The Way of Least Resistance

I'm going to start a series of short pieces dealing with what I consider to be "persistent myths" in the martial arts: myths that won't go away despite contrary logic and a plethora of available information. Since I've been talking about blocks a lot lately, I'm going to start with this one: Traditional blocks are designed to be executed in isolation. Erm... No, they're not.  Why would anyone think so? People might not say this so clearly, but it is often necessarily implicit in their argument.  As Rashaud noted in the comments to my last article: "What's interesting, I think, is that most people look at "blocking" as a static thing.  That all of you've done is "parry" or "deflect" an incoming strike. From that line of thinking, most would therefore consider the formal block overkill, or unworkable." Presumably the impression among these people is that all you do is "block" (ie. stop or re...

Taijiquan’s "continuing momentum" In Part 1 of this article I discussed the internal arts principle of "preservation of momentum" - ie. converting a fully extended or expanded position into something else. In that Part, I discussed how each of the internal arts has its own principle 1 or preferred method of doing this. “Continuing momentum” is my name for taiji’s method. What is this? Essentially it involves beginning a retraction at the very moment you reach full extension and vice versa. That might sound easy enough. But if you simply “back pedal” after missing a committed haymaker, you will probably be simply reversing momentum - not continuing it.  In that circumstance you might well find yourself smack in the middle of your opponent’s counter. If anything, your opponent is relying upon your back pedal (as a predictable, untrained response). So how does taiji address this issue?  The answer lies in 5 different, but equally important elements...

Introduction There is a classic principle in the internal arts (specifically taijiquan) commonly referred to as “the rule against double weighting”. To me, this is one of the most misunderstood principles associated with the internal arts. Many proponents of this principle will insist that the body should never “double-weighted”. In other words, weight is always biased on one leg or the other, not distributed equally over both. A drill I teach beginners who are learning the Chen Pan Ling "99" taijiquan form The fallacy: your body inevitably passes through double-weighted points! In literal terms the “rule against double weighting” is clearly a fallacy. Consider for a moment that you will, sooner or later, have to transfer your body weight from one leg to another. And as you do so your body will have to pass through a point where your weight is, however transiently, evenly distributed over both legs. In Chen Pan Ling taijiquan we acknowledge this ...

Continued from Part 1 Introduction In my article " Why blocks DO work " I set out my arguments as to why traditional "blocks (better termed "parries", "interceptions" or "deflections") are indeed very effective. In that article I also discussed how the failure to understand and apply blocks correctly has led people to dismiss them as ineffective. This in turn has led some traditional martial artists to reinterpret blocks as strikes, locks or holds in order to justify their continued presence in the traditional curriculum. One of the more sophisticated revisions in modern karate is the reinterpretation of block/counter combinations . According to this theory, there are no such combinations in karate: rather, every block is itself a direct attack. The theory holds that there if you block, then punch, you cede the initiative to your opponent and give him or her the advantage. It is better to respond to every attack with your own attack - w...

Introduction I have written previously about my views on the importance of flow or connectivity between movements and the role kata plays in this process. In particular I have noted the importance of connecting a series of related techniques (eg. a block/deflection and counter) so that they comprise one cohesive sequence rather than separate, disconnected movements. In my article " The importance of flow " I used a specific example of a movement from Aragaki seisan as researched by Patrick McCarthy and as performed by Erik Angerhofer, a student of McCarthy Hanshi’s respected International Ryukyu Karate Research Society (IRKRS). I chose to compare Erik’s and my performance of the same movement for a very specific reason: I did not do so in order to assert that I was "faster than Erik". On the contrary, I chose Erik’s example because I felt that he and I were moving at more or less an identical speed. What the comparison was intended to show (and which I ...