When studying/practicing
technique's (whether new or known), those technique's should be
reduced to their component pieces and procedure of application.
Student's very often get transfixed (if not mesmerized)
by the finishing position of a given technique.
If the initial and
subsequent follow-up motions of a technique are done incorrectly (or
even sloppily) that technique has a greater potential of
failure. Each of the individually involved motions (of the
technique) need to be understood by the user.
What I often encounter
(when evaluating a student's performance of a technique), is that the
student is (mainly) concerned with the motion's ending
being in the desired position. How it gets to that
position is (actually) the more important issue.
As an example, the
performance of an “Outside Forearm Strike” (some refer to this as
an “Outside Block”). To the casual observer, the
arm's motion (beginning from the tori's side) crosses the tori's body
(low) and raises, crossing (back) across the tori's (upper) body
until it is vertical (and in-line with it's relative
shoulder). For many beginning student's, that's the end of
this motion's instruction. There may be some further clarification as
to “hand position” (palm-in or palm-out), but
generally, this is how student's are told that one “blocks” a
strike (that's intending to plow through your head).
It isn't going to
happen that way. But that's what they're told. And even after
having experienced that it doesn't happen that way.
Those same individual's will continue to tell other (if not
their own) student's, to perform that motion exactly
the same way that they were told to.
There's been a rash
of posting's of late about Block's as Strikes and the
individual opinion's thereof (both Pro and Con),
including one by myself. For the most part, I could give a flying
S*&T what anyone else is doing/teaching. I teach that striking
an offending limb is more beneficial than simply batting it away.
That's not to say that I have a problem with only
performing a parry in response to that strike attempt. But,
given a choice, I would much prefer to cause damage
to that arm with how I execute that response.
The reason that I restate
that position (because I've done so before), has to do with how I
teach student's to perform an “Outside Forearm Strike/Block”
(what-ever). Arm motions (in general) are always practiced
as beginning at the tori's side. This isn't to say they should
always begin there, only that this would be the most
inconvenient position to have to begin from (any other
position would have numerous advantages).
The first motion made, is moving the hands/forearm's forward. It should be obvious (because the hand can't cross the body until it does so, LOL), but it's these minor details that I'm referencing to.
When the arm begins to raise,
it crosses the body as it does so. This is done mostly to
generate a slight momentum advantage, as well as offering an
additional amount of coverage from a strike. As the arm
circle's upward, and achieves it's vertical positioning, it (then)
motions forward (towards the uke). As long as the
hand's finger/knuckle positioning has been maintained properly (at a
45ยบ
angle, straight wrist), then it won't matter
whether the uke's strike is intercepted by the tori's forearm,
or with the knuckle's
of the hand (during the raising
portion of the arm's motion). Even when the aggressor's arm is struck
after
the motioning hand moves forward
(towards, and upon the uke's upper-arm), the uke should experience a
loss of ability with that arm.
When
done properly, one has the potential to cause damage
to the uke's arm, and
to divert or
knock that attacking
limb away
(from the tori). The primary
goal of the action, is to prevent
the tori from being struck. Anything else, is bonus.
If
the arm's motion is not practiced
(as described), these particular results
would be more difficult to reproduce. It isn't (simply) a matter of
“raise and swing the
arm sideways” to
accomplish the motion. There are another dozen
motions involved with that whole technique's execution. Merely
perceiving it as being a forward
motion, confuses
many students. Until it's been exampled (and experienced)
to a student, it can be difficult to understand
the application.
Each
of the taught technique's, need to be broken-down to their essential
motions. This includes stances and punches, Reviewing kata motions
can reveal many improperly performed actions (at least when one is
certain
of the kata's correct performance, LOL). If your thinking that a
kata's motion is only a punch
or a block,
your probably wrong (or
at least still thinking at the novice
level). There's
nothing wrong
with either of those motions, but be aware
that there's usually more possibilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment