The difference between the striking art and the throwing art

[YouKnowWho]

In

- striking art, you want to use your "Fajin - power generation" to knock your opponent's head off.
- throwing art, you want to use your "Fajin - power generation" to force your opponent to respond, you then borrow his force and throw him down effortless.

For some striker, he may think that to use his "Fajin - power generation" to throw his opponent is proper. To me, that's 100% against the "borrow your opponent's force so you can have an effortless throw" principle. In other words, some striker may use his "Fajin - power generation" on the wrong place when he tries to throw his opponent.

What's your opinion on this?

[Kellen Bassette]

Not all throws are effortless.

[Syn7]

In

- striking art, you want to use your "Fajin - power generation" to knock your opponent's head off.
- throwing art, you want to use your "Fajin - power generation" to force your opponent to respond, you then borrow his force and take him down effortless.

For some striker, he may think that to use his "Fajin - power generation" to throw his opponent is proper. To me, that's 100% against the "borrow your opponent's force so you can have an effortless throw" principle.

What's your opinion on this?

I think that, in grappling, using leverage and strength to throw is just as acceptable as borrowing. It depends on the variables. I also think they are both valid in striking. I would never limit myself by pigeon holing myself like that. If you can make it work, and it does work, you have been successful. Don't tell me the best freestyle wrestler can't take down the best SC guy and vice versa. As long as the rule set doesn't favor one over the other, that is.

[YouKnowWho]

Not all throws are effortless.
The "Gong Li throw" that you use only your force and not borrowing any of your opponent's force is not effortless.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZwzfjydGPM

[YouKnowWho]

I think that, in grappling, using leverage and strength to throw is just as acceptable as borrowing. It depends on the variables. I also think they are both valid in striking. I would never limit myself by pigeon holing myself like that. If you can make it work, and it does work, you have been successful. Don't tell me the best freestyle wrestler can't take down the best SC guy and vice versa. As long as the rule set doesn't favor one over the other, that is.

You can use your body momentum to knock your opponent off balance and then take him down. To me that final throw is still "effortless". Of course if you combine both into one, it will be hard to say it's "effortless".

[YouKnowWho]

Here is a good example. This guy may use too much unnecessary force to unbalance his opponent. Do you think he may use his power in the wrong place?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBgV1IE9ewE

[Kellen Bassette]

Does it matter if they are effortless or not? Sure it's cooler to use their force against them, but whether you borrowed their momentum, or just crashed in and threw them, as long as they end up on the ground right? Nothing wrong with using strength...

[YouKnowWho]

Does it matter if they are effortless or not? Sure it's cooler to use their force against them, but whether you borrowed their momentum, or just crashed in and threw them, as long as they end up on the ground right? Nothing wrong with using strength...

As long as the end result is the same, it doesn't matter. The only question is what's the most efficiency way to spend your power, before the throw or at the throw?

[wiz cool c]

beijing style shuai jiao is anything but effortless, does this look effortless to you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTTLKdMfLaA

[Syn7]

Sure, the less energy you use, the more energy you still have. That is a given. That being said, sometimes suplexing your opponent through the floor can be the right thing to do. Sometimes it's the wrong thing if you gas out and get beat up. Sometimes only borrowing will get you hurt, sometimes it will give you a much needed advantage when you get into the deep end. It's not an "either or" scenario for me. I use both and when I use them is dictated entirely by the situation. My understanding of the mechanics, my understanding of how to exploit my opponent, my understanding of what my own energy levels are, how I'm doing so far and what is the best course of action.... and so on. Not to mention all the things that require both to be successful.

[YouKnowWho]

beijing style shuai jiao is anything but effortless, does this look effortless to you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTTLKdMfLaA

If your opponent is a good wrestler, it's not that easy to be able to borrow his force. This is why sometime a wrestling round can last over an hour.

If you want to twist your opponent "clockwise" and take him down, you first twist him "counter clockwise" as hard as you can. When he resists, you then change your twisting direction, your final "clockwise" twisting can be effortless.

Since this kind of "apply your force into the opposite direction first" may not apply to the striking art. It make both arts with complete different approaches.

[-N-]

In

- striking art, you want to use your "Fajin - power generation" to knock your opponent's head off.
- throwing art, you want to use your "Fajin - power generation" to force your opponent to respond, you then borrow his force and throw him down effortless.


How many people are only strikers or only throwers?


For some striker, he may think that to use his "Fajin - power generation" to throw his opponent is proper. To me, that's 100% against the "borrow your opponent's force so you can have an effortless throw" principle. In other words, some striker may use his "Fajin - power generation" on the wrong place when he tries to throw his opponent.

You present a dichotomy that does not have to exist, even if you look at striking separate from throwing.

If a someone jabs so he can slip the counter-jab and give a body shot, uppercut, and hook, he is borrowing the opponent's force.

If someone lowers their guard to draw an attack, then beats the other guy to the punch, he is borrowing the opponent's force.

If someone makes the other guy chase, then delivers a stop kick or stop punch, he is borrowing the opponent's force.

[lkfmdc]

Your throw should be based upon proper mechanics, proper angles, proper leverage and set up,,,,, but that doesn't mean you won't use speed and power in doing it.... doing BOTH makes you good

[-N-]

The "Gong Li throw" that you use only your force and not borrowing any of your opponent's force is not effortless.

This throw can borrow force if you draw the left punch from the other person.

Your left hand catches the punch, you steal step, and continue from there.

You use his punching force to help the throw.

You can combine striking and throwing. You don't have to be either/or.

[-N-]

As long as the end result is the same, it doesn't matter. The only question is what's the most efficiency way to spend your power[...]

Agreed on this.

[YouKnowWho]

If a someone jabs so he can slip the counter-jab and give a body shot, uppercut, and hook, he is borrowing the opponent's force.

Agree! In

- striking art you want to borrow force so you can have a head on collision.
- throwing art you want to borrow force so you can have a rear end collision.

[YouKnowWho]

Here is an example. In this clip, he tried to shake his opponent like a rag doll (at 0.37, 1.31) before throwing him. At 4.16, he pulled before his pushing.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtPNDbBm-7E

[YouKnowWho]

You can combine striking and throwing. You don't have to be either/or.

This can be an interesting discussion by itself.

Should you use your strike to off balance your opponent so you can throw him effortless (you treat strike and throw as 2 different moves), or should you combine your strike and throw as 1 move?

For example,

- You use your shoulder strike to knock your opponent off balance. You then put your leg behind his legs and throw him.
- When you use your shoulder to strike on your opponent, you put your leg behind his legs and throw him at the same time.

[-N-]

This can be an interesting discussion by itself.

Should you use your strike to off balance your opponent so you can throw him effortless (you treat strike and throw as 2 different moves), or should you combine your strike and throw as 1 move?

For example,

- You use your shoulder strike to knock your opponent off balance. You then put your leg behind his legs and throw him.
- When you use your shoulder to strike on your opponent, you put your leg behind his legs and throw him at the same time.

Yes, this is where it gets very interesting.

TCMA is one of the original MMA's. Sometimes people don't appreciate the level of integration that exists in TCMA.

You are a Praying Mantis guy. 2 moves or 1 move? There are so many different ways you could do that.

How about both 2 moves and 1 move and borrow force too?

Both are in right lead.

You right grab and pull him into your left punch to his face to make him flinch back.

You follow him back and hit with your right forearm hook to the neck, chest hit his body, and leg behind his leg to throw.

First move is hit to unbalance and borrow force to set up the second. Second move is hit and throw at same time.

You CAN have it all :)

[-N-]

You right grab and pull him into your left punch to his face to make him flinch back.

You follow him back and hit with your right forearm hook to the neck, chest hit his body, and leg behind his leg to throw.

First move is hit to unbalance and borrow force to set up the second. Second move is hit and throw at same time.

If you like, you can just face off and give him an opening to punch.

At that time you just step in with only the second move.

Takes skill and guts to pull it off.

But that is what makes it fun.

[-N-]

If your opponent is a good wrestler, it's not that easy to be able to borrow his force. This is why sometime a wrestling round can last over an hour.

It can help to punch his face :)

[YouKnowWho]

It can help to punch his face :)

A face punch changes everything in wrestling. MMA guys have to train boxing and wrestling separately and then integrate both together. TCMA guys already had those integrated longtime ago.

If face punch is allowed, a wrestler will never stand like this.

http://imageshack.com/a/img43/2371/wrestling1h.jpg8021

[YouKnowWho]

You right grab and pull him into your left punch to his face to make him flinch back.

You follow him back and hit with your right forearm hook to the neck, chest hit his body, and leg behind his leg to throw.

First move is hit to unbalance and borrow force to set up the second. Second move is hit and throw at same time.

You CAN have it all :)
I like that too. Punch at my opponent's face as hard as I can and then throw him afterward.

[-N-]

I like that too. Punch at my opponent's face as hard as I can and then throw him afterward.

The throw can use a forearm smash like in a TCMA hook punch, or splitting down forearm strike like in some of your front cut videos. Combined strike and throw.

[Kellen Bassette]

If face punch is allowed, a wrestler will never stand like this.

http://imageshack.com/a/img43/2371/wrestling1h.jpg8021

Very true...

[-N-]

I like that too. Punch at my opponent's face as hard as I can and then throw him afterward.

You don't even have to hit his face.

It is more important to create his reaction with your threat so you can borrow that force.

Grab, eye attack, takedown.

Fast, efficient.

[MightyB]

I believe the dominant hand lead found in some styles of TCMA is because those TCMA styles were very blended or balanced with throwing and striking.

[-N-]

I believe the dominant hand lead found in some styles of TCMA is because those TCMA styles were very blended or balanced with throwing and striking.

And evolution favors dominant lead for predators :)

[SPJ]

Here is an example. In this clip, he tried to shake his opponent like a rag doll (at 0.37, 1.31) before throwing him. At 4.16, he pulled before his pushing.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtPNDbBm-7E

Yes.

There are two main strategy.

1. walking or moving in a circle. Forcing the opponent to move his facing and rooting.

easier to trip the leg, if his roots/feet are loose or changing. (horizontal strategy)

2. shaking up down, again to "uproot" his footing. (vertical strategy)

easier to trip the leg.

Great.

[YouKnowWho]

I believe the dominant hand lead found in some styles of TCMA is because those TCMA styles were very blended or balanced with throwing and striking.

It's even more important about the leg. Your back leg is your rooting leg that act like a door hedge. Your front leg is your attacking leg that act like the door frame. Depending on where you may land your back leg, it define how far that your leading leg can attack.

[TaichiMantis]

Totally agree wit N...

I don't see a dichotomy in our style.

[SteveLau]

Borrowing force is a technique that is found in both striking art and throwing art. The reality is that it is not easy to do. It requires the opponent to exert too much strength, and not moving accurately.



Regards,

KC
Hong Kong

[YouKnowWho]

Borrowing force is a technique that is found in both striking art and throwing art. The reality is that it is not easy to do. It requires the opponent to exert too much strength, and not moving accurately.

It's not that hard to borrow force.

In the

- striking art, if you can make your opponent mad to run into your kick, that will be a perfect example of borrowing force.
- throwing art, all you need is to pull before push.

There was one time that I pulled my opponent so hard that when I let go my grip, my opponent was flying back.

[-N-]

It's not that hard to borrow force.

In the

- striking art, if you can make your opponent mad to run into your kick, that will be a perfect example of borrowing force.
- throwing art, all you need is to pull before push.

There was one time that I pulled my opponent so hard that when I let go my grip, my opponent was flying back.

Even nicer way is to borrow intent :)

[SPJ]

There was one time that I pulled my opponent so hard that when I let go my grip, my opponent was flying back.

Classic.

A plus plus.

:cool:

[-N-]

There was one time that I pulled my opponent so hard that when I let go my grip, my opponent was flying back.

He must not be Praying Mantis, because he would have been flying in when you pulled :)

[TaichiMantis]

Was watching a UFC fight on fox2 and saw this guy keep trying big punches to his opponent's head. He was overreaching and the other guy was evading by leaning back or backing up. Kind of inefficient if you ask me. We are taught to evade by waist turn and step to the side (cat) or step forward at an angle with waist turn or even just forward with slight waist turn. Body moves your arms. You get his forward momentum into your full bodyweight strike. Or, since he's overreaching, small waist turn, deflect shot and reach in around neck to pull him into a knee to his body. There are throws and arm bars you could do too... Of course reading an opponent's intent and your own quickness is the key.

And now here comes your chance to tell me why this can't work in UFC. I still think someone who has even some mantis or tai chi moves ingrained in his background could pull it off. I just saw a lot of missed opportunities and inefficient fighting....*sigh*

[YouKnowWho]

He must not be Praying Mantis, because he would have been flying in when you pulled :)

I didn't pull in straight line but in circle. I tried to run behind him.

[Faux Newbie]

In regards to the fajin part of the discussion, a lot of throws I like that have a fajin component use the fajin against an already compromised structure, so it is not about maximum power, but quick, strong, and decisive motion.

In regards to the strong hand in lead in kung fu(versus boxing, where it is commonly kept in the rear), I tend to think this arises because of the focus on 'crossing arms' as important, or at least that range between striking and full clinch. At longer range striking, the lead hand has to feel things out and make openings. At contact, the lead hand has to have openings made for it, but has deeper penetration for a strike. So strong hand in lead. Just a theory.

In both striking and throwing, I try to train myself to look for sufficiency of force over maximization of force. So your idea of fajin at the right moment rings quite true to me. Even using a previous comment on striking in mma, many people always slip forward and in, but slipping toward the back quadrants allows more time for the slip in the case of a faster opponent, and tends to make some fighters enter too far when they are striking toward the head, which enables the defender to more easily counter by using the nearness of the opponent's footwork against them after the slip.

True, if fighter A moves forward, hitting fighter B while he is moving forward, then the power is maximum, but if fighter A fades and hits fighter B while he is moving forward, the hit is less powerful, but he still hits, and sets up favorable conditions for followup. This is what I mean when I think of sufficiency over maximization. Have the capacity, timing, and sensitivity/awareness to achieve the maximum, but build an approach toward using sufficient actions to create the conditions for the maximum ones, rather than counting on always being able to maximize an offensive action. You can only always maximize an offensive action against someone with far less skill than you, and in their cased, no point outside of training getting subtle, but against good people, it is not just the 'offense' that wins the fight.

/babble

[YouKnowWho]

the strong hand in lead in kung fu(versus boxing, where it is commonly kept in the rear),...

It may be proper to say that Kung Fu prefers "strong leg (attacking leg)" lead instead. This way your attacking leg is closer to your opponent's body.

In Chinese wrestling, you have to develop "major hand" and "minor hand". Of course you can always develop both sides equally, but it will cost you twice amount of the time and less efficiency.

When you have your strong leg forward, you can always put your "minor hand" forward (cross stance). This way your "major hand" is ready to punch out anytime. The cross stance is used quite commonly in Chinese wrestling.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3KdRTSGA9I

[Faux Newbie]

It may be proper to say that Kung Fu prefers "strong leg (attacking leg)" lead instead. This way your attacking leg is closer to your opponent's body.

Interesting...


In Chinese wrestling, you have to develop "major hand" and "minor hand". Of course you can always develop both sides equally, but it will cost you twice amount of the time and less efficiency.

When you have your strong leg forward, you can always put your "minor hand" forward (cross stance). This way your "major hand" is ready to punch out anytime. The cross stance is used quite commonly in Chinese wrestling.


There is a throw/strike from my system that does this. I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but in training it, it was definitely getting the "minor hand" able to initiate before the "major hand" came in that took the longest. Thanks!