Easy Knockouts?

[gazza99]

Ok,
Has anyone here been Knocked out without being touched? Many people lately have laid claims of being able to do these "no touch knock outs"
Ill leave a few links, perhaps you can find more. But what really gets me is that there are only a few groups doing the pressure point stuff besides myself and the WTBA, and when they sign on to the no touch stuff it puts everything they do automatically in that catagory of a bunch of "voo-doo". There are a few clips online...let me see if I can post some links..

http://www.kyushoworld.net/index_files/page0005.htm


Gary

[bob10]

Only a few groups doing pressure point? There seem to be plenty here in the UK.

And don't the "wudang qi disruption kata" work without contact?

[Stone Monkey]

Check out Ken Gullette's site - he's a rabid detractor of "no-touch chi voodoo magician types" - Rich Mooney et al. I've seen some pretty heated arguments on that forum.


http://www.kungfu4u.com/disc3_toc.htm

[The Willow Sword]

what a CROCK OF STEAMIN HOT SH!T!!!

[gazza99]

plenty? Name them! And no the "wudang qi disruptive" forms do not work without a strike.

Gary

[bob10]

Russel Stutely's people and associates (DSI), most of the ju jitsu instructors I know, Yap Leong's Shaolin Fists school, Paul Whitrod (Mantis), Jim Uglow's Hung Gar and Taiji schools, thats a few off the top of my head.

Well Jim told me Erle demonstrated "no touch" work at his school once

[old jong]

Some preachers do the same thing!...:rolleyes:

[gazza99]

Find me a no-touch KO tape/book by Erle? He tapes everything.

"most of the ju jitsu instructors I know"

I wasnt aware Jujitsu was a neijia art, all of this Qi power all of the sudden! Its comical!!

Gary

[old jong]

I want to learn the Vulcan touch!;)

[bob10]

Well it would be some search through all the titles - what is it 150 now?

Who said anything about JJ being neija? I though we were talking about pressure point work? Plenty of styles have it.

Jim told me EM had him get into a guard stance, then he waved his hands in front of Jims arms, about 6 inches away. Jim said he let his arms fall. EM told him this was a qi drainage method. Mind you, this was before all the RIch Mooney stuff, so maybe empty force was a bit more "sexy" then?

[bob10]

old jong - the vulcan touch is Video 181 - Vulcan Touch vs Grappling Knife Attacks, only $30

[old jong]

Does that technique works as well on MMA guys as it does on ordinary humanoids? :confused:

[bob10]

No, it's waaay to dangerous for use on MMA types, though it will work on hippies.

[gazza99]

"I though we were talking about pressure point work? Plenty of styles have it"

Join the thread, im talking about no touch Knock-outs. Not pressure point striking Knock outs.
And yes the vulcan touch only works on hippies from what ive heard!

Gary

[old jong]

Oh! Oh!..We got carried away I suppose!;) It would have more to do with the "force" I presume. Can I buy a video on the "force" and...Does it only works on hippies also?...;)I want something that works on everybody.:)

[Felipe Bido]

Olg Jong, you might try to ask the guy in my avatar (YES!, "Dark Daddy" Vader). I've heard he's an excellent source for Force KO's and force butt pinching. Ah, it also works on MMA guys (Unbelievable!). He knows force chokes.


..although I really think that Royce would choke him and the whole Empire gang...

[Braden]

bob10

"Well it would be some search through all the titles - what is it 150 now?"

He's got them sorted, so it would probably be pretty easily actually. Probably take about a minute.

[Volcano Admim]

I want to learn the Vulcan touch!

Well, ok, fine, who summoned me this time, what is it now?

[bob10]

Well here it is from Erle himself:

http://taichiworld.com/ Qi Disruption videos

"MTG107 ALSO ON DVD
Qi Disruption Volume One.

In the martial arts area, this is another exciting area. Just a swish of a hand, not even touching the opponent will cause him to become weak or even have to sit down!"

But you said: "And no the "wudang qi disruptive" forms do not work without a strike."

So what's the deal????

[gazza99]

But where is the Knock out claim? Read on and you will find that each method is followed up immediately by a strike, and within the same second you will find if you learn the forms.

"Each of the nine Qi disruptive methods also has a follow-up strike that will take advantage of the Qi disruptive method in the best possible way. Usually this strike is an extremely deadly strike all by itself,"

Another big difference beteween the Qi-disruption stuff and no-touch KO stuff, in the Qi dis. forms-besides the necessary followup strike, is that the motion is quick, violent, and very close to the persons body, the motion also serves to block a punch in addition to cutting the persons energy. But its really a moot point with the followup strike in the motion anyhow. In the no-touch stuff the people are standing still! The person doing the demo had their hands still, a few inches/feet from the person, and acts like they are projecting chi which causes a KO.

Even if one doesnt believe in Qi, or the concept is bogus, Erles methods will end the fight, the no-touch stuff wont.

The point is people are doing NO-touch KO's without any sort of stike involved.(Hence NO-touch) Do you fall into this catogory BOB?

Gary

[wushu chik]

Gary, check you pm

~Wen~

[bob10]

No I don't Gary, though I've trained with both Mooney and Montaigue.

And regardless of whether it result in a knock out or not, the claim is still that you can effect someone's "energy" by using your "energy" with no contact. In fact an outsider could argue that the no-touch KO is more usuefl as it doesn't need a follow up strike??

[gazza99]

"And regardless of whether it result in a knock out or not, the claim is still that you can effect someone's "energy" by using your "energy"
No, the claim is that it can be used to KO people without touching them, who cares if you disrupted their energy if you blocked and hit them in a dim-mak point instantaneously? (via Erles wudang stuff) But you should care if someone claims there is no need to touch your opponent to KO them, hence the topic of the thread.

Gary

[bob10]

So Gary, can you use your chi to weaken / disrupt someone else's chi without any physical contact?

[gazza99]

Not really a valid question Bob, if I did think I could do such a thing , would I try and use it in combat to KO a person? The answer is No, absolutely not, that is the topic of the thread, again, feel free to join at any time.

Gary

PS: You mentioned you worked with Mooney? Did you get KO'd by a "no-touch" method? Or did you get pushed over from a distance?

[bob10]

No, neither.

I just find your no-touch KO comments interesting when your own teacher claims he can disrupt qi with just the swish of a hand.

Just seems to be a question of degree to me - one can make you weak, the other can knock you out.

[gazza99]

That is a valid point,
But degree is what is important, hence Erles material is not Qi dependent to end the fight, the no touch KO is. Degree can mean a big difference. Feel free to join the no-touch KO topic at any time!

Gary

[bob10]

Hmm, maybe not qi dependent, but very qi based?

No touch KO - be interesting to feel it, certainly dont think RM can do it.
No doubt those who claim they can would say it was "too dangerous" to try on non-students?

[Skarbromantis]

Why is it always fat American looking guys, doing the "no touch" or "empty force? I know before the download is finished that when it opens, its going to be some fat American karate looking guy!

Why?

Skard1

[dedalus]

I mean think about it - if someone falls over because you jump out of a dark alley and yell "SURPRISE!", that's surely energy disruption. Same differnce if your dog abeys a hand signal, your wife responds to a facial expression, or a moving object near your eyes makes you blink. Some people suffer "no-touch knockout" when they see blood.

There are central and peripheral nervous system effects from an enormous variety of sensory stimuli, and I think some of these effects have predictable consequences. You can't prove these effects involve qi when qi is incorrigible, but if you're on to something you ought to be able to reproduce statistically significant consequences. Not everyone falls over when I yell "surprise", but more often than not it sates my childish palate (if not there's always KFO forums ;) )

[bob10]

Well that's how "no contact" work is explained and trained in the style I practice, as a psychological effect. And that would be my own explanation for the instances I've seen it demoed by other people - the thing is they invariably describe it as projecting chi to effect the other person.

[dedalus]

I agree that that description is wide open to doubt, and although it is neither proven nor disproven, most people agree that the onus of proof is on the claimant. A point worth making, however, is that "instumentalist" explanations are rife in western science, too. Nobody has seen a particle-wave, but the posited properties of such an entity fit a proportion of otherwise unexplainable experimental data. The theory is *useful*, hence "instrumental". The entities of TCM seems to fall under a similar category, because their assumption has lead to an effective clinical science.

But let's return to the consequences of such claims - the trouble with Rich Mooney is that he can't reproduce them *and* it matters. With Erle Montaigue there is no major combat significance to the qi disruption movements... they are embedded in forms that contain a great deal of information about how to move when you fight, and the applications to which the disruptions are attached require conventional striking anyway. There's no place for using qi disruption movements, by themselves, in fighting, and I could only specualte on why they're in there (perhaps to train fa-jing? perhaps, if you believe in TCM, to teach about the health effects of unbalanced meridians? I don't know). Anyhow, I think EM is a different case from RM.

[dedalus]

You mentioned a couple of posts back that you've trained with both Rich Mooney and Erle Montaigue. I was wondering if you might write a few words about what positives and negatives you gained from each, and perhaps why you left your training? Just curious for the first-person perspective.

Cheers :)

[bob10]

Worked more extensively in EM system than with RM - which was 2 or 3 seminars.

EM system - ok for some things, but limited in some areas, questionable historical claims, I used it more as an "add on" to one of the traditional family styles. Some nice application work, push hands not so good, power development not so good. Nice guy but not my cup of tea these days

RM - showed some decent enough application work, the tai chi ruler / energy work doesnt do much for me, nor does the hysteria evoked by anyone questioning what he does