Verdict: Hop Gar striking mechanics?
I just find it interesting that a group of Kung Fu Styles use expansive strikes apparently in full-contact sparring and/or contest, yet you don't see much of it in other sports where it is within the rules. All other things being equal, how good is it?
* Hop Gar kung Fu aka Tibetan White Crane aka Lion's Roar aka Lama Pai aka Pak Hok Pai
* Choy Lee Fut Kung fu
* Similar moves in many other Kung Fu
Funny comp "ko"
You are a total Douchbag. Train more, post nevermore.
FickleFingerOfFate -08-21-2007 08:59 AM
just die already.
Plasma - 08-20-2007 11:45 PM
Best MA website ever!!!!!: http://www.dogjudo.co.uk/
These strikes need to be set up. I've seen very few choy li fut people developing any sort of setup for big looping strikes. I find the DBMA kali tudo material to be some good stuff for getting the right angles and stuff.
From watching the vids it seems to generate power for these types of strikes you really need to wind it up. Someone good see you winding up like that, he'll step in with a stiff jab.
Another problem I can see is because it's so telegraphed and much slower, it's easy to duck under and counter with a hook to the body or head (which would incidentally catch the guy on the return swing as he's turning into the hook).
With conventional fighting guards where the arms are held up high to defend against kicks and punches, you'll also find it hard to get past the guard. If you try to go for the body, you'll need to step very close and your head is open for a variety of nice things your opponent will throw at you. Namely a right cross, hook, knee, etc. One variation I might see working is if you swing from the centre down, going in between the guarding hands, aiming for his nose and mouth.
I've learned to use many of the long lead hand strikes as tools to clear/knock down an opponent's guard to follow up with the other hand. Think of using the downward swinging motion to grab a lead hand as you follow through with the next. Another way this is used is to swing the lead hand down, follow up by checking the lead hand down + across the body, then follow up with the long lead hand horizontal swing.
I actually spent nine or so months training in Pak Hok Pai, the style in the last video.
I was always told that, while the strikes were long, they were also designed to be shortened during application, and that most of the strikes ended up looking a lot more like western boxing with the occasional raking knuckle strike thrown in for cutting. That it was trained in that exaggerated manner to teach the completely unschooled how to generate power. Absurdly, and you can't tell from those videos posted above, most of the power came from twisting your waist for the punch, rather than just throwing your fist out there.
But I have to say, that when I switched to other stuff like MMA, I kept a couple of the long fist stuff for using when I can set them up to each an opponent stepping or angling out of range. Its not a lot different mechanically (the mechanic itself not he way I punch), than this clip with chuck liddell:
He just applies it like somebody that actually uses it, versus somebody like the people in the above clips who look like they mostly air-punch.
Last edited by JP; 8/04/2007 11:00am at .
Reason: Edited cause teh jp can't schpell good while hung the fuck over.
I've said it elsewhere a few times and I'll say it again, but most of the strikes that are very "stylised" and typical of a CMA styles are too often trained as the whole system rather than a specific part.
The looping CLF punches, they're not meant to replace or make irrelevant the jab and the cross, they're meant for specific situations. Any decent CMA school will, along with its more complex and specific techniques, train the **** out of the simpler punches.
But most people want to see and train stylised techniques like in the movies, so too many schools with otherwise respectable lineage train their students ineffectively.
To make a grappling parallel, it's as if a school trained flying armbars without training any takedowns, because people want to see impressive techniques. You'd get shitty fighters that chase after limbs rather than fight.
Which is what is happening with CMAs; shitty fighting because all they look for is an opportunity for a complex technique because that's all they've been taught.
Looks like they're being taught to throw sloppy haymakers. I'm kind of shocked Chuck would teach his students to punch like that... they're just asking to get their **** ruined by a technical striker.
Not sloppy haymakers. You can knock people out like that. The only thing is you cant really on it over the standard jab, cross, hook and uppercut. You can throw a couple combinations of standard western boxing and throw in a Chuck Haymaker as long as you have good timing and know what your doing.
Its not a staple of your strikes like the jab, its just a KO shot you can throw in if you have the chance. So sure, if you use it against a technical striker and your not a technical striker, you loose, but more so based on you not being a good striker. If you are a good striker, then you can use it.
I like the grappling analogy. Blacklbelts can pull off flying armbars and triangles, whitebelts will only fall on their head.
People get KO'd with sloppy haymakers in MMA. Doesn't make them good punches. It's just an overhand right with a tremendously long loopy path that puts you in a terrible position if you wiff it. I used to throw punches exactly like this when I was 12 years old.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO