Sign-up for Free Fighting Techniques & Videos
Delivered Daily to your Inbox

Transitional Range

0

Free Fighting Techniques, Fight Videos and Training Courses

Sign-up to Receive Free Fighting Techniques, Fight Videos and Training Courses from the Warrior Combatives Academy 

privacy We value your privacy and would never spam you

Transitional Range
Original Poster: jlambvo
Forum: Others
Posted On: 08-11-2004, 19:47

Orginal Post: jlambvo: Many fighting systems, particularily the more modern and sport-oriented ones, tend to be classified based on a particular range, and/or structure their techniques based on range.

A prime example, I had a small bit of experience with a MMA system based on the founders various background arts called Three-Circle Jujitsu I believe, which (as I understand) essentially combined thai kickboxing, judo, and Brazillian jiujitsu. These covered three essential ranges (hence 3 Circle): striking, clinch/throwing/takedown, and groundfighting.

Based on my (albiet very limited) experience there, and conversational interactions and observations of students from these kinds of disciplines, there seems to be a strong focus on how to fight within these ranges, and they are very good at it. I was just made nidan in budo taijutsu, and I wouldn’t put money on myself against even a mediocre wrestler or middle kyu-grade in BJJ in a groundfight.

But something that struck me as a fundamental difference in our approach to technique is that almost everything in Budo Taijutsu seems to happen in the transition of one range to the next rather than working WITHIN a given range, taking control of the space before entering it, and continually seek that transitional range should the situation become a struggle or contest of ability.

My question is, how much focus do your systems have on this space between ranges? Why? How do you practice technique across those points, etc?

Post: bamboo:

Quote:
My question is, how much focus do your systems have on this space between ranges? Why? How do you practice technique across those points, etc?

We call it mai-ai, or “critical distance” (although this is not the only meaning of mai-ai, it includes the spatial relationship between uke and nage at all times). For me, mai- ai is everything to me as an aikidoka and its something that is constantly practiced and pondered.

As I understand it, we enter into the “negative” space while blended with uke in hopes of controlling the center and never bring uke into a comfortable, “tangible” space or range.

I have no interest in going to the ground with a BJJ man or being in kicking range of a good muay-thai person, thats what they train for, aikido as we do it trains in the space they don’t use and uses that as strategy…at least as I understand it at this moment. :P I guess what I’m trying to write in response to your question is that our entire practice takes place in the spaces between the ranges, all the increments in between.

BTW, congrats on your nidan!

-bamboo>

Post: Tease T Tickle:

range is a fallacy. get away from it.>

Post: zefff:

its a really huge area but to me it seems that Ive been taught to try and recognise the dynamics between ranges rather than the space. Like jlambvo said, transition. How you blend or crash from one to another is how you how you gain advantage. It could be compared to chess moves.

In Eskrima and WC Ive been taught how/when/why to move into or out of a range for best effect. The transitions are what can upset people most rather than having to put the graft in later once you are actually where you want to be. This is why I love sombrada, hubud and sinawali and Chi sau. I chi sau like a wierdo because I try to use it to develop ways of gaining control rather than just hitting the guy. I treat it as the brief moment in time when limbs clash and a fluid movement into a position of dominance is called for.

I am learning that my WC is all about success in transition rather than actual range as I (try to) act out what ‘will’ happen rather than what ‘is’ happening.

If that makes sense. :?

This is especially interesting for me now as I am doing some Judo work. Its great cos my throws and takedowns need work bigtime! but some mats would be nice…thank god I can breakfall okayish :lol:>

Post: zefff:

[quote=DeStRuCtIkOn range is a fallacy. get away from it.[/quote 

why? can you expand on this? I know range can be complicated with the inclusion of loads of different ranges or it can hinder technique as it limites your thinking if you believe only certain techniques can ever be pulled off from a given range but still, we can either be in range to attack, or not in range to attack. Isnt that right?>

Post: The BadBoy:

What Des said. A fight is a fight and the fight dicates where and how it takes place. get over this range stuff and you’ll be glad you did. I believe I made a thread on the old forum about controlling ranges. Des had some great stuff to input there. Wonder if anyone has save dit? Setsu i’m looking at you bro :shock:>

Post: 8LimbsScientist:

Well…I remember the thread, and I agree that controlling ranges isn’t going to work in certain cases. We’ve seen time and time again in MMA that people are willing to wade through strikes and get inside to mess someone up.

But by the same token I’ve popped people pretty good in the gut with teeps. And this is against other martial artists I’ve been training with. Against a guy on the street I could probably blast the air out of them without exposing myself to much. On the other hand, he could just ignore it and keep coming in.

My question is…it works sometimes against certain opponents, but clearly not against everyone in every situation. But is that a good enough reason to take it out of your arsenal all together?>

Post: Irish_Blood:

How to defeat ranges.

Method A:
1. Start 10 feet from opponent.
2. Walk to opponent.
3. Hit opponent.

Method B:
1. Start 10 feet from opponent.
2. Walk to opponent.
3. If opponent attacks you, defend yourself, then move to Method A: Step 3.

8) :lol:>

Post: Tease T Tickle:

[quote=zefff why? can you expand on this? I know range can be complicated with the inclusion of loads of different ranges or it can hinder technique as it limites your thinking if you believe only certain techniques can ever be pulled off from a given range but still, we can either be in range to attack, or not in range to attack. Isnt that right?[/quote 

Well, logically it makes no sense. We consider techniques from the groun to be different from techniques from a standing position. There is in truth very little difference. If you are mounting somebody and punch their face, the mechanics are no different than if you punched him while you were both standing. Applying a textbook juji gatame armbar might be a tad difficult while standing, but there are literally tons of standing armbars to choose from. Basically, whatever you want to do can be done regardless of where you are. Furthermore, if you count the tactical (dis)advantages of particular ranges, you see that they apply elsewhere as well. For instance, being on the bottom in a groundfight is not a whole lot different from being pinned against a wall while standing.

As for “range to attack” and “ranges you cannot attack” you are obviously discounting the use of technology or simple ingenuity. Maybe across the bar is too far for a guy to slug you, but he can still throw a beer bottle, so it’s still best to not anger that man. Never assume limitations on your enemies, never assume limitations on yourself. That is exactly what range does, it limits, and that is exactly why ranges should be avoided in martial conceptualization.>

Post: jlambvo:

Quote:
I have no interest in going to the ground with a BJJ man or being in kicking range of a good muay-thai person, thats what they train for, aikido as we do it trains in the space they don’t use and uses that as strategy…at least as I understand it at this moment. I guess what I’m trying to write in response to your question is that our entire practice takes place in the spaces between the ranges, all the increments in between.
Quote:
Well…I remember the thread, and I agree that controlling ranges isn’t going to work in certain cases. We’ve seen time and time again in MMA that people are willing to wade through strikes and get inside to mess someone up.

This is actually symptomatic of the strategies I’m referring to: my opponent is a strong striker, so I will get inside that range and use my superior grappling skills where he (as a striker) is weak. This is successful in MMA styles, in part because they seem to engrain this perception of “fighting ranges.”

I do believe there is an element of truth to this in one respect, being that every weapon function and technique (a jab for instance) tends to have a ma’ai or optimal distance, as bamboo pointed out. It’s important to know when someone can reach you with his hand, and I would much rather be a mile away from someone throwing a bottle than 6 feet! So to say that range is a fallacy is a bit of an overstatement.

Bamboo, your description

Quote:
As I understand it, we enter into the “negative” space while blended with uke in hopes of controlling the center and never bring uke into a comfortable, “tangible” space or range.

sounds much more like what I’m getting at.

IrishBlood says:

Quote:
How to defeat ranges.

Method A:
1. Start 10 feet from opponent.
2. Walk to opponent.
3. Hit opponent.

This actually makes sense to me. Walk up from a great distance and hit the guy. There’s an important part missing between 2 and 3 however (which might be implied), where you cross over from “distance where my hand cannot touch opponent” and “distance where my hand CAN touch the opponent.” This is where you defeat him, not by hitting him, but by moving to a place where you CAN hit him (well) and he can’t do anything about it. That is a difficult study, especially if the opponent is aware of your intentions or you are locked in combat, but that is WHY we study.

This might seem like common sense. It does to me… but why do many martial artists spend so much time training for scenerios where you start within a given distance on equal ground? How realistic is it to be fighting on equal ground unless you start far outside the range of possible contact?

In our first partnered kata, ichimonji no kata, one of the things we are shown is a place to stand where almost all of our strikes can land on the opponent, and essentially none of HIS can reach unless he takes a step first. It is a sweet spot in time and distance where we are in striking range but he isn’t yet.

Another example looking at Takagi Yoshin ryu jujutsu, capturing the opponent by beginning to enter punching range in a threatening manner to provoke a preemptive attack on his part, and blending with his punch to perform tachiwaza in a way very similar to what Bamboo describes above… there is never really a tangible “range” or space for uke.

Des already stated:

Quote:
As for “range to attack” and “ranges you cannot attack” you are obviously discounting the use of technology or simple ingenuity…Maybe across the bar is too far for a guy to slug you, but he can still throw a beer bottle, so it’s still best to not anger that man. Never assume limitations on your enemies, never assume limitations on yourself. That is exactly what range does, it limits, and that is exactly why ranges should be avoided in martial conceptualization.

Weeell…. there is simply a point where someone cannot punch you without moving his feet, that is just a matter of fact. I sort of feel that the intention of your statements to “get over range” is not far off base from what I’m saying. True you can strike in groundfighting and throw at your fingertips, but this is possible in my opinion because you have a superior understanding of how those ranges work, not because range doesn’t exist. The first step obviously is to recognize that optimal distances overlap, they do not supersede.

I guess more of what I’m trying to get at is: presupposing that you and the opponent cannot reach each other with whatever weapons you have, how do you study control of the timing and distancing to control that space as you DO enter it? What principles do you have that deal with this aspect of a fight?

For example, you have a scenerio where your opponent punches and you are to counter. How do you study the period leading up to the beginning o the punch? There should be a moment where your options are maximized and your opponent’s are minimized, and THIS is where he is defeated, before you even begin technique.>

Post: lakan_sampu:

to truly learn anything liberates one from it…same with range…
good points by des and jlambvo…I’ll take note of these…
range does make sense and when you learn it,,,then it does not in a way…overcoming/manipulating range is a complicated task and I myself haven’t studied it consciously so far.
hey zeff, you’re an escrimador, right?I kinda experience what you just wrote in sinawali while seemingly “dancing” in and out of particular ranges of my opponent’s until we get to the point that one of us is rendered “immobilized” because one cannot attack anymore being out of his/her range..>

Post: zefff:

[quote=DeStRuCtIkOn  As for “range to attack” and “ranges you cannot attack” you are obviously discounting the use of technology or simple ingenuity. Maybe across the bar is too far for a guy to slug you, but he can still throw a beer bottle, so it’s still best to not anger that man. Never assume limitations on your enemies, never assume limitations on yourself. That is exactly what range does, it limits, and that is exactly why ranges should be avoided in martial conceptualization.[/quote 

No I wasnt discounting anything. I hear what you are saying but I dont think like that. Outside the box is the way definitely. But what youve said about the beer bottle instead of a punch actually highlights the limits or range of an attack.

jlambvo:

Quote:
This actually makes sense to me. Walk up from a great distance and hit the guy. There’s an important part missing between 2 and 3 however (which might be implied), where you cross over from “distance where my hand cannot touch opponent” and “distance where my hand CAN touch the opponent.” This is where you defeat him, not by hitting him, but by moving to a place where you CAN hit him (well) and he can’t do anything about it. That is a difficult study, especially if the opponent is aware of your intentions or you are locked in combat, but that is WHY we study.

thats a really good statement and the only reason why I stick with chi sau practise.>

Post: setsu nin to:

In my opinion you have to learn fight in all situations, no metter what you prefere and what not. I personaly dont like ground fighting and would never recomande to someone to go in groundfighting in real situation, but that doesnt mean that I can allowed to myself to not practice it. So you should be prepared for all cinds of fight, standing, siting, kneeling, groundfighting, fighting in water… becouse you never know when you will need it.

There are milion of complicate theories what to do in fight in bar, in fight on street, in day fight in night fight… and they say you what you should do and what you should think… its all crap! In real life you wont have time to think about all that and you have to think just about tings that dont take you much time. First you need to have reaction as an reflex that you will use widouth much thinking. Thinking about things will I go to groundfight or stand up fight will just take your time and you dont have any time. Concentrate on your opponent and wait for his mistake or make him to made one and than use that mistake against him. Ofcourse he will try to do same thing so one that first do it will win the fight.

When you learn some technique learn to use it in any situation, becouse you never know will you have to use it in stand up position or on ground or in closed space in open space…

When you take down borders of stand up fight, ground fight, fight on tatami, grass or street, in open or closed space and all other cainds of fight and when you realise that there is only fight widouth any word before it or behinde it than you will be able to go in real fight, becouse there is only fight in real life.>

Post: setsu nin to:

The BadBoy

“Wonder if anyone has save dit? Setsu i’m looking at you bro :shock:

Sorry, but if its not here than I didnt save it. All what I saved I posted it here. :(>

Post: Tease T Tickle:

[quote=zefff No I wasnt discounting anything. I hear what you are saying but I dont think like that. Outside the box is the way definitely. But what youve said about the beer bottle instead of a punch actually highlights the limits or range of an attack.[/quote 

If that is how people think here, then maybe the problem isn’t the concept of range but the concept of an attack.

If I am standing three inches from you, I can punch, kick, claw, bite, headbutt, throw you down and place a joint lock on you. Or I could pull a pen from my pocket and stab your eyes, pick up a beer bottle and smash it on your face, pull a gun and shoot you dead, etc. All of these are attacks.

If I am standing across the room from you, I can still attack you by throwing any object that is handy and I still have use of my gun.

If you are half a world away, I could design an ICBM if I really wanted to hurt you.

Regardless of our physical distance, I can still attack you. Maybe you guys want to focus on the optimal distances for throwing punches or kicks or what have you, but the fact remains that at any distance people can still attack and be attacked. A punch is only one kind of attack and ultimately not that important. All that is important is the act of attacking.>

Post: zefff:

You seem to be agreeing with me in your disagreement. :?

Are you saying then that the only weapon you have is your will? Whatever method you use to attack with doesnt matter because its all just an extension of your will. Is this what your saying?
I can understand that. But it may be a higher way of thinking…or rather not thinking when you act.

Using anything as a weapon, even other people, to achieve your aims is what I am talking about but doesnt the best way to utilise any method come from the knowledge of that weapons capabilities? Knowledge of capabilities as a base for creativity and flexible improvisation.

respect.>

Post: 8LimbsScientist:

I think there are ideal ranges for techniques. I can’t punch anywhere near as effective on my back as I can standing up, and fighting on my back is different from fighting pressed up against a wall because of gravity. I also can’t roundkick effectively from clinching range.

If ranges didn’t exist than why are techniques for striking, clinching and groundfighting so different? Shouldn’t we just have a few techniques that are applicable in any range? Shouldn’t I be able to armbar someone from across the room?>

Post: Irish_Blood:

This is going to get really confusing..

When it comes to roundkicks and that sort from clinch.. If you went through the motion of a roundkick when in a clinch, it would be a sideways knee. Still effective. Maybe more so, since you’ll be aiming with your foot traveling through the opponent instead of the knee hitting them and coming down!

You should, in practice, try to work punches and movements that you can do in any position. And if you are weak in one area, then you know it should be a focus of practice. Yes, its true that you can’t punch as hard from under someone. But it’s also true that if your punch mechanics are right and so are your targets, you can still get substantial results. It’s not so much how HARD you hit, just how you hit.

But these arn’t techniques per se – these are strikes.

Quote:
Shouldn’t I be able to armbar someone from across the room?

An armbar or a strike should work from any range anyway (yes, of course not from across the room, but who makes physical contact from across the room anyway? That was a loaded question.)
But on that note, some people think it’s impossible to put an effective lock on someone unless you’re in clinch or grappling range… I tend to disagree. If you threw a punch and I intercepted it, a wrist lock can quickly be formed. It’s the same with an armbar or a finger lock. You can throw a kick at me and I can break the anckle or dislocate the knee while being fairly far away. You can throw someone from striking range if you know where to throw them, and you can strike a hole through someone from a grappling position.

On that – striking, clinching and groundfighting are pretty much the same in Systema, though sometimes you have to use one principle more than the others. For example, rotation is really important when groundfighting. If an enemy comes by and trys to land a stomp, you can deflect it by turning your body (or at least make you a harder target), while getting farther and farther from the enemy(s) who you are fighting with. You still strike from the ground, still manipulate locks on people, etc.

This is all IMHO, and if you disagree, shouldn’t be taken too seriously. Thinking out loud here. ;)>

Post: jlambvo:

Okay, I think the discussion is getting caught up in what I am trying to contrast here again :)

Yes you can strike in a groundfighting situation, kick in clinch range, etc. Yes, you have to make some adjustments. All of this is largely beside my point.

My question is not how you function WITHIN a space, but how you change and stretch space to your advantage, so that when you ARE in range of certain weapons, you’ve already defeated them.

Destruktion:

Quote:
Regardless of our physical distance, I can still attack you. Maybe you guys want to focus on the optimal distances for throwing punches or kicks or what have you, but the fact remains that at any distance people can still attack and be attacked. A punch is only one kind of attack and ultimately not that important. All that is important is the act of attacking.

Okay, this is actually getting at what I’m talking about. Relate this to Bamboo’s earlier statement:

Quote:
As I understand it, we enter into the “negative” space while blended with uke in hopes of controlling the center and never bring uke into a comfortable, “tangible” space or range.

Look what happens when you float in that distance between where the opponent can punch you, and where he has to throw something at you. It is sort of like keeping him in limbo, locking him up through relative positioning alone. How do you stretch this moment out and turn it to your advantage, or manipulate his perception of it?

One of the fundamental concepts to Gyokko ryu is koku, which seems to be expressed as expanding and collapsing space between you and the opponent, sort of like creating vacuums that draw him in and suddenly envelope or smother him. When this feeling is captured well, technique just happens as you dance across borders between the range of his weapons, and uke ends up wristlocked, twisted, rooted, and completely helpless.

The theme of training this past year in the Bujinkan was juppo sessho. I won’t pretend to understand what it really means, but I have speculations related to this. It literally means something like 10-direction kiling way, which on one hand refers to using basic techniques in many directions and distances (the 8 directions x up and down), but also implies shutting off all 10 directions of movement for uke so he becomes suspended in place. This seems to be related to dancing on this borderline, so you can come to completely control the opponent through positioning alone.

I’ll leave off here for now, I gots class :)>

Post: Tease T Tickle:

[quote=jlambvo Look what happens when you float in that distance between where the opponent can punch you, and where he has to throw something at you. It is sort of like keeping him in limbo, locking him up through relative positioning alone. How do you stretch this moment out and turn it to your advantage, or manipulate his perception of it?[/quote 

The key here is positioning, range is a very small and I would argue useless portion of it. If you want to be within range to strike an opponent but keep him out of a range to use his skills, you will fail because your weapons are relatively the same size. Unless you’re Manute Boll, your reach will never greatly differ from your opponents’. However, if you use positioning, such as attacking the flank, you limit their ability to deal with your attack. However, the flank is a relative position, not a range.

Furthermore, if you believe in a limbo range where a guy cannot punch you due to the distance involved but can’t throw something at you because he’s too close, you obviously have missed the memo. Kali practicioners have developed the ability to use close range projectiles, using the give and take of personal strife to throw knives when a stab or slash may be blocked or parried. Since you study with Japanese weapons, I’m sure you’d like to try these tricks with shuriken. I could only imagine them being devastating used in this manner. There is no limbo range because the ingenuity of man has destroyed them.

Quote:
One of the fundamental concepts to Gyokko ryu is koku, which seems to be expressed as expanding and collapsing space between you and the opponent, sort of like creating vacuums that draw him in and suddenly envelope or smother him. When this feeling is captured well, technique just happens as you dance across borders between the range of his weapons, and uke ends up wristlocked, twisted, rooted, and completely helpless.

This may be viewed as an elegant solution to a large problem, but it isn’t. When uke is trying to slug it out with you, you use the collapsing range as he pushes mass forward to draw him in and take him down. This is no different from using an opponent’s roundkick to grab the single leg and make the takedown. This is no different, despite the elegant presentation, to MMAists wading through punches to make the clinch. To simplify semi-mystic ninja techniques, when your opponent attacks, parry, capture, attack. And the parry is optional. Unfortunately, the basis of almost all martial arts is this simple formula of parry, capture, attack.>

Post: jlambvo:

Quote:
The key here is positioning, range is a very small and I would argue useless portion of it. If you want to be within range to strike an opponent but keep him out of a range to use his skills, you will fail because your weapons are relatively the same size. Unless you’re Manute Boll, your reach will never greatly differ from your opponents’. However, if you use positioning, such as attacking the flank, you limit their ability to deal with your attack. However, the flank is a relative position, not a range.

I don’t differentiate range and position. Range is not linear, it is three dimensional, and pertains to individual concepts even moreso than specific limbs (a hook obviously uses a different distance and alignment than a straight). Because the human is bipedal, these ranges vary depending on the angle you face a person. Likewise, there are relative positions that DO put your weapons “in range” where your opponent’s aren’t. It is a matter of inches, but significant nonetheless, especially since distance and time are related.

Quote:
Kali practicioners have developed the ability to use close range projectiles, using the give and take of personal strife to throw knives when a stab or slash may be blocked or parried. Since you study with Japanese weapons, I’m sure you’d like to try these tricks with shuriken. I could only imagine them being devastating used in this manner. There is no limbo range because the ingenuity of man has destroyed them.

Of course :) But I don’t mean that there is a physical inability to do this, but a MENTAL hangup, moments of indecision. What I am talking about is messing with your opponent on a perceptual level.

Quote:
This may be viewed as an elegant solution to a large problem, but it isn’t. When uke is trying to slug it out with you, you use the collapsing range as he pushes mass forward to draw him in and take him down. This is no different from using an opponent’s roundkick to grab the single leg and make the takedown.

Okay great, it’s no different in concept sure. So how do you refine that moment? How long can you stretch it out and direct it? Is there really nothing more to it than interrupting and snatching a kick to dump the guy? Is there not a more developed method that gives you more mobility and more options?

This is one of those things that seems vital to fighting multiple opponents (or multi on multi) because its so dangerous to get tied up in a “contest” with one person.

Quote:
To simplify semi-mystic ninja techniques

Ouch. I don’t mean to sound that froofy. I just think there’s more to it than jamming a punch and haven’t seen it brought up much anywhere.>

Post: Tease T Tickle:

[quote=jlambvo I don’t differentiate range and position. Range is not linear, it is three dimensional, and pertains to individual concepts even moreso than specific limbs (a hook obviously uses a different distance and alignment than a straight). Because the human is bipedal, these ranges vary depending on the angle you face a person. Likewise, there are relative positions that DO put your weapons “in range” where your opponent’s aren’t. It is a matter of inches, but significant nonetheless, especially since distance and time are related.[/quote 

Getting into complex spatial relations like this begs for quantum mechanics. :) When that happens we need to introduce uncertainty. We might know where uke is, but then we don’t know his velocity. If range to you is a relative position, and not a linear distance, then you know uke and nage’s positions, but not their vectors necessarily. When you attempt to execute, you can still be stopped by quick reflexes.

Quote:
Of course :) But I don’t mean that there is a physical inability to do this, but a MENTAL hangup, moments of indecision. What I am talking about is messing with your opponent on a perceptual level.

This sounds like Dave’s Psychological combat principles from Systema, and I’m sure they’re at least partially related. However, in my understanding of psychological warfare, I’m more keen on using principles like this to cause surrender, not to cause moments of indecision that I can capitalize on. By contrast, you could run right up on a guy and body slam his ass and because he was unable to defend himself and the severity of the attack was so great he should lose the morale to fight back and you already won. Just to show a different approach to similar thinking.

Quote:
Okay great, it’s no different in concept sure. So how do you refine that moment? How long can you stretch it out and direct it? Is there really nothing more to it than interrupting and snatching a kick to dump the guy? Is there not a more developed method that gives you more mobility and more options?

I would argue that it doesn’t need to be stretched out. You used that moment of indecision we talked about above to gain the upper hand. Just like generals on the battlefield, you can defeat a greater opponent just through superior positioning. So, if you have that moment and use it properly, you shouldn’t need to stretch it out because you’ve used it to gain such a superior position that further resistance to you is futile. Perhaps further discussion will aid in understanding.

Quote:
This is one of those things that seems vital to fighting multiple opponents (or multi on multi) because its so dangerous to get tied up in a “contest” with one person.

Which is why it is necessary to end contests quickly. If you dance in this limbo range and get people to not act for moments, at the end of that moment you are still dealing with the same number of opponent’s unless you contest one of them. It is then necessary to take that out as soon as possible, and then the number of opponent’s decrease. For this end, I would utilize sharp pointy objects, throat strikes, knee strikes and solar plexus strikes. Perhaps the Bujinkan teaches other tools to reach the same end, or perhaps our tools are similar.

Quote:
To simplify semi-mystic ninja techniques

Ouch. I don’t mean to sound that froofy. I just think there’s more to it than jamming a punch and haven’t seen it brought up much anywhere.

It wasn’t that ‘froofy.’ It just seemed that the reasoning beyond it was grounded in obscure principles that most of us are not aquainted with. Perhaps I’m stupid for saying so, but I always liked this forum because people would de-mystify their practices and spell it out in simple layman’s terms so practicioners of other arts could ponder the concepts. For instance, when Aikidoka talk about blending with other people’s energy, that might confuse a wrestler, even though I would argue that certain wrestling techniques utilize the same principle. So, if you “dumbed down” the jargon, more people can get in on the discussion and maybe use the theories.>

Post: jlambvo:

Quote:
I would argue that it doesn’t need to be stretched out. You used that moment of indecision we talked about above to gain the upper hand. Just like generals on the battlefield, you can defeat a greater opponent just through superior positioning. So, if you have that moment and use it properly, you shouldn’t need to stretch it out because you’ve used it to gain such a superior position that further resistance to you is futile. Perhaps further discussion will aid in understanding.

Stretching it out is more for the purpose of study, like looking at that moment under a microscope. The point is that you should never be too eager to rush by that instance, and if you CAN’T stretch it out, how much control did you really have to begin with? ANYONE can toss another guy to the ground, especially after a couple weeks of training. It’s a greater skill indicator to me when you can disbalance and outposition the opponent and NOT throw just yet, but make that time of control last as long as possible. Ultimately, this gives you more options too, instead of being predisposed to one course of action from the beginning.

Of course, it doesn’t NEED to be stretched out, but there’s power in having the ability to do either.

Quote:
Which is why it is necessary to end contests quickly. If you dance in this limbo range and get people to not act for moments, at the end of that moment you are still dealing with the same number of opponent’s unless you contest one of them. It is then necessary to take that out as soon as possible, and then the number of opponent’s decrease. For this end, I would utilize sharp pointy objects, throat strikes, knee strikes and solar plexus strikes. Perhaps the Bujinkan teaches other tools to reach the same end, or perhaps our tools are similar.

Of course, but its easier when you gain positioning in those ranges so that your attacks can go through more or less “uncontested.” The danger lies in engaging someone on equal ground, ESPECIALLY with other opponents. The most important part of a technique is almost always in the time before contact, or in the case of strikes before they are really in range. You know how futile wristlocks off of grabs usually are if you wait until the opponent has actually grabbed you… the lock itself is practically trivial next to the stuff that happens AS the “grab” comes into contact.

Ack I gotta run…>

Share.

About Author