

DeVore · 11-07-2001 11:56pm

scutchy, interesting article (and karma applied for it!)
but I dont necessarily agree.

I was thought what I would consider "blocks" in Kempo (years ago, it was either Kempo or Kenpo, I forget hehe. It was a style of Kung Fu).

after 2 years of training, I found their blocks very effective. They were partially as you describe (ie: blows to deaden or hurt the arm/leg) or simply to guide that limb to expend its energy into thin air.

we certainly never "opposed" the attack as you suggest:
"Think about it - you're opposing a powerful, moving target with a stationery one. "

we simply guided it and then often used their lack of balance or bad positioning to attack back (preferably in one graceful move

)

You might not be able to stop a fist, but you can certainly sway it 2 inches one direction while moving 2 inches the other way and avoiding a bloodied nose in the process.

btw: all blocks we were taught were with our knuckles pointing outwards, as per your Radius/Ulna argument.

anyway, blocks have definitely saved my ass on occasions when I've been forced to defend myself...

DeVore.

bonkey · 12-07-2001 9:02am

Originally posted by DeVore:
scutchy, interesting article (and karma applied for it!)

Yeah - good lucid article. Karma much deserved.

after 2 years of training, I found their blocks very effective. They were partially as you describe (ie: blows to deaden or hurt the arm/leg) or simply to guide that limb to expend its energy into thin air.

This is where the root of the disagreement comes from I think. The "guiding" of a limb to miss you is often referred to as a block, but in reality, its more a parry. You are not blocking the punch/kick, you are making it miss you.

The other style you describe - the deadening of a limb - again can be construed as a block (if you are using it to counter a specific attack). However, were you to use it purely offensively (i.e. he is not throwing a punch at you, and you deadened his arm anyway), then it becomes a strike of some description.

So - then it boils down to semantics. Is it a strike or a block?

The best example I can give is the practice of the "punch block" where you counter a punch by punching into it. Very difficulty to do in reality, and I'd question the wisdom of it, but think about it...

You are blocking the punch by meeting it with a solid surface which is moving against the direction of the incoming punch. If square contact is made, and the blocker has his fist shaped correctly, there is the possibility of breaking the attackers hand (remember that when properly locked, the bones in the hand form an almost-solid mass which can be almost as hard as the forehead - although were Occy around I'm sure he'd correct me on that! ).

Now this, to me, is clearly a block. However, the same move would work as a punch, if not aimed at an incoming strike. So, is it a strike, or a block, or both, or something else?

This is semantics, and I believe it would depend on the art you study as to what you classify it as. However, I would generally accept the definitions of a move as given by the practitioner of that art.

we simply guided it and then often used their lack of balance or bad positioning to attack back (preferably in one graceful move )

Almost a textbook definition of a parry. Which I believe is where scutchy was coming from.

The classic view of blocks is the "Wax On, Wax off" from Karate Kid - which is the old forearm coming down to stop a kick in its tracks. This particular one, I would imagine, is far more likely to break your arm than successfully stop an incoming leg from a trained attacker.

I have seen moves which (for example) slow and trap the incoming limb. Again, the first part of this move (slow and trap) is considered by some to be a block, and by others to be a parry and hold. IN this case, I tend to fall towards the latter.

At the end of the day, I've always felt that blocks are more "brute force" approaches. Parrys are about redirecting the energy, as opposed to just stopping it, which makes them massively more attractive as a technique to me.

jc

bonkey · 12-07-2001 9:12am

I have selected only parts of what scutchy quoteed, but I am doing so in order to highlight the difference of our opinions, not to invalidate his.

Originally posted by scutchy:
Wushu:

"Now, society values the exhibition and practice of wushu in different ways."

<snip>
"Finally, on the issue of self-defense. My knowledge and experience in this area of martial arts are limited, as my focus and training have been on the other three aspects of wushu practice."

Once more the definition problem. I refer to Wu Shu as a style you learn to look good in films and demos

This is indeed where the disagreement came from. I would read what he has said quite differently. Wushu has evolved over centuries to meet whatever needs were prevalent at the time.

This means that there is an aspect of WuShu which is, indeed, flashy, dancy, suitable for movies and the like. This is also where the "martial sport" named WuShu has come from (which I assume is what you were referring to as being only a few decades old in the other thread).

This is what Jet Li excels in, and yes, I would say that he can hold is own in a fight, but that he is nowhere near as competent as someone who has trained in a martial discipline which is targetted at actual fighting.

However, this does not mean that there is no longer truly martial forms of WuShu which is combat-focussed, nor that WuShu is not suitable as a combat art. Li himself admits that his focus was not on self defense...not that self-defense is not part of WuShu.

Again, I guess it comes down to semantics. Neither KungFu nor WuShu are, strictly sepaking, martial arts. They are anglicised descriptions given to entire "classes" of martial arts. The common misconceptions and disagreements arise when someone means KungFu as one specific art and someone else means it as a "class".

jc

scutchy · 12-07-2001 9:51am

Originally posted by bonkey:
I have selected only parts of what scutchy quoteed, but I am doing so in order to highlight the difference of our opinions, not to invalidate his.

On reflection, I've been an a$$hole during this discussion. I'd like to offer my apologies. Although I stand by most of the facts I presented, my method of delivering them was unhelpful, and personal insults were uncalled for.

For convenience, let's use Wu Shu to refer to martial arts in general, and Modern Wu Shu to refer to the flashier stuff, like bilang.com.

bonkey · 12-07-2001 10:18am

Originally posted by scutchy:
On reflection, I've been an a$$hole during this discussion. I'd like to offer my apologies. Although I stand by most of the facts I presented, my method of delivering them was unhelpful, and personal insults were uncalled for.

I would also like to apologise for replying to you in kind!

Newsnet and bbs systems in general are too full of flamage and personal insulting as it is. It has brightened my day no end to see someone admit that it is not an acceptable form of communication in these fora. Let us all learn from Scutchy's example (and I include myself in that).

For convenience, let's use Wu Shu to refer to martial arts in general, and Modern Wu Shu to refer to the flashier stuff, like bilang.com.

Agreed.

jc

scutchy · 12-07-2001 1:42pm

Hi DeVore,

It has suddenly dawned on me what karma is - many thanks

I don't think we necessarily disagree on blocks - personally, I describe what you posted as forearm strikes and parries, and feel that they're effective. It all boils down to semantics really... given the choice I describe them as strikes and parries as it gives the intent more clearly - IMHO of course.

scutchy · 12-07-2001 2:37pm

Originally posted by K!LL!@N:
Interesting stuff, Scutchy.

I admire how you let that guy have a couple of digs at you, just to end things quickly.

Another time I convinced this drunken guy that I was batman, and had to go fight crime

- the only problem was he wanted to be robin (yep - strange night) but I told him the suit wouldn't fit him.

Talking out of fights is much more fun

scutchy · 12-07-2001 4:26pm

Can someone delete this please?

I couldn't post in the women / violence thread, so I posted it here, then it turns out it was posted three times in the other thread... what a mess.

Originally posted by The FANJ:
Scutchy I was not talking through me **** . You very very careful when quoting me to leave out (I think ).

I was attempting to imply that your experience in the martial arts was insufficient to give credence to the opinions you voiced. It was a personal attack and the easiest option; you have my apologies - I should have tried to make my point more politely.

I did not reply to this thread looking to start a fight with you and I was giving my opinion on martial arts.

If this refers to my offer to spar you dog brothers' rules, you should perhaps examine said rules:

"No judges, no referees, no trophies. One rule only Be friends at the end of the day. This means no one should spend the night in the hospital, and everyone should leave with the IQ that they came with."

According to these rules, I can lend you my battle axe if you want. You say martial arts aren't useful in real life situations - I offered you a relatively safe way to prove it. You can bring friends. You can bring blunt weapons. Hell, you can bring sharp pointy weapons or an Uzi if you like, as long as you stay within said rules.

(If anyone else is interested and has some prior training, I'm always willing to learn btw)

It was not meant in a threatening way, and I have no desire to fight you. I hang 'round with an eclectic bunch; such an invite is considered friendly. Perhaps I should spend more time in the real world . If I gave you the wrong impression, I apologise.

I don't care what you think but running from a fight is always the best solution.

Wrong I'm afraid.

Sometimes you have to drop them first.
Sometimes you should give them your money.
Sometimes it's a bad idea to resist rape.
Sometimes you have to run into a fight so your mates can get away.
Sometimes you have to die.
Sometimes you have to kill.

Please think. You are giving advice on life and death situations. Your advice is wrong. Why do you persist?

You really must have issues if your bragging about four muppets that you personaly managed to kick the crap out off.

All but one of them could move under their own power afterwards. (Quite fast in fact ) I reported the incident, and judging by the fact that the cops never called back, they all made some semblance of a recovery. You said martial arts weren't of any use in real-life situations, I provided you with a real-life example. Would you have accepted anything less? I did not intend it as bragging. (If I was bragging, I'd post a pic of me doing the chair splits )

have you checked out sherdog yet btw?

Here's a good sample: Lion's den highlights

Edit: fixing link

[This message has been edited by scutchy (edited 12-07-2001).]

[This message has been edited by scutchy (edited 12-07-2001).]

Martial Arts

Comments