A recent comment
on one of my blogs got me thinking (always dangerous,
LOL). The comment reminded me, that our method of responding to an
aggressor's actions, tend to be “off of the norm”.
Though often claiming
otherwise, the most common response to a (any) strike (to a
defender's head/face), is to “Block/deflect” and then retaliate
(pretty standard). The differences (between systems) is
in just how that is accomplished.
In virtually every
(other) system that I have been involved with, the “standard” has
been, if/when the aggressor's strike is coming at you from your
left side, then use your left hand/arm to stop/deflect it. If/when it
is from the aggressor's left hand/arm, use your own right
arm to stop/deflect it (pretty simple, if not obvious).
Of course, this isn't as
practical, as one would at first assume it to be. When
an aggressor is going to strike you in the head, they don't
(commonly) tell you about it before hand (thus allowing you to
put things in order, and make arrangements to account
for it's impending arrival upon your face). More commonly,
they would prefer it to be a complete surprise.
The reason that
the majority of people attend some manner of martial arts training,
is to avoid this situation from occurring (or at least the
“getting hit” part). Avoiding the “surprise” part, is only a
matter of paying attention (and despite the description,
is in fact a cost free skill-set, and only requires the
awareness of one's surroundings, ie. “paying attention”, LOL).
The second fact
that makes this even more difficult (to accomplish), is that
you are (commonly) only allowed seconds (more like Milli-seconds) to evaluate that they are (actually)
going to hit you, which hand they are going to do so
with, and which hand you need to use to (attempt
to) stop/block it with, and (then) do so.
The first (few) things
can be done fairly quickly (the
“evaluation” of
the situation). It's actually the last one (the
“response”) that's the most difficult to pull off.
Most people (that have just been struck) will tell you that
“they saw it coming” (but just didn't respond fast
enough to do anything about it).
Based upon these
(numerous) evaluations that are often presumed to be necessary, the
system we teach (ie. Taika Oyata's methodology),
approaches a defensive situation differently. We learn (several)
defensive motions that will provide (varying) defensive capabilities,
regardless of which arm (or striking manner) is utilized by the
aggressor.
The ability to
(initially) disregard which hand an aggressor is striking
with, is a bigger deal than most would care to admit.
When a defender is able to be unconcerned with
an aggressor's initial strike, this provides an enormous
(defensive) advantage.
When I first began my
study with this system, I (too) had been indoctrinated with the
belief that I would be required to respond differently
to an aggressor's Right-handed strike, than to one made with their
Left-hand.
My problem (at the time)
was a common one, of limited understanding of the
applications I was attempting to defend against. When examined, the
ability to strike another individual in the head (the
most commonly performed first strike made by an aggressor) is
fairly limited in it's ability to do so.
There are (basically) 4
ways that a hand/fist is able to strike another in the head. (#1) A
straight punch (from the waist), (#2) a “shoulder-cocked” punch, (#3) an
“uppercut” strike and (#4) a “roundhouse” punch. When
this is attributed to include being done by either side, this makes 8 possible ways to be struck (and therefor be included in one's defensive planning).
When you examine the way
that (any of) those strikes can make their way to your head, you see
that they can only occur along certain pathways to get there.
By utilizing the same simple defensive motion (utilizing both
hands) regardless of the individual “path” taken by the strike,
it is a fairly simple matter of interfering with that strikes
ability to reach it's target.
Doing so certainly
doesn't make one impermeable, but it does raise the “odds”
of one's ability to be successful at preventing an
aggressor's initial attempt at doing so.
Being successful
at preventing a “first strike” being successfully made by an aggressor, has an enormous psychological effect upon that individual. There (obviously)
needs to be follow-up applications being applied afterword, but
this is more easily accomplished if/when an aggressor's
initial offensive attempt is disrupted.
The first of these (types
of) motions taught, is referred to as a “Cover-Strike” (a
possibly over-simplistic name for a fairly encompassing
motion/concept). Being that it is (first) demonstrated and taught at
the lower kyu rank levels, student's often (misinterpret?) consider
it to (only) be a “beginner's” defensive action.
As with numerous applications learned from Taika, there are additional layer's to be added as the
student progresses in their study. As the student becomes more
comfortable with each, then another use/variation of the
application is added (until defenses of every one of the “8”
possible methods of being struck, are included within the same initial motion).
The most difficult part
of this (manner of) training, is getting the student to focus upon
their own motion (and not that of the aggressor).
No comments:
Post a Comment