Introduction
Karate employs many techniques categorised as "uke" derived from the Japanese verb "ukeru" meaning literally "to receive". It is fashionable in some circles to deride traditional blocks as "unworkable" or "ineffective". The principal arguments in support of this proposition are that -
(1) there is little value in just "stopping" an attack - rather you should use other means to set up an effective counter; and
(2) in any event, the movements constituting traditional blocks are "too large" for practical use.
In many people's minds these criticisms are seen as unassailable. That blocks "don't work" is regarded as a fundamental truth, a basic assumption, unquestionable "fact".
Yet I am firmly of the view that the criticisms underlying this assumption are completely misconceived - it's just that no one has ever comprehensively dealt with them. I propose to do so now:
The 2 "answers" to traditional blocks The wide acceptance that "blocks don't work" has fuelled 2 very different "answers" to traditional blocks.
The contact sports alternative to blockingFrom the 70s onwards many contact sports schools have substituted boxing evasive movements such as dodging/weaving/bobbing (it was Joe Lewis who is famously quoted as saying "karate techniques from the waist up are a fraud" - he was talking principally about punches, but I've dealt with that to some extent in my article
Visible force vs. applied force and I hope to deal specifically with the physics and mechanics of punching in the near future).
In the contact sports, if hands are used protectively they are held close to the face as a shield. This was initially advocated with closed fists (a la boxing - see figure 1) until the advent of ungloved fighting in the early 90s (Ultimate Fighting and MMA) when I suspect the reality of having your own fist shoved into your face was revealed as scarcely better than just taking the punch full on (again, more about the boxing vs. karate "guard" another time). Nowadays it is standard practice to hold the palms up against the sides of your head/face instead of your fists (see figure 2).
Figure 1: The boxing shield defence
Figure 2: The MMA shield defenceRevisionist "explanations" of blockingThe second "answer" to traditional blocking comes, ironically, from within traditional circles. It constitutes an entire school of thought that "there are no blocks in karate", but rather they are a hidden "code" for certain counters, be they strikes (usually to vital points (known as "kyusho" or "dim mak") or grappling moves or both.
The 2 "answers" to traditional blocks The actual techniques described as "uke" in karate cover a wide range of defensive interceptions of attacks using your hands, forearms, thighs, shins and feet. The term "block" is actually a misnomer because traditional blocks don't simply "stop" an attack. Rather they act as checks, parries, deflections, set-ups or any number of other moves that both -
(1) neutralise an attack; and
(2) set you up to counter effectively.
Clearly the argument that "there is little value in just stopping an attack" is a purely semantic one. It is the proverbial straw man, set up only so that it can easily be knocked down. I don't propose to waste any more time on this "argument".
I will continue to use the term "block" in this article to cover "uke" partly for the reasons stated above, partly out of habit and partly because there is no one term that readily comes to mind that would encompass the concept of "uke" ("deflection" comes closer I suppose, but never mind).
The second criticism is misconceivedNow for that old chestnut - "traditional blocks use movements that are too large to be applied against real attacks".
I had a young boxer come up to me once and say this, so I invited him to throw his fastest jab. Of course, with my own guard up, I was able to deflect it easily, using a hiki uke (see the series of pictures comprising figure 4 and the video below).
Figure 3: the hiki ukeFor future reference, by "hiki uke" I'm talking about the circular open-handed goju block known by some as "kake uke" - see the series of pictures comprising figure 3.
Simple physics should tell you that blocks can beat jabs. If you have your arms up in a guard your arm will only have to move about 10cm to deflect a jab. The guy throwing the jab has to move half a metre. Even taking into account your reaction time you have the advantage (provided your handspeed is similar).
If we apply this principle (every kihon block is composed of two blocks and a pullback), your bunkai also changes a lot. Even gekisai dai ichi, the most basic goju ryu kata becomes pretty advanced.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am not sure about the secondary being the a backup block. First of all, I think that for primary block you refer to the visible, or more recognizable block, which usually gives the name to the block. The secondary block is a less visible block of which many people is unaware.
For instance, in the uchi uke you talk about in your videos, the secondary block is first, and the primary is last. Same in yodan age uke. In gedan barai uke, when the arm of the primary block is in front of the face, the other arm is performing the secondary block as gedan. So if the secondary block is first, it can not be a backup block.
But, if the secondary block is first, it means the secondary block is the first defense, and the more visible block (or primary) is the counter or the setup for the counter.
For example, first movement in gekisai dai ichi: someone punches you, so you use the secondary block to deflect and primary block to strike.
Same kata, the last of the series of uchi ukes: you use the secondary block to deflect, and the primary block to turn your opponent so he shows his back or his side to you (then kick, elbow, uraken, etc)
Are we using the same primary-secondary block concepts?
As discussed elsewhere Alfredo, I have used the term "backup" very loosely and, to some extent, inaccurately.
ReplyDeleteSuffice it to say that the "backup" could actually be the "primary" block - indeed this is often my brother's preferred method of applying blocks from karate.
I propose to expand on this fascinating issue another time. For now, this article must serve as a mere introduction to "blocking" in karate.
I liked the analysis you gave.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that I have never heard anyone make the statement that traditional blocks don't work before.
Then again, I tend to ignore a lot of the statements I hear against traditional martial arts anyway.
In order to show that the blocks work, they need to be pressure tested against people outside of the system. While I think it's great you spar, you can't claim something is effective unless it works against people who were trained differently.
ReplyDeleteHi David
ReplyDeleteI don't have much sparring footage, and that which I have is not hard contact.
I shall have to film something to demonstrate that the inherent mechanics of our hard sparring are not really different as regards use of deflections (blocks).
I have read this post and considered it very informative. However, I would like to ask your opinion about the stand of some that it is not practical to block in terms of knife attacks, like in this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r4NI5qmnf0
ReplyDeleteWhen knives or other weapons are involved you have to adopt a different strategy.
ReplyDeleteI use the Filipino martial arts approach of stopping the shoulder with one hand and the forearm with the other and not attempting to grab on the first contact (especially with a knife).
I'll detail this in a video sometime.
Thanks for reading.
Brilliant post. Love reading about this kind of stuff in such a thoughtful way. I studied a fusion of goju (U.S. style) and Hapkido for years, then switched over to Brazilian capoeira (just for the fun of it), which has virtually no blocks and relies heavily on training in full-body evasion (BTW, I could not locate your "evasion" post). Thank you for these excellent articles.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most common mistakes made when using physics in evaluating the effectiveness of striking techniques, or when simply discussing what’s necessary to achieve effective strikes, is to confuse momentum with energy.
ReplyDeleteIn short, we should not be concerned with momentum; one way to define momentum is, the amount of force necessary to stop a moving object. But stopping a moving object is not what we’re after – and neither is the force necessary to stop it. What we want is to apply a destructive force to the target we are moving against.
Now – the formula for momentum is m X v, where m = mass and v = velocity.
So, if we’re going to work off of that formula, then in order to develop a more effective strike we can either increase the mass that we’re moving (grab a fistful of quarters), or increase the speed of our strike; either one will do.
But momentum is not what we’re concerned with when we’re working with karate strikes. What we want is energy transfer – we want to transfer the kinetic energy of our moving hand or foot to the body of the opponent.
The formula for kinetic energy is ½ m x v squared. Ooh, look at that magic "squared” Along with that magic “½,” that changes everything.
Let’s imagine that your fist is comprised of 10 units of mass, and you’re moving it with 10 units of velocity. Now, plug those numbers into the formula for energy, then begin doubling first the quantity of “m” and then doubling the quantity of “v,” and see which of those doublings will transfer more energy to the target.
As things stand originally, ½ the mass (5 units) times the square of the velocity (100) will get you 500 units of energy. Doubling the mass will get you 10 X 100, or 1000 units of energy. Leaving the mass as it is and doubling the energy will get you 5 X 400, or 2,000 units of energy. Velocity is clearly the king when we want more effectiveness from our strikes.
It’s like this: Say that a 100-ton locomotive, moving at ½ mile per hour, was to collide with your person. That’s an enormous amount of momentum, but it’s hardly likely to cause you any injury – the most it will do is push you to the side. But now let’s consider a 100 grain bullet, moving at ½ mile per second. It’s that bullet -- and the velocity at which it's moving, that’s going to do you in.
When attempting to increase the destructive force of karate strikes, it’s velocity that’s going to do it for us. (And just by the way, striking with a fistful of quarters is going to slow down our strike, so it not only gains us nothing, it actually reduces the effectiveness of our strike.)
Another reality of physics is that a striking object that bounces off its target transfers more energy than a striking object that does not bounce off – but that’s a discussion for another day. It is worth considering, though, when fine-tuning our punching technique.
Great site -- very interesting and thought-provoking. Glad I found it.
Thanks Jack for your insightful comments.
ReplyDeleteAnd a belated thank you to Patch. The principal evasion post can be found here.