Punching "Through" vs. "Hit Don't Push"
Is the concept of punching “through” your target compatible with “hit don’t push”? On the surface they seem incompatible to me since punching “through” would be akin to pushing.
Ideal: You focus on a point 2" beyond the surface of your target. You deliver a smooth fast strike to that imaginary point then immediately get your hands back to guard.
Pushing: You fixate on the surface of the target but try to remember that you should "punch through" This tends to make you land a shot on the surface then shove the bag/target. Shoving after impact makes your return really slow.
Do you see how my "ideal" example accomplishes both?
Summary of WS's post: "Ya Rly."
Punch past your target in varying degrees with good speed behind the strike as well as the return.
Your ideal example makes perfect sense.
Originally Posted by WhiteShark
I'm asking this question because the notion of "punching through" ingrained in me in my past TMA training is not 2 inches. It's more on the order of "aim for the back of the head when punching someone in the face".
I don't agree with the descriptions the others have used, but the two ideas of "punching through your target" and "hitting, not pushing" are not mutually exclusive. It boils down to HOW you hit.
You have to hit your target explosively.
Think of it like this. Place a golfball on a tee. Swing the club such that when you whack the ball, you stop the club shortly after impact. The ball doesn't really go anywhere, does it?
Now place the ball back on the tee and swing again, this time swing medium power but follow all the way through. The ball probably goes a little further this time, but not much.
Now for the final test. Place the ball back on the tee and really whack it, following through on your swing.... that ball is flying!
Apply these same principles to your strikes. In a roundabout way, its the same principle. You not only need to strike explosively, but you need to follow through. In other words, strike THROUGH your target, not just 2" past the surface of the target.
(But you also need to take into account what strike we're talking about....)
Good analogy, but WS' example is a little... simpler. I'm going to use it in class, actually, because it's so frustrating when I'm holding a 5" body shield and the kid is hitting it either like it's going to give him AIDS if he touches it for too long, or as though he'll get AIDS if he pulls his foot back from it.
Originally Posted by Khun Kao
Punching through = hitting not pushing
if you're not used to hitting things it's actually a bit harder of a concept to grasp than you might imagine, especially if you've been training for a while. it's easy to forget what being a total n00b is like.
Originally Posted by The_Tao
Not striking at the surface of the opponent, but projecting the oomph into them, (part of which involves a fast drawback of the arm), is what I understand it to mean.
I throw hard, and pull back as fast as I can....a bit of a generic description, but it comes with time on the bag...make it dance, not swing. (I sound like a retard, but before I shut it...)
It's easier to hit "through" the target (with some practice) than describe it. Also, if someone's holding the focus mits for you, have them slap into your gloves a bit, as you strike, you'll feel that pop, and know there's real hurting power there, or you'll sprain your wrist (always wrap your hands). Also, make sure they are at least your size, or you'll hurt their wrists.
I thought Khun Kao had been replaced by a crazy jerk-off until I got to his paranthetical statement. I was talking almost exclusively about straight punches.
I totally agree with follow through for Thai kicks and several other types of "hitting" but I'd say 2" or so is a good rule of thumb for hard crisp punches.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO