Semantics in Obscure Wing

Semantics in Obscure Wing

Joined: May 7th, 2004, 11:02 am

December 3rd, 2008, 2:34 pm #1

Still working on translating the orange belt techs in Dutch and came across another difficulty (for me that is...)

First let's say that here in Holland we do this tech with the attack coming from 4:30, pulling in. Then we step backward (purposefull compliance) towards the centerline of the attacker with the back elbow to the solar plexus, followed by the back hammerfist to the groin and the obscure elbow to the chin.

If I step backward to 4:30 I'd settle in a reverse bow stance, simultaniously with my back elbow. So far no problem. But if I'd turn my head to see the attacker, what would then be the orientation of my stance? Would that be a reverse bow towards 10:30, or towards 4:30, or wouldn't it be a reverse bow stance anymore? And if the direction would be 4:30, would my back elbow still be a back elbow (it can no longer be considered travelling backward).

The other problem is the way it's written in de manual. The attack is stated as a "right flank left hand shoulder grab". From what clock position would you consider that attack coming from?

Next point is that the description says to step to 3 o'clock into a horse stance, and simultaniously deliver a right back elbow. IMO that would mean I'd move my mass on the 9-3 axis, while striking on the 12-6 axis, which wouldn't be very efficient. Would you agree on our solution and step basically on the diagonal and execute the elbow strike on that same line?

Looking forward to your opinions on this,
Marcel

***************************************
Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands

http://www.katsudokenpo.nl
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 27th, 2008, 10:59 pm

December 3rd, 2008, 3:38 pm #2

We have the attacker starting much closer. We do not have the attacker pulling in.

During the attack, one of the determining factors for Obscure Wing ... can I feel the attackers forearm on my back? If I can, I know the attacker is close. I can then use an short range weapon (e.g. the elbow).

If the attacker were further away...
if I have to step into the attack at 4:30 ...
if I could not feel his forearm on my back ...

I would be thinking about a different technique; Obscure Sword, Sword and Hammer, or maybe Falcons of Force.

Yes ... we do step out with our right to 3:00 o'clock while striking to 6 with a rear elbow. It is an interesting combination of marriage of gravity with the strike you point out.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 5th, 2006, 12:56 pm

December 3rd, 2008, 3:50 pm #3

Still working on translating the orange belt techs in Dutch and came across another difficulty (for me that is...)

First let's say that here in Holland we do this tech with the attack coming from 4:30, pulling in. Then we step backward (purposefull compliance) towards the centerline of the attacker with the back elbow to the solar plexus, followed by the back hammerfist to the groin and the obscure elbow to the chin.

If I step backward to 4:30 I'd settle in a reverse bow stance, simultaniously with my back elbow. So far no problem. But if I'd turn my head to see the attacker, what would then be the orientation of my stance? Would that be a reverse bow towards 10:30, or towards 4:30, or wouldn't it be a reverse bow stance anymore? And if the direction would be 4:30, would my back elbow still be a back elbow (it can no longer be considered travelling backward).

The other problem is the way it's written in de manual. The attack is stated as a "right flank left hand shoulder grab". From what clock position would you consider that attack coming from?

Next point is that the description says to step to 3 o'clock into a horse stance, and simultaniously deliver a right back elbow. IMO that would mean I'd move my mass on the 9-3 axis, while striking on the 12-6 axis, which wouldn't be very efficient. Would you agree on our solution and step basically on the diagonal and execute the elbow strike on that same line?

Looking forward to your opinions on this,
Marcel

***************************************
Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands

http://www.katsudokenpo.nl
First of all I completeley agree with you that it wouldn't be very logical to step to three o clock with a back elbow when the attack is coming from 4:30. It wouldn't make sense at all as you energy would be splitted in two different directions. So we have to examin the attack in this case. Is the attack really coming from 4:30 or does it comes from another direction, more from the side?

To help you out I checked two other manuals (beside the original IKKA Manual which most probably is the same one you have). First I checked mr. Speakman's written manual as this is one of the techniques which didn't changed in the 5.0 system. The description in there is almost the same. The attack is a left shoulder grab from the right flank, it doesn't mention a pulling in grab though). It also suggest to step to three o clock while executing a right back elbow. Pretty much the same thing.

I also checked the TULOCK (The Unabridged Library Of Contemporary Kenpo).
This is what is written out in that one:

-Pin your opponent's left hand to your right shoulder with your left hand (pinning check),
-Step to 3:00 in front of your opponent's left leg with your right foot. Try to hug against the inside of his leg with your right backside of knee (right side step through),
-Execute a Right back elbow srike to the opponent's solar plexus (palm up).

NOTE: These actions will prevent strikes from the opponent's left hand and leg by checking his leverage points...blabla

This is an interesting description because it explains why to step to three o clock, it mentioned that you hug the inside of his leg with the back of your knee which also leave us with the conclussion that the attack doesn't come from 4:30 but more from the side. If this is the case, stepping towards 3:00 would make more sense to me.

Another thing I would like to mention is that in none of my written versions of this technique a pull in is mentioned, so my conclussion is that it is a stationary attack. Stepping to the side is pretty much o.k. in that case. But would it be an pulling in attack that it seems logical to me that you step in the same direction as where you are pulled in using Purposefull Compliance as a type of Borrowed Force in that case.

If in your case you keep telling your students that the attack is coming from 4:30 and it is a pulling in attack, then I suggest you stay with the version where you step in that direction in a Reverse bow stance with a back elbow, which is a very powerfull move!

Hope this helps!!!

Nice regards,

Richard Baarspul
Jeff Speakman's Kenpo 5.0 - The Netherlands
www.jeffspeakman.nl
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 7th, 2004, 11:02 am

December 3rd, 2008, 4:18 pm #4

We have the attacker starting much closer. We do not have the attacker pulling in.

During the attack, one of the determining factors for Obscure Wing ... can I feel the attackers forearm on my back? If I can, I know the attacker is close. I can then use an short range weapon (e.g. the elbow).

If the attacker were further away...
if I have to step into the attack at 4:30 ...
if I could not feel his forearm on my back ...

I would be thinking about a different technique; Obscure Sword, Sword and Hammer, or maybe Falcons of Force.

Yes ... we do step out with our right to 3:00 o'clock while striking to 6 with a rear elbow. It is an interesting combination of marriage of gravity with the strike you point out.
Hi Michael,

Thanks for your answer. If the attacker is that close and the grab is stationary, it does make more sense to step to 3 and use a back elbow, although you still don't use progressive directional harmony of motion, which I'd prefer to do.

Thanks again,
Marcel

***************************************
Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands

http://www.katsudokenpo.nl
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 7th, 2004, 11:02 am

December 3rd, 2008, 4:33 pm #5

First of all I completeley agree with you that it wouldn't be very logical to step to three o clock with a back elbow when the attack is coming from 4:30. It wouldn't make sense at all as you energy would be splitted in two different directions. So we have to examin the attack in this case. Is the attack really coming from 4:30 or does it comes from another direction, more from the side?

To help you out I checked two other manuals (beside the original IKKA Manual which most probably is the same one you have). First I checked mr. Speakman's written manual as this is one of the techniques which didn't changed in the 5.0 system. The description in there is almost the same. The attack is a left shoulder grab from the right flank, it doesn't mention a pulling in grab though). It also suggest to step to three o clock while executing a right back elbow. Pretty much the same thing.

I also checked the TULOCK (The Unabridged Library Of Contemporary Kenpo).
This is what is written out in that one:

-Pin your opponent's left hand to your right shoulder with your left hand (pinning check),
-Step to 3:00 in front of your opponent's left leg with your right foot. Try to hug against the inside of his leg with your right backside of knee (right side step through),
-Execute a Right back elbow srike to the opponent's solar plexus (palm up).

NOTE: These actions will prevent strikes from the opponent's left hand and leg by checking his leverage points...blabla

This is an interesting description because it explains why to step to three o clock, it mentioned that you hug the inside of his leg with the back of your knee which also leave us with the conclussion that the attack doesn't come from 4:30 but more from the side. If this is the case, stepping towards 3:00 would make more sense to me.

Another thing I would like to mention is that in none of my written versions of this technique a pull in is mentioned, so my conclussion is that it is a stationary attack. Stepping to the side is pretty much o.k. in that case. But would it be an pulling in attack that it seems logical to me that you step in the same direction as where you are pulled in using Purposefull Compliance as a type of Borrowed Force in that case.

If in your case you keep telling your students that the attack is coming from 4:30 and it is a pulling in attack, then I suggest you stay with the version where you step in that direction in a Reverse bow stance with a back elbow, which is a very powerfull move!

Hope this helps!!!

Nice regards,

Richard Baarspul
Jeff Speakman's Kenpo 5.0 - The Netherlands
www.jeffspeakman.nl
Hi Richard,

I was already waiting for your quote from the TULOCK

The way I look at it now, is that if I'm able to hug the inside of his leg with the back of my right knee (can't be other than his left leg IMO), then the back elbow is not a back elbow towards 6, but towards 3 (in which case the semantic question arizes: is it still a back elbow then?), thus using PDHoM anyway. For clarity I inserted a picture of what I mean:



Now we've a whole new technique (in comparison to what I'm used to).

Thanks for your input, still waiting for that video :lol:

***************************************
Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands

http://www.katsudokenpo.nl
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 27th, 2008, 10:59 pm

December 3rd, 2008, 4:43 pm #6

I would say ... no, no, no ... on those foot positions.

Once you get to the extension, having the attacker facing 9:00 o'clock will mess everything up.

I checked back of the 'Kenpo Kards', and this source has the feet of both defender and attacker facing 12:00. It does show the attack more from 4:30 than 3:00. But, I still think it needs to be a close attack ~ for a short range response.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 9th, 2007, 6:15 am

December 3rd, 2008, 6:02 pm #7

ive always know this to be a close attack. attack is a right flank sholder grab with their left hand. both of u are facing 12. you are stepping out to three but its more of an off center horse. so u can check off attackers leg. all the strikes seem the same back elbow hammer fist obscure elbow heel palm.
but looking at that diagram with me facin 12 and attacker facin 9 the tech. would work the same no? just a side elbow into hammerfist and so on instead of back elbow
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 24th, 2004, 1:31 pm

December 3rd, 2008, 7:44 pm #8

Still working on translating the orange belt techs in Dutch and came across another difficulty (for me that is...)

First let's say that here in Holland we do this tech with the attack coming from 4:30, pulling in. Then we step backward (purposefull compliance) towards the centerline of the attacker with the back elbow to the solar plexus, followed by the back hammerfist to the groin and the obscure elbow to the chin.

If I step backward to 4:30 I'd settle in a reverse bow stance, simultaniously with my back elbow. So far no problem. But if I'd turn my head to see the attacker, what would then be the orientation of my stance? Would that be a reverse bow towards 10:30, or towards 4:30, or wouldn't it be a reverse bow stance anymore? And if the direction would be 4:30, would my back elbow still be a back elbow (it can no longer be considered travelling backward).

The other problem is the way it's written in de manual. The attack is stated as a "right flank left hand shoulder grab". From what clock position would you consider that attack coming from?

Next point is that the description says to step to 3 o'clock into a horse stance, and simultaniously deliver a right back elbow. IMO that would mean I'd move my mass on the 9-3 axis, while striking on the 12-6 axis, which wouldn't be very efficient. Would you agree on our solution and step basically on the diagonal and execute the elbow strike on that same line?

Looking forward to your opinions on this,
Marcel

***************************************
Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands

http://www.katsudokenpo.nl
From reading the responses to you posts we can all agree so far that Obscure Wing is for a short range attack. The "ideal" phase is with the opponent at your "flank" (Merriam-Websters defines it as: the right or left of a formation or SIDE: the space beside one ) With that said I teach and have been taught that the opponent is at your side (3 o'clock) and slightly behind you.

Ideally I trap the hand with my left and step into a horse stance towards 3 o'clock simultaneously delivering a back elbow strike to the opponent' solar plexus. This methods of doing the technique shows how to gain you opponent's centerline by stepping in. The opposite example of that would be in Escape from Death.

The primary power principle for this technique is purely torque for your mass is moving to 3 o'clock and your strike is moving towards 6 o'clock. Therefore the power principle of back up mass (your weight in line with your strike) is not followed and you are not using your weight vertically to enhance the strike (Marriage of Gravity) either.

If you step with your left foot into a Reverse Bow and you are facing 4:30, then it is a left Reverse Bow. The back elbow is still a back elbow because it is traveling behind you or in back of you. The only inherent issue I could possible foresee is that by buckling the opponent, you are causing him and the intended target, the solar plexus, to fall away from the strike. As his upper body bends at the waist causing his head to come forward, his solar plexus is out of position to accept the shot.

The way you do the technique I am sure works well for you and I don't disagree with the method in which you've chosen to perform it. I teach it the way I do because it's my understanding that Mr. Parker gave examples of certain things and that's why the techniques are done the way they are done.

IMO, I think in some cases where people's "ideal" phases vary is because someone along the line said "I don't like it like that" or they didn't understand it as it was performed and decided to change the "ideal" phase leaving out bits of the "Kenpo puzzle".

"Whose "ism's" are those?"
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 23rd, 2007, 2:37 am

December 3rd, 2008, 9:06 pm #9

Still working on translating the orange belt techs in Dutch and came across another difficulty (for me that is...)

First let's say that here in Holland we do this tech with the attack coming from 4:30, pulling in. Then we step backward (purposefull compliance) towards the centerline of the attacker with the back elbow to the solar plexus, followed by the back hammerfist to the groin and the obscure elbow to the chin.

If I step backward to 4:30 I'd settle in a reverse bow stance, simultaniously with my back elbow. So far no problem. But if I'd turn my head to see the attacker, what would then be the orientation of my stance? Would that be a reverse bow towards 10:30, or towards 4:30, or wouldn't it be a reverse bow stance anymore? And if the direction would be 4:30, would my back elbow still be a back elbow (it can no longer be considered travelling backward).

The other problem is the way it's written in de manual. The attack is stated as a "right flank left hand shoulder grab". From what clock position would you consider that attack coming from?

Next point is that the description says to step to 3 o'clock into a horse stance, and simultaniously deliver a right back elbow. IMO that would mean I'd move my mass on the 9-3 axis, while striking on the 12-6 axis, which wouldn't be very efficient. Would you agree on our solution and step basically on the diagonal and execute the elbow strike on that same line?

Looking forward to your opinions on this,
Marcel

***************************************
Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands

http://www.katsudokenpo.nl
"If the attacker is that close and the grab is stationary, it does make more sense to step to 3 and use a back elbow, although you still don't use progressive directional harmony of motion, which I'd prefer to do."

I totally see the logic in what is troubling you here with regard to power principles and directional harmony. I'm curious, though, how you do the back elbow in Escape from Death. In the way I was taught, it is essentially the same - move the mass on the 3:00/9:00; deliver the elbow to 6:00 - only Escape uses the left arm. I'm wondering if you have a variation on that as well, or if the same lack of directional harmony just hadn't grabbed your attention. I look at the step as the means of acquiring the attacker's centerline - putting my weapon directly in line with his solar plexus. Hence, I try to put my right foot right between his legs since everything I want to hit is directly above that point. If I have to step back a little to be in the proper range for penetration, so be it.

One point that I don't believe has been mentioned yet is that, in the execution of Obscure Wing that I learned, as I pin with my left hand, I also load my right arm straight out in front of me for travel on the elbow, palm down for torque. This is similar to shooting the left arm out in Locked Wing. (That move in LW serves the dual purpose of freeing your arm from their grip, but you get the visual.) I then blast the elbow as I land in my stance. So...the power for the elbow, in effect, comes from full range of motion.

Hope that was of use.

Dan Puleo































































































































Last edited by DanPuleo on December 3rd, 2008, 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 7th, 2004, 11:02 am

December 3rd, 2008, 10:03 pm #10

Dan,



In comparison to Escape from the Storm: You're right that in that case you also don't use directional harmony in delivering the back elbow. There's a good reason for that however. From the position you're in at the beginning of the tech, there is no target available, so I'm forced to let go of my intention to step into the target while delivering the strike. In obscure wing there is a target, the ideal tech just seems to step in front of it before striking off angle.



On your other point of loading the elbow before striking I was typing a reply, but didn't manage to explain myself, so I shot some pics to clarify:





In pic 1 I load my arm as you describe. In pic 2 you can see that my elbow forms a flat surface with which I'm striking, which is what I don't favour. Pic 3 shows the back elbow from point of origin, resulting in pic 4: striking with the point of my elbow thus causing much more damage to the target. Aside from that striking from point of origin is much faster and by keeping my arm closer to my body it's easier to keep my mass attached to the weapon. The speed is definitely needed, because as someone already said, there's probably his right fist speeding towards my head while I'm doing all this, and I'd better elbow him before that fist reaches my head.



I hope this clarifies why I do the back elbow the way I do it, if not I'll have to let you feel the difference someday



Bye for now,

Marcel



PS: I know I use my left arm in the pics, while in OW it's the right one, so no need to start a discussion on that

***************************************

Marcel de Jong, 4th Black from the Netherlands



<a href="http://www.katsudokenpo.nl" rel="nofollow"><span class="link">http://www.katsudokenpo.nl>

</span></a>
Last edited by nlkenpo on December 3rd, 2008, 10:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share