Quote Originally Posted by Buddha_Fist View Post
No insult - just my opinion about this kind of theories!



No. There's a huge difference from what a boxer does to what is being advocated here: A boxer resorts to the same tool (his good old punch) no matter what angle, distance, position, or timing dealt with. He targets larger areas with the same tool and it will do damage no matter whether he got you anywhere on the head or anywhere on the body. He keeps it simple (Ving Tsun!) and does not have to think first about whether to cross his fingers in a certain way before striking, nor is he looking continuously for that small spot on the inside of your left forearm...
Actually I beg to differ. Saying a boxer resorts to the same weapon regardless of angle is simply not true. Jab, cross, uppercut, hook are all fundamentally different. Add in the distance and targetting and an upper cut to teh jaw of an opponent is very different in angle and line of power to the same shot done to the solar plexus. A hook to the temple has very different angles, elbow positions and lines of force to a hook done to the floating rib or liver. Good boxers don't just aim at big areas and hit willy nilly. My old boxing coach could hit my floating rib and solar plexus at will with pin point accuracy.
I totally agree that aiming for tiny "pressure points" or spots on the inside of the arm as you refer to them, from no contact is utter nonesense, but the ability to see a target and select the best weapon for the job instinctively comes with training and is what we all do when we flow from punches to elbows or choose palms or fak, and a good boxer does when in close he selects the uppercut instead of the jab.
Although my lineage doesn't use them, I'm not inclined to dismiss the tools just because the way some people choose to employ them is flawed.