|
|
| Author |
Message |
baronbvp
Black Belt
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 1132
Location: Berlin, Germany
Styles: JKD/MMA, Muay Thai, Shorin Ryu, military combat arts, fencing, archery
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I'll modify my theory. Regardless of style, the only way to train to multiple opponents is to spar with multiple opponents.
_________________
Only as good as I make myself be, only as bad as I let myself be.
Martial arts are like kinetic chess. Your move. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bushido_man96
KF Sensei
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 14121
Location: Hays, KS
Styles: Taekwondo, Combat Hapkido, Aikido, and I research Medieval Combat
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| baronbvp wrote: |
| I'll modify my theory. Regardless of style, the only way to train to multiple opponents is to spar with multiple opponents. |
I agree with this. I don't think it has so much to do with style, as it does to do with training methods. Regardless, I think it will be very difficult to try to successfully defeat more than one opponent at a time.
_________________
Success is where preparation meets opportunity.
www.chiefswarpath.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NightOwl
KF Sempai
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 988
Location: Japan
Styles: This and that, Rookie Judo
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bushido_man96 wrote: |
| baronbvp wrote: |
| I'll modify my theory. Regardless of style, the only way to train to multiple opponents is to spar with multiple opponents. |
I agree with this. I don't think it has so much to do with style, as it does to do with training methods. Regardless, I think it will be very difficult to try to successfully defeat more than one opponent at a time. |
Yes...I'd also imagine that the same rule applies to taking on just one opponent: Any style can be successfully applied, but you have to know how to use it in a fight situation first (not that you couldn't with no sparring experience etc, but it helps ALOT). Thus if you want to know what it is like to fight 2-3 guys, put yourself in that situation!
_________________
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.
~Theodore Roosevelt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cross
Black Belt
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Posts: 1875
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I agree with this. I don't think it has so much to do with style, as it does to do with training methods. Regardless, I think it will be very difficult to try to successfully defeat more than one opponent at a time. |
I think everyone would agree with this. Thats why its so important against multiple attackers to maintain the pre-fight stage and use your verbal ability to diffuse or manipulate the situation to your advantage, allowing you to escape if you can talk your way out, or lower your opponents guard and raise their ego allowing you to pre-empt without warning(to them) and increase your chance of walking/running away.
The most important thing is to act first. Weather that means physically, verbally, psychologically, or a combo of these. The 2 worst things you can do are:
1. Allow them to take control of the situation by not taking action, and become a pawn in their game.
and
2. Give up, sure even against one person with an intent to hurt you, its going to be an up-hill battle. But does that mean you should quit, or even worse not try and prepare yourself before hand for the reality of gang type attacks? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kangaroo
Yellow Belt
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 25
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:18 pm Post subject: Re: Circular vs. Linear styles |
|
|
| Ziyad wrote: |
Linear strikes are quick and to the point. Very effective and harder to block or dodge in general. On the other hand, as I see it, if you do manage to block them, it's easier to block effectively compared to when you block a circular attack (block a round house with your arm, anyone?).
A linear style like kickboxing has a more pronounced disadvantage, however, when you're not the faster or longer-reaching striker. Because, unless I'm mistaken, the arsenal of a linear style is limited.
A circular style, almost by its nature, is slower with strikes, but has a much wider range of movement. Dodging inside attacks to open a defense. The freedom is much greater in a circular style, but that is sometimes only aesthetics. The power may be greater on average, but the control more limited. And it's easier to get inside of the defense of a circular style.
In essence, it seems like purely linear styles went only to the basics and although it's effective training, it's only effective to the degree that you can force your opponent to play the same game (or, of course, have an opponent who's unaware of strategy).
A purely circular style, on the other, has incredible surprise and is harder to attack. But it's like only learning the advanced stuff and never grasping the basics. And surprise is only good in so far as that you manage to pull it off and if you haven't when it matters, you're much more defenceless.
Of course, it's better to combine the best of both, but I'm trying to find out what is the best of both. |
i think you hit the nail right on the head. This is something I've been thinking about lately. Unfortunately, you will receive resistance from those that have only trained in one or the other styles because they are not seeing it from a neutral point of view.
Nothing I can add to your post, summed it up perfectly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MizuRyu
Green Belt
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 381
Location: Michigan
Styles: Present: Judo/Boxing, Past: Ryu-Te, Tang Soo Do, Wing Chun, BJJ
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've taken both "linear" and "circular" types of styles, and what it will always come down to is who can punch the fastest and the hardest, and in my experience it's always the linear guys.
Example: Ving Tsun. Extremely linear, but aggressive and effective in that regard. If you're looking to beat the tar out of someone, it's a good style if trained correctly. It's entire backbone is the fact that linear attacks are more powerful if properly trained (because the bone structure is more conductive to impact), and it will meet the target faster than a circular attack due to it's straight-forward approach.
When I took Ryu-Te, I was also taking Ving Tsun. Now this is where it gets interesting: Ryu-Te relies purely on circular blocks. Lots of flowly looking snake movements that move the attack off line but not by 'wedging' it, instead striking the attacking limb from the side lightly enough to move it. When I brought this blocking back to Ving Tsun (when we did gor sao or "light sparring"), I found it very easy to remove the Ving Tsun attacks and cross them up.
With a circular block, you cover more area, leaving a lot more room for error. With a Ving Tsun block, like paak (slap) for example, there's very little room for error, and the range of the block is limited to your foot position and distance. A circular block, because of it's wide range of coverage, combined with fluid footwork (not the angular, blocky stuff of Ving Tsun) has a much higher success rate by nature.
On the attacking side, I've noticed that the centerline punch is hands-down the fastest most solid strike I've learned. Straight to the chin with a hip twist thrown in, it can put an attacker larger than yourself straight on his rear end. It's hard to avoid due to it's speed and easy to withdraw due to it's low level of commitment. If you throw a hook, you commit yourself to that attack from the second it's initiated. If someone steps in on you when you throw it, it's basically null, and they're in your guard and have control. Or, in the midst you catch a jab to the jaw. So, by law of raw mechanics, I see centerline attacks as being a safer, more effective bet.
These are just my PERSONAL observations from my level of cross training, but I've narrowed it down to this: aggressive circular defense and linear attack are where it's at. It all heavily depends upon the individual and their level of training, of course.
I've combined and stripped all of the arts I've taken into a 'toolbox', and found that the punch I always resort to first and train the most is the centerline punch. When I'm doing blocking drills with my buddies, I'm always weaving in with circular blocks (mostly inside blocks, since they're easy to use from a boxing stance, my stance of choice), and they work very well.
Also, the circular blocks leave a lot of room for movement. It's easier to block, turn, and straight punch to the face since the circular hip motion has already been initiated. Say someone throws a right hook and you have your hands up, you inside block with the left, turn into it, and slam them in the jaw with a right center punch. If it doesn't knock em down, it stops them dead in their tracks.
_________________
"They look up, without realizing they're standing in the palm of your hand"
"I burn alive to keep you warm" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheRenegade
Yellow Belt
Joined: 19 Jun 2007
Posts: 37
Styles: Fighting
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Seems to me that if you are even thinking in terms of circular and linear, you don't have your mind right. It's just so abstract and meaningless when it comes to real fighting. In martial arts, theoretical ideas can never compare to real experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kajukenbopr
Pre-Black Belt
Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 933
Styles: Kajukenbo - Emperado Method
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Linear styles pack a whallop. the human body works well moving forward without making turns- all of us walk in straight lines. It is easier with a straight line to put all of ur force behind it. however, this doesnt mean they have limited movement, its not just forward, backward and sides, you have to take into account diagonals, which might not restrict them of movement as you thought.
circular styles have the power to dissolve the force of the attacker and speed is crucial in both evading the attack and setting urself to counterstrike or give an attack of your own.
While you can argue that one is superior to the other, they can be used to counter each other very well.
_________________
<<Kajukenbopr>> Be humble, train hard, fight dirty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kajukenbopr
Pre-Black Belt
Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 933
Styles: Kajukenbo - Emperado Method
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MizuRyu wrote: |
I've taken both "linear" and "circular" types of styles, and what it will always come down to is who can punch the fastest and the hardest, and in my experience it's always the linear guys.
Example: Ving Tsun. Extremely linear, but aggressive and effective in that regard. If you're looking to beat the tar out of someone, it's a good style if trained correctly. It's entire backbone is the fact that linear attacks are more powerful if properly trained (because the bone structure is more conductive to impact), and it will meet the target faster than a circular attack due to it's straight-forward approach.
When I took Ryu-Te, I was also taking Ving Tsun. Now this is where it gets interesting: Ryu-Te relies purely on circular blocks. Lots of flowly looking snake movements that move the attack off line but not by 'wedging' it, instead striking the attacking limb from the side lightly enough to move it. When I brought this blocking back to Ving Tsun (when we did gor sao or "light sparring"), I found it very easy to remove the Ving Tsun attacks and cross them up.
With a circular block, you cover more area, leaving a lot more room for error. With a Ving Tsun block, like paak (slap) for example, there's very little room for error, and the range of the block is limited to your foot position and distance. A circular block, because of it's wide range of coverage, combined with fluid footwork (not the angular, blocky stuff of Ving Tsun) has a much higher success rate by nature.
On the attacking side, I've noticed that the centerline punch is hands-down the fastest most solid strike I've learned. Straight to the chin with a hip twist thrown in, it can put an attacker larger than yourself straight on his rear end. It's hard to avoid due to it's speed and easy to withdraw due to it's low level of commitment. If you throw a hook, you commit yourself to that attack from the second it's initiated. If someone steps in on you when you throw it, it's basically null, and they're in your guard and have control. Or, in the midst you catch a jab to the jaw. So, by law of raw mechanics, I see centerline attacks as being a safer, more effective bet.
These are just my PERSONAL observations from my level of cross training, but I've narrowed it down to this: aggressive circular defense and linear attack are where it's at. It all heavily depends upon the individual and their level of training, of course.
I've combined and stripped all of the arts I've taken into a 'toolbox', and found that the punch I always resort to first and train the most is the centerline punch. When I'm doing blocking drills with my buddies, I'm always weaving in with circular blocks (mostly inside blocks, since they're easy to use from a boxing stance, my stance of choice), and they work very well.
Also, the circular blocks leave a lot of room for movement. It's easier to block, turn, and straight punch to the face since the circular hip motion has already been initiated. Say someone throws a right hook and you have your hands up, you inside block with the left, turn into it, and slam them in the jaw with a right center punch. If it doesn't knock em down, it stops them dead in their tracks. |
I have something to say about Wing Chun - it is not that they have slaps that protect very little or very specifically, but if u trained seriously, u know that the hands are positioned in front of you in a certain place in order to protect your center and block strikes easily if you can identify your attacker's attack opening.
in other words, if you feel like you were going to miss, or missed a block, it is not because the style is "careless" , but because you didnt apply the principles correctly. It is not that the style has little room for error, it is designed to work very very easily, and without guessing where your opponent might hit next.
_________________
<<Kajukenbopr>> Be humble, train hard, fight dirty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mantis.style
Orange Belt
Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 177
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find it a little worrying that guy training in wing chun would say that a pak sau/slap hand defends very little, especially considering that it is one of the core movements in the style. The fact that it can be used across the centre in both directions, with a short bridge or a long bridge, inside gate and outside gate, above and below bridge, it can be used to press and it can be used to cover and to top it off, be performed without having to move your elbow from a defensive position says a lot about what it can do. When I was training in my wing chun, one of the things that I learnt is that pak sau can even be performed without having to even move your arm. Pak sau as a technique is ranked second only to the tan sau in terms of just how much it can cover without having to adjust. If you want to learn how to fight, pak sau, tan sau and punch is all you need.
_________________
traditional chinese saying:
speak much, wrong much |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
on the post.
