Explosive Forward Movement (use your head!)

[BruceP]

You need to remember at all times that Mr McKinley is the is 'the most generous' sharer of his esteemed wisdom here and that Shooter is 'the giant on whose shoulders we all stand'. Once you adjust your point of view to take this into consideration, then everything will become clear

The info stands on its own merits. If you don't like how some people deliver it, too bad. You're quoting something I wrote in jest, btw. Some guys can get past the personality for the sake of the message. Not very many though.

Given the nature of the internet, it can be tricky getting a bearing on the personalities involved in any e-community. The one thing I've found to be really quite reliable in discerning the bullshitters from the rest is watching for a poster's consistancy. I've been reading Mckinley's yammerings since '97, from cyberkwoon to the underground, and have never seen him change his tune. The message has evolved and expanded, as should be expected, but the song remains the same. I spoke to him on the phone once, but other than that, he's just another stack of text on the screen. The truth is, he's one of the few people I don't read critically when it comes to his sharing ideas on IMA being applied to actual fighting. Chris has solid integrity and ethical grounding in what he shares here. I don't even blink when I see him citing his history of sharing good info. It seems to bother some folks though, and that's what's really funny. OTOH, guys like Graham change their tune every 6 months or so, and as is often the case with those shifts in their thinking, they still don't get it.

I'll take Mckinley's bitter words before I'll take the word of someone who plagarizes their teacher in giving their 'own take' any day.

[DeusTrismegistus]

Wanderingdragon's claim perhaps is a bit too carte blanche as previously worded, however, it does not have to be true in all circumstances or with all possible combat movements in order to be a very valid concept for consideration in one's training. It's possible to use isolated movement effectively in combat, I've done so...in fact, it damn well better be possible because once engagement is made, it can be surprisingly difficult to find opportunity for a clean, whole-body movement, especially if the engagement begins with an initial diminishing assault on you. I've said many times that if your stuff doesn't work without perfect structure, whole-body movement, proper shen fa, true internal movement, etc., it flat doesn't work for real combat, period. If all of that isn't icing on the cake, then you don't have true functional skill.

That said, and even with certain exceptions allowed, the idea of leading with the head for various whole-body movements is perfectly valid for exploration and testing.

I am trying to associate what you guys are calling leading with the head with how that should feel. I have not been able to do so. I just did a few cross punches which is my standard "whole body power" movement, and I cannot feel my head leading the movement. I am trying to remember from sparring things that would feel like the head is leading the movement but I can't really do so. My head moves, but it feels like it is moving with my spine in one piece. In the video of the swimmer she ducked her head to initiate the stroke. Now my head movement does start before my punch, but the head movement does not feel like it is leading the body.

[Chris McKinley]

There ya go, Deus. Kudos for actually trying it out. What you experienced may be all there is to "feel". And yeah, the head isn't really going to go anywhere without having to drag the spine along with it. That's why, when we talk about exploring it, it's worth opening up your observations for discussion and new insights. You also experienced one of the possible exceptions to the principle....namely, that of rotating the whole body on the vertical axis. It is possible to include whole body movement without leading with the head if the movement involves rotating about the axis described and defined by the spine. Maybe that little discovery wouldn't have been made if you hadn't explored it a bit yourself.

Where we still generally do see the leading with the head/spine is when moving the whole body from A to B on a plane described by the floor or ground. One can rotate on an axis and move in place without moving to another point on that plane. Once you decide to move from A to B, though, you will likely see some involvement, however elegantly minimized, of the head/spine in initiating the body's movement.

[Chris McKinley]

Shooter,

I know it unavoidably risks painting this exchange as a mutual congratulations society, but thanks anyway for the kind words.

[DeusTrismegistus]

There ya go, Deus. Kudos for actually trying it out. What you experienced may be all there is to "feel". And yeah, the head isn't really going to go anywhere without having to drag the spine along with it. That's why, when we talk about exploring it, it's worth opening up your observations for discussion and new insights. You also experienced one of the possible exceptions to the principle....namely, that of rotating the whole body on the vertical axis. It is possible to include whole body movement without leading with the head if the movement involves rotating about the axis described and defined by the spine. Maybe that little discovery wouldn't have been made if you hadn't explored it a bit yourself.

Where we still generally do see the leading with the head/spine is when moving the whole body from A to B on a plane described by the floor or ground. One can rotate on an axis and move in place without moving to another point on that plane. Once you decide to move from A to B, though, you will likely see some involvement, however elegantly minimized, of the head/spine in initiating the body's movement.

I will try to pay more attention to this tidbit especially while sparring and watching others spar. I tried the walking thing as well and from standing in a shoulder width stance my head moves over whichever foot stay stationary while I step forward, however again the movement is connected with my spine and my center.

I think the confusion may lie in what we mean by leading. Leading can mean initiating a movement, which it sounds like that is what Steve Morris was referring to in his article that Tom linked, or it can mean the head moves in front of the rest of the body. I will explore more over the next few days.

[cdobe]

cdobe,

RE: "So what insights did you contribute to the discussion ? What's the take home message in a couple of short sentences.". So glad you asked. For starters, how about "The solution is simple, if not easy, in that you almost never move in with whole body commitment until you've created/opportunized on a hole in the opponent's defenses. Usually, if you're starting from scratch, that comes from better fencing skills with your hands/arms. If the opponent does something, and in the process of your counter you create an opening, you may then engage in a whole body movement for the squash.". That's the take home, and I gave it in a couple of short sentences.

There's also "It doesn't have to do with whether or not you are stiff, which implies muscular tension, or not as you move in. It has everything to do with inertia. Even if the neijia guy is loose, if he's moving his center of mass toward me and he hasn't created a momentarily irreparable opening in my defenses, he's gonna get clocked. While he is in motion, my limbs can move around his center of mass to find the opening in his presentation faster than his center of mass can adapt and close that opening.". Really, it's just a further, more objective explanation of why the opening has to be made before moving in from long range with a committed attack.

Then you've got "When working with these people, I generally begin by demonstrating with a training blade how I can make contact with their abdomen/torso almost at will as long as they are maintaining strict zhong ding. This works as a sufficient lesson for most people who can dress themselves and don't drool uncontrollably. IMA guys, however, can prove a little more stubborn. Next, I move to one of the classic marker/chalk demonstrations, where I again show how I can paint a nice pretty picture all over their abdomens with my marker or chalked blade.", where I outline a specific practice for demonstrating why/how rigid adherence to zhong ding isn't appropriate when dealing with a bladed weapon attack.

It's fairly minor, but there's also "Try practicing your Sparrow's Tail set with this quality of motion for a couple of weeks, then go practice your apps with a partner and see what comes out.", in reference to the kind of loose movement that Brian Hassler described. Not everything has to be specific and informative, and this is really just a tagalong to Brian's point, but Taijiquan practitioners might not have considered applying that sort of movement to one of their fundamental training sets before, so it might spur some further discovery for someone.

Then there's "I'll offer something I used for myself as a visual metaphor for years.....think like an astrolabe. Not the flat, two-dimensional calendar ones, but the big, three-dimensional hanging sculpture ones with all the moving gears, spheres and circular metal bands. They move with varying arcs, in various and changing planes, with different orbit sizes and different speeds. When moving, the whole thing looks like a planned train wreck about to happen, but it's all mechanically harmonious and moves quite literally like a well-oiled machine.". A bit "out there", so to speak, but it is a metaphor and therefore meant to include at least a bit of abstraction. It's also very specific, and IME, it has been quite helpful, so I thought I'd share it.

Even in the middle of my self-admittedly indulgent opinion post as a specific response to Shooter's request for my opinions, there was a moment of some useful insight for someone who cares to look, in "It wasn't because I had the mojo working that I was able to paint 'em up, which I've also sometimes further proved by having a relatively new guy do the same thing to 'em. It was because they weren't getting their damn belly out of the way of the blade.". That's a short, sweet take-home lesson if ever there was one.

Chris,
thanks for the reply. I'm glad I didn't ask for a lengthy discussion of your views

As for your take home message, I can see your point. Krav Maga people however seem to make use of the exact opposite tactic by charging into any attack (at least in the majority of cases). I can see value in both tactics.
I still view your points as opinions and not as information. So instead of "sharing information" you should rather say "providing opinion" IMHO.

CD

[DeusTrismegistus]

this is the internet, there is no such thing as information just whatever asshat that put it on the webs opinion no matter what the content is.

[Chris McKinley]

cdobe,

As for the Krav guys, whom I have tons of respect for, they aren't so much charging into an attack that they themselves are initiating so much as charging into a committed attack by an opponent, most of the time at least. Under such circumstances, i.e., where the other guy has already made a committed attack of his own, responding with whole-body movement can be just what the doctor ordered. That very same strategy is mirrored in neijia as well, and can be extremely effective. However, if you watch how they train to initiate their own attacks (as opposed to countering one from the opponent), they typically follow the same general strategy that you will find in Western Boxing/Muay Thai/MMA. Sometimes it can be a committed attack, but often it's prefaced with an opening strike of some kind, such as a jab.

In that sense, I don't necessarily see what I'm advocating and what the Krav Maga guys are doing as particularly in conflict. If the other guy has already made his committed move, I would say it can certainly be appropriate to respond with whole-body movement, but IMO/IME, initiating a committed whole-body attack from long-range before the opponent has committed himself to anything at all, or without creating/opportunizing on an opening, quite often results in being slipped, evaded, dodged, blocked, parried, etc. and in being counterstruck. And without a whole lot of effort/luck on the part of the opponent.

This is where it's important IMO to take the IMA principle of whole-body movement in context with other possibilities which may be happening simultaneously. It's very much like the Baguazhang principle of 'Take the Center from the First Motion'. It's great when you can get it, but in reality, you can't always get it no matter how good you are. It's another of many Platonic ideals in IMA that, even if they can't be perfectly manifested at all times and under all circumstances, still represent goals of perfection worth training for.

[everything]

Revisiting some old exercises this week, I had a "why didn't I get this before" moment (wouldn't call it an epiphany...)

The drills were medium distance butterfly (swimming) and sprints (running).

Since you were speaking of sports, these examples aren't forward movement, but they are about moving something else forward, sometimes explosively, sometimes involving striking something with maximum speed:

- baseball swing
- football (American) long pass
- golf swing
- bowling
- discus throw
- javelin throw
- shotput

I don't think they start with the head, but with feet or hips. This doesn't refute your non-epiphany, though. Just had this thought. If you are moving yourself forward explosively, maybe it starts with head. Not sure. If you are moving something else explosively forward doesn't seem like it.

[Sprint]

Sprint,

you immediately and very impolitely followed that question with the statement that "I don't think you really understand what whole body movement is about.",

My statements, however derogatory or not, are not remotely close to trolling because they are openly claimed to be nothing but personal opinion and not, repeat not, about any particular individual so as to provoke or offend.

So what you are saying is your opinion regardless of how derogatory it is, is OK because you are aiming it at everyone rather than someone in particular. So, for example, you would see something like racism as being OK because it targets everyone in a particular group.

I have to say your interpretation of what is acceptable is somewhat arbitary. My statement was merely what I thought I did not expect you to be so touchy about it. I would have been intrigued to find out why someone thought that about me in different circumstances - but another time perhaps.

Anyway thanks for taking the time to answer my points it was most revealing.

[Bhassler]

Revisiting some old exercises this week, I had a "why didn't I get this before" moment (wouldn't call it an epiphany...)

The drills were medium distance butterfly (swimming) and sprints (running).

Since you were speaking of sports, these examples aren't forward movement, but they are about moving something else forward, sometimes explosively, sometimes involving striking something with maximum speed:

- baseball swing
- football (American) long pass
- golf swing
- bowling
- discus throw
- javelin throw
- shotput

I don't think they start with the head, but with feet or hips. This doesn't refute your non-epiphany, though. Just had this thought. If you are moving yourself forward explosively, maybe it starts with head. Not sure. If you are moving something else explosively forward doesn't seem like it.

In part it may depend on how you define the movement. For all of the above, the athlete's head is already oriented in the direction of the desired action. In some respects, non-movement can be seen as coiling (like throwing a ball, where the throwing shoulder moves back to "wind up" the spine), which from a mechanical perspective would function as an initiation of the movement.

[Chris McKinley]

Sprint,

RE: "So what you are saying is your opinion regardless of how derogatory it is, is OK because you are aiming it at everyone rather than someone in particular.". No, and I'm a specific enough writer that I don't need you to Cliff's Notes me by having me state whatever you want me to state. I worded myself, as I nearly always do, very carefully. I didn't say it was "OK" (or not), all I said was that it was not trolling, which it isn't. Whether it is "OK" or not depends entirely on whether or not the criticism is valid. If not, then it's not OK in that it is not accurate. If it is, then it is entirely appropriate to the discussion. It is a case of, "If the shoe fits, wear it." If it does not, then provide a convincing refutation and ignore it.

RE: "So, for example, you would see something like racism as being OK because it targets everyone in a particular group.". No, that's just you being an asshole and putting words in my mouth again. Ask Graham what I think about racism or being called a racist. It's something I've forgiven him for, but also something I hope he remembers for future communications with me.

RE: "I have to say your interpretation of what is acceptable is somewhat arbitary.". I don't care whether you have to say that or not, it is entirely inaccurate. Discuss something objectively, i.e., not ad hominem, and it's acceptable whether it is accurate or not. Level ad hominem attacks when you yourself have not been personally attacked and that is unacceptable. It's quite simple really.

RE: "My statement was merely what I thought I did not expect you to be so touchy about it.". Interesting copout from someone singling me out for criticism unprovoked. Perhaps I should turn that around on you and point out that my statements are merely what I thought and that I did not expect you to be so touchy about it. Then again, I wasn't really thinking about you in any way, since unlike yours, my comments did not single you out for criticism, whether objective or ad hominem.

RE: "I would have been intrigued to find out why someone thought that about me in different circumstances - but another time perhaps.". You are, puzzlingly, still confused....this isn't about you in any way. It never has been. It's odd that you make such an illogical inference from my original statements.

And likewise your continued asinine behavior after being very politely asked to have an objective discussion is also quite revealing. It looks like you simply confirmed that you were only trolling after all. Too bad.

[Bhassler]

Revisiting some old exercises this week, I had a "why didn't I get this before" moment (wouldn't call it an epiphany...)

The drills were medium distance butterfly (swimming) and sprints (running).

Since you were speaking of sports, these examples aren't forward movement, but they are about moving something else forward, sometimes explosively, sometimes involving striking something with maximum speed:

- baseball swing
- football (American) long pass
- golf swing
- bowling
- discus throw
- javelin throw
- shotput

I don't think they start with the head, but with feet or hips. This doesn't refute your non-epiphany, though. Just had this thought. If you are moving yourself forward explosively, maybe it starts with head. Not sure. If you are moving something else explosively forward doesn't seem like it.

In part it may depend on how you define the movement. For all of the above, the athlete's head is already oriented in the direction of the desired action. In some respects, non-movement can be seen as coiling (like throwing a ball, where the throwing shoulder moves back to "wind up" the spine), which from a mechanical perspective would function as an initiation of the movement.

I rethought what I wrote. A better way to say it is that the head may not be the first thing to move, but in all cases the head moves before the limb that is affecting a change in the environment. So the shotputter may have a step as the first movement, but the head still orients and moves in the direction he wants the shotput to go prior to the release of the shot.

[dragontigerpalm]

.[/quote]

I rethought what I wrote. A better way to say it is that the head may not be the first thing to move, but in all cases the head moves before the limb that is affecting a change in the environment. So the shotputter may have a step as the first movement, but the head still orients and moves in the direction he wants the shotput to go prior to the release of the shot.[/quote]

I don't believe that is the case with the golf swing or the swing of a bat in baseball.

[everything]

.
I don't believe that is the case with the golf swing or the swing of a bat in baseball.

I think that's right.

I think in baseball you are facing the direction of the incoming target but you do not look where you're going to hit it. You have to keep your eye on it at contact. In golf, same thing, you have to keep your eye on it, and only look afterwards.

Not sure if that tells us anything for martial arts, though.