the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Good point Tom, plus we need to consider psychological factors. The effect of receiving a "light" strike or an "invisible" hit can often cause a psychological reaction too

absolutely.

Tom wrote:I'd like to interject another possible element that may come into play with an "internal" strike--the effect on the opponent's nervous system, not just pain, but reflexive response as well. Discussion often tends to focus on biomechanical leverage and momentum transfer--which are important but don't necessarily describe the complete interaction with the opponent, whose neuromuscular response to contact is a fairly immediate component of his overall response. Nerve plexi, pressure points, etc. need to be considered for a complete description of internal striking--not just the generation of power by the striker, but the opponent's response to the strike.

well said Tom...Gregory Bateson put it this way ..

The status of energy is of special interest. In general in communicational systems, we deal with sequences which re semble stimulus-and-response rather than cause-and-effect. When one billiard ball strikes another, there is an energy transfer such that the motion of the second ball is energized by the impact of the first. In communicational systems, on the other hand, the energy of the response is usually provided by the respondent. If I kick a dog, his immediately sequential behavior is energized by his metabolism, not by my kick. Similarly, when one neuron fires another, or an impulse from a microphone activates a circuit, the sequent event has its own energy sources.

btw thanks wtq.. i'll try that one

Yes...but... You can learn to change and control your reactions to pain, fright, being startled, etc. If your opponent is trained, conditioned, or even just drunk, his reactions may not be anything you can anticipate.

yusuf wrote:Gregory Bateson put it this way ..

The status of energy is of special interest. In general in communicational systems, we deal with sequences which re semble stimulus-and-response rather than cause-and-effect. When one billiard ball strikes another, there is an energy transfer such that the motion of the second ball is energized by the impact of the first. In communicational systems, on the other hand, the energy of the response is usually provided by the respondent. If I kick a dog, his immediately sequential behavior is energized by his metabolism, not by my kick. Similarly, when one neuron fires another, or an impulse from a microphone activates a circuit, the sequent event has its own energy sources.

there it is right there.

yusuf wrote:

Tom wrote:I'd like to interject another possible element that may come into play with an "internal" strike--the effect on the opponent's nervous system, not just pain, but reflexive response as well. Discussion often tends to focus on biomechanical leverage and momentum transfer--which are important but don't necessarily describe the complete interaction with the opponent, whose neuromuscular response to contact is a fairly immediate component of his overall response. Nerve plexi, pressure points, etc. need to be considered for a complete description of internal striking--not just the generation of power by the striker, but the opponent's response to the strike.

well said Tom...Gregory Bateson put it this way ..

The status of energy is of special interest. In general in communicational systems, we deal with sequences which re semble stimulus-and-response rather than cause-and-effect. When one billiard ball strikes another, there is an energy transfer such that the motion of the second ball is energized by the impact of the first. In communicational systems, on the other hand, the energy of the response is usually provided by the respondent. If I kick a dog, his immediately sequential behavior is energized by his metabolism, not by my kick. Similarly, when one neuron fires another, or an impulse from a microphone activates a circuit, the sequent event has its own energy sources.

btw thanks wtq.. i'll try that one

Yes agreed these things can definitely enter the equation. Glass jaws, student awe and even finely tuned nervous systems can present significant weaknesses that can contribute to produce all kind of effects upon the receiver. To play devils advocate for a minute though, this could be turned on its head. There has been heaps of research and incredible results from certain types physical therapies that require extremely light touches. With these light touch techniques it is stated, significant change can be brought about to the fascia, and muscular-skeletal systems. The argument put forward by some of these practitioners is that any more pressure than the lightest of touches can elicit the "body's" protective responses; so that the intended therapeutic technique is blocked or diminished. If this is true, then it could follow that if we do not set off the body's "alarm systems", a more subtle and potentially more penetrating application of "force" could be possible.

Walk the Torque wrote: To play devils advocate for a minute though, this could be turned on its head. There has been heaps of research and incredible results from certain types physical therapies that require extremely light touches. With these light touch techniques it is stated, significant change can be brought about to the fascia, and muscular-skeletal systems. The argument put forward by some of these practitioners is that any more pressure than the lightest of touches can elicit the "body's" protective responses; so that the intended therapeutic technique is blocked or diminished. If this is true, then it could follow that if we do not set off the body's "alarm systems", a more subtle and potentially more penetrating application of "force" could be possible.

Bingo! You've figured out the "magic" to Systema's strikes... at least one of the main ingredients.

Conn can you dig up any links to research on these physical therapies using light touch? I'd be very interested to read anything on the topic.

i think cranio sacral is one, feldenkrais also has this in functional integration

yusuf wrote:i think cranio sacral is one, feldenkrais also has this in functional integration

Here is some research on the former method

http://www.chiroandosteo.com/content/14/1/10
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1070 ... t=Abstract
http://www.ptjournal.org/cgi/content/full/82/11/1146

yeah everything i've read on craniosacral methods - in scientific literature anyway - has said quite clearly that there is absolutely no evidence showing the existence of the rhythmical skull movements described as the core of the technique, and no reliability of diagnosis or treatment among practitioners.

which is not to say that practitioners are "not doing anything" since of course they are, but again it shows that what they are doing is based mostly in the psychological reactions of their patients.

I-mon wrote:Conn can you dig up any links to research on these physical therapies using light touch? I'd be very interested to read anything on the topic.

I have little time till the weekend; but I'm sure I have something in one of my study folders. I was thinking specifically of myofacial release therapy. I must say though, I can't agree that a lack of scientific evidence automatically means that the mechanism is psychological.

ok i don't mean purely psychological, more in the sense described by Gregoy Bateson in Yusuf's post. In craniosacral stuff, for example, even if there is no actual craniosacral rhythm being felt by the practitioner (whatever they might believe they are feeling), the act of them putting their hands and fingers gently on different areas of the skull and telling the patient about the connections between their skulls and their sacrums should help the patient feel some sort of connection and hopefully induce a greater degree of relaxation throughout the head, all the way down the spine, and into the sacrum and pelvis.

i'll look up the myofascial release stuff when i get some time - that's a major part of the course i'm doing at the moment, starting next year, so anyway i'll have a better idea about it soon enough.

dtactics wrote:

Walk the Torque wrote: To play devils advocate for a minute though, this could be turned on its head. There has been heaps of research and incredible results from certain types physical therapies that require extremely light touches. With these light touch techniques it is stated, significant change can be brought about to the fascia, and muscular-skeletal systems. The argument put forward by some of these practitioners is that any more pressure than the lightest of touches can elicit the "body's" protective responses; so that the intended therapeutic technique is blocked or diminished. If this is true, then it could follow that if we do not set off the body's "alarm systems", a more subtle and potentially more penetrating application of "force" could be possible.

Bingo! You've figured out the "magic" to Systema's strikes... at least one of the main ingredients.

Yes, I immediately thought of something Alex Kostic demonstrated. He was teaching structure breaking takedowns, and showed that if for example you slam in and try a head control takedown forcefully, your opponent will tense up and resist the technique. But if you enter softly, even gently, he will not instinctively recognize the touch as a threat and will not resist until it is too late. Interesting stuff...

Walk the Torque wrote:I must say though, I can't agree that a lack of scientific evidence automatically means that the mechanism is psychological.

Generally speaking this is absolutely true. But when a large number of studies consistently show that neither the proposed underlying mechanism exists, nor that there is any objective sensation to feel for the practitioners, nor that there are any significant results in healing for the patients, then it is safe to say that the method doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

CD