Corkscrew Punch

[gmanry]

Ok,

We have a lot of posts in the Seisan thread concerning the corkscrew punching techniques (call it "standard" seiken for lack of a betterterminology, I am sure this is inadequate).

My question for everyone is, given that this punch finishes in the horizontal position, at what point for each of you does it make impact. To minimize the "it depends" answers, let's discuss this in terms of standard makiwara practice in your own experience.

I ask this, because you hear all the reasons for the twist, tearing skin, adds impact power, etc. However in many texts, I see snapshots of the fist already being horizontal at impact, across many different schools.

So, are all these people doing it "wrong" (I doubt it)?

I am not looking for the "truth" here, I am looking for everyone's experiences.

For example, my punch, ideally, hits at 12 o'clock and rotates through to horizontal when I am working reverse and lunging punches on the mitts or makiwara.

May be a stupid question, I don't know, just curious. Fundamental techniques are my focus of study right now.

[RadioSuicide]

This is just semi-educated opinion but here goes:

I don't think it matters really. I think the angle of your hand at impact depends on how far away your target is. In normal practice I would be contacting the target at about the same point you mention, with the hand vertical or slightly past that.

But with a very close (imagine you've grabbed your opponent around the neck with your hand and pulled them in close, but not a head lock) target my hand would be further 'back' into the rotation. Think of the classic upper cut.

I never believed the skin tearing thing myself. I think the point of the rotation is simply that the chamber is more comfortable with the fist palm up, and, being more comfortable, offers better power. Trial and error demostrates that. From a 'karate' chamber position with the fist palm down, the punch feels significantly less powerful than with the fist palm up and ending palm down.

It is an issue of comfortable positioning allowing greater power, and extension of the arm for penetration depth. Again, the chamber is more comfortable palm up, but you can punch 'deeper' with the palm down.

- Mark

[Steven Malanosk]

Hello,

Now this varies from Ryu to Ryu and even then to Ryu Ha " style to style and to faction of style."

The punch contacts at 3 quarters of the way complete.

This capasitates for a penetration, to various internal targets.

The last part is on followthrough.

Makiwara, can be practiced this way, but due to the potential of damage to most but the seriously developed hand, is usually practiced at horizontal or vertical on impact.

In kata Seisan, this would not be so obviouse to the eye of the beholder.

[gmanry]

Thank you gentlemen for sharing your views.

I agree completely that it depends, a punch is simply putting your hand on a target for the purpose of destroying that target.

Knowing that most readers on these threads give a lot more thought to the mechanics and details of their practice, I wanted to just see what other schools of thought were. The punch that works is the correct punch, of course.

I am not very familiar with Seisan, however, the version I have seen (Pangai Noon I believe) has "short" punches that "appear" to be vertical. No doubt the body action can be extended in application in various ways. I don't really want to create another Seisan thread, however.

[kenshorin]

I have played around with this much in the past, and what I have found is that the more you can get the twist at the end of the punch, the better. Your punch will release from a chambered position looking much like an under punch. Then try to begin the twist as close to the target as you can, and make it a quick snappy twist. I don't believe in the "tearing skin" thing much myself, but I have found that the added torque towards the end of the technique *will* allow you to penetrate much deeper into your target, like the torque you give a screwdriver allows the screw to penetrate. So the best answer I guess would be, train to try and get as much of that twist towards the end of the technique, and your own comfort level will determine where that is exactly.

I agree with KD and the rest of you guys.

Bryan Seer

[Doug Daulton]

Mark,

Welcome to E-Budo and the OMA Forums!

For future reference, it is E-Budo policy to sign all posts with your full name, unless your handle/nickname contains your full name.

Good post!

Regards,

Doug Daulton
Moderator
E-Budo - Okinawan Martial Arts Forums

[PingAnTu]

One thing we might consider is mechanical implications of the horizontal, 45 degree, and vertical positions.

It seems to me (at least from a shorin perspective) that the main point of the horizontal position is simply to teach beginners how to keep the elbow in and the shoulder down as the arm goes out. One bad thing in any martial art is "floating". If the motion isn't natural and if the body doesn't rest on the skeleton system as it should.. you get floating. With floating you get decreased power and a possibility of hurting yourself with your own force (the force can get trapped and bounce around your body resulting in stiff neck and back muscles, injured joints or worse).

After this is mastered, you move on to the other positions -- the fighting positions. But you still do the horizontal position in the kata to practice "extension". If you start with the verticle position, people have a tendency to push with their shoulder and the elbow will wobble (which means that force is getting bounced back and forth instead of "out"). Extension is never trained so you never learn how to let the force out of your major muscle groups -- you never learn the release part of "compress and release". There are, however, styles of karate that train the vertical punch in the kata. The main difference is that some styles train for fighting in the kata and some styles train for bodily attributes fundamental to fighting in the kata. Am I making any sense?

The verticle fist is the king of fighting punches but if you don't think you can hit hard with a horizontal punch -- enter a national traditional karate tournament and let the Japanese stylists hit you full force to the guts! You can blow it off but MAN does it hurt!
:eek:

[John Bowden]

Originally posted by PingAnTu


The verticle fist is the king of fighting punches but if you don't think you can hit hard with a horizontal punch -- enter a national traditional karate tournament and let the Japanese stylists hit you full force to the guts! You can blow it off but MAN does it hurt!
:eek:

I must admit, I always find it amazing that people have such strong feelings about vertical vs. horizontal punches. In my shorin system, we punch with a vertical punch, but if we want to hurt them, we bring it the final distance to horizontal. We never refer to it as a vertical punch, and in kata the punches are always twist punches ending in horizontal. That being said, there are certain angles and strikes where there is no rotation at all (esspecially raking punches, dropping punches and uppercuts) where the horizontal or vertical fist is driven home with no rotation at all. I'm only familiar with Okinawan stylists, but I'd hope the Japanese would (regardless of vertical or horizontal) be able to wreck you with a punch to the torso if you stood there for it. What's the use of any punch if it doesn't come in like a Mack(tm) truck?

[gmanry]

Since I started this, I guess I should just step in and say that the punch that does the job is the correct punching technique, period.

Given the nature of the corkscrew punch, it seems like we are all relatively on the same page here. I find it interesting that some people (out in MA land, not here necessarily) attempt to describe this punch in the form of a straight line. Maybe I am wrong, but the seiken typically rotates into line of the target from outside to inside.

Mas Oyama's "Essential Karate" describes this action well with photographs. I think that particular series of photos overemphasizes it for the purpose of the book, but this action should be coordinated with the turning and aligning of the shoulder, waist, hips and connecting to the feet on the ground.

Yet, I see a lot of people try to launch this punch in a straight trajectory at at target in many schools of karate (and especially TKD).

I am not saying a straight line is wrong, I am just saying that it does not synch up with my personal understanding of my punching technique. I tend to throw it with the outside to inside circular trajectory. The reason being that the body is really incapable of describing a straight line, and any straight line is only at an end point like a finger (which isn't doing the work) tracing a line. So, straight lines in the body are largely an illusion.

I do think that making raw beginners think that they are throwing a straight punch can be useful for keeping elbows in and shoulders relatively aligned, but it has its limit once that is accomplished.

What about the rest of you? Just curious, and let's try to keep it civil, as I doubt any of us has any magic bullets to mastery.

I have to say this but I'll keep it civil. Why is it that when someone with a scientific background gives folks an explanation of something using science and not assumption, many people tend to side with feelings over evidence. If my name was known and I had no medical education, you guys would be kissing my behind and using my stuff for reference. Just because you don't know me doesn't mean I don't know anything. In fact, the unknown people are usually the ones who really know. What does the populace, for the most part, know anyway? 98% of people are sheep, and that's why they're always getting took by psychopathic half-wits.

My experience as a Paramedic in a Level I Trauma Center, and now as a medical student, led me and my brother to do some research on our own. My brother is an Orthopedic surgeon. Do you think I'm gonna take some laymans opinion about a subject directly related to Orthopedics, over an educated and trained Orthopedist? I'm giving you guys anatomical, biomechanical, and physical reasons that the 3/4 twist punch is more stable than either the horizontal OR vertical fist.

I couldn't care less about what a bunch of "senseis" have to say on this subject, as I know what is truth and what is fallacy. If you only have opinion to back up your argument then I have to dismiss what you say as useless rhetoric. So everybody do what they want. Maybe we'll meet up at a seminar somewhere and we could talk in person, and explain to one another face-to-face what we mean. I don't know why I waste valuable time on this board. I guess it's because I thought that this was the last forum that's worth it's salt. Maybe I was wrong.

You can talk all you want about what you think you know, but do you have any proof? Any witnesses or empirical method behind the gab? Where is your research and understanding of modern scientific principles? Can you really claim to be a teacher of something without updated proof and with lots of antiquated conjecture? No wonder the MMAs (especially Brazilian JiuJitsu) look down on Karate and Kung FU as a bunch of outdated, ineffective mumbo-jumbo..

You are all right. A punch is a punch, and the situation dictates delivery. The horizontal punch is superior to the vertical punch and vice-versa. Which is it? It has to be one or the other. One is definitely more effective than the other, for most situations, and the situation defines execution. Blah, blah, blah, sounds like a typical American politician. Running around in circles trying to catch up with his arse!!! Where's your science and PROOF!

Bryan Seer

[John Bowden]

Originally posted by gmanry
I find it interesting that some people (out in MA land, not here necessarily) attempt to describe this punch in the form of a straight line. Maybe I am wrong, but the seiken typically rotates into line of the target from outside to inside.


Outside to inside is ok as long as it's a straight line! :) If your punch is curving or doglegging then your efficiency is blown and probably your energy is very low also...except in the case of a hook punch (which is completely different.)

Even if you are standing in horse stance punching at solor plexis in a very traditional manner, the fist should drive from the chamber straight to the target. Any straight line attack should be driving straight from start to destination without deviation or suffer from unecessary loss of power.

I see this as a very basic and universal concept. I'd be very interested to hear an argument against this.

[John Bowden]

Originally posted by Shorinichi


I have to say this but I'll keep it civil. Why is it that when someone with a scientific background gives folks an explanation of something using science and not assumption, many people tend to side with feelings over evidence. If my name was known and I had no medical education, you guys would be kissing my behind and using my stuff for reference. Just because you don't know me doesn't mean I don't know anything. In fact, the unknown people are usually the ones who really know. What does the populace, for the most part, know anyway? 98% of people are sheep, and that's why they're always getting took by psychopathic half-wits.

My experience as a Paramedic in a Level I Trauma Center, and now as a medical student, led me and my brother to do some research on our own. My brother is an Orthopedic surgeon. Do you think I'm gonna take some laymans opinion about a subject directly related to Orthopedics, over an educated and trained Orthopedist? I'm giving you guys anatomical, biomechanical, and physical reasons that the 3/4 twist punch is more stable than either the horizontal OR vertical fist.

I couldn't care less about what a bunch of "senseis" have to say on this subject, as I know what is truth and what is fallacy. If you only have opinion to back up your argument then I have to dismiss what you say as useless rhetoric. So everybody do what they want. Maybe we'll meet up at a seminar somewhere and we could talk in person, and explain to one another face-to-face what we mean. I don't know why I waste valuable time on this board. I guess it's because I thought that this was the last forum that's worth it's salt. Maybe I was wrong.

You can talk all you want about what you think you know, but do you have any proof? Any witnesses or empirical method behind the gab? Where is your research and understanding of modern scientific principles? Can you really claim to be a teacher of something without updated proof and with lots of antiquated conjecture? No wonder the MMAs (especially Brazilian JiuJitsu) look down on Karate and Kung FU as a bunch of outdated, ineffective mumbo-jumbo..

You are all right. A punch is a punch, and the situation dictates delivery. The horizontal punch is superior to the vertical punch and vice-versa. Which is it? It has to be one or the other. One is definitely more effective than the other, for most situations, and the situation defines execution. Blah, blah, blah, sounds like a typical American politician. Running around in circles trying to catch up with his arse!!! Where's your science and PROOF!

Bryan Seer


Bryan Seer

Bryan,

*flame on*

What a terrible attitude you have! Your attitude as some beginning medical student is astounding. You seem to repetitively show a terrible courtesy here to people esspecially and ironically on the karate forums.

I for one, speak as one who doth indeed hit like a truck. I'd wager that most karate-men of a brown belt level make a real effort to be able to punch like hell regardless of vertical/horizontal mumbo jumbo. You think a karate man needs a paramedic to tell him when his punches are stable or not? Do you not practice Karate?

What gall!

I've heard NHB fighters criticize karate men for alot of things, but this is the first time I've ever heard one accuse karateka of not knowing what theyre talking about regarding a strong punch!!!

Besides, the real mystery of punching doesn't lie in the twist or no twist. It's in learning to create alot of energy in a short time and learning to get the fist in contact with a moving body. Good grief, a decent karate man can use a palm heel and still wreck someone.
*flame off*

[gmanry]

Thanks for keeping it civil Shorinichi...good Lord...

I'll respond short and sweet to your post. Take 5 orthopedists in a room and discuss any physical training regimen undertaken by any olympic sport...see what transpires. It gets even more interesting if you examine flexibility routines...

Also, 2+3=5, 8-3=5, 2x2.5=5, many ways to get to the same outcome. Your desire for the supreme correct answer may be dangerous in something as complex as combative science.

Mr. Bowden,

I am sorry but I don't agree with you. I know what you are saying, but I think it pertains more to my finger drawing a straight line illustration.

From Oyama's photo series, the line is not straight but curved, actually a spiral or corkscrew in the literal sense. I don't think anyone would accuse Mas Oyama of not having an efficient punch, regardless of what you may think about him overall.

I was just at the mirror watching my punch, and at first glance it seems like a straight line, but as I slow it down and examine it, I see that it is really a subtle curve, admittedly very subtle.

You know what would be interesting is to get some of those stroboscopic balls they use for mapping video games. I bet there is a poor mans way to do that. Hmm, Mr. Seer wants some evidence of the things we say. It may take me some time, but I think I may be able to do this with a video camera and some glow balls or glow sticks. Regardless of the outcome, wouldn't that be neat?

[John Bowden]

Originally posted by gmanry

Mr. Bowden,

I am sorry but I don't agree with you. I know what you are saying, but I think it pertains more to my finger drawing a straight line illustration.

From Oyama's photo series, the line is not straight but curved, actually a spiral or corkscrew in the literal sense. I don't think anyone would accuse Mas Oyama of not having an efficient punch, regardless of what you may think about him overall.

I was just at the mirror watching my punch, and at first glance it seems like a straight line, but as I slow it down and examine it, I see that it is really a subtle curve, admittedly very subtle.



Hmmmm. Well point 1. photos in books regardless of the source are not really too useful I think.

I'm contemplating my own reverse punch, and in analyzing it, I see that my intent is a pure straight line, however there is a bit of curve introduced as my hips open up. The fist itself is being driven in a straight line by my upper body (at least as straight as humanly possible) however as my lower body runs its rotational and weight transferring processes, I can see a bit of curvature being introduced to the actual path.

I guess, I have to restate my position that the intent should be to drive it straight! :) Perhaps a bit of curvature is introduced by emphatic driving of the hips/legs/bodymass as the hips move out somewhat and weight travels basically straight forward (not actually in the vector of the fist.)

I still maintain that alot of diagrams aren't required to tell if your punch is a whopper or a lovetap.

I've worked with people who's form in practice is absolutely textbook appearing. When put into application, they actually seem to get better at full speed. When analyzed in slow motion video (I have done this) the form actually appears sloppy and ugly as hundreds of microadjustments are made dynamically with the moving partner.) This is only apparent when slowed down in video. In full speed good technique against a real opponent seems flawless.

So, I guess ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that the intent should be pure line. The reality may involve a curve because you are trying to punch with all that you have. In reality when you try to tag someone they are gonna move and you are gonna have to make some micro or macroadjustments to make up for it.

Sorry if I've totally diverged from the corkscrew question!


If you punch under a different theory and you punch hard as hell, keep going that way! Ultimately punching hard as hell is all that matters.

[gmanry]

I agree completely that the intent has to be in a straight line. Our conscious mind can't do the calculus that our muscles and nervous system can.

I think what is important is that the trajectory has to be typically perpendicular to the target, although even that can be adjusted if one is trying to displace something like the ribcage.

What originally got me thinking about these things was kicking. particularly front kick. So many people learn it in 90 degree extensions which the hip, knee and ankle really can't do. So many people rarely get beyond the basic form of that type of up, out, back thinking. A front kick can come in many varieties, but it is not generally most efficient when it is lifted and thrust out. The break in motion required to readjust the trajectory robs it of its efficiency. So, one day I started looking at punching too. As I read and experimented, I found that subtle curves are what really produce the most efficient movement for the body.

It is like the difference between pure theory in a lab with perfectly controlled conditions and what engineers have to do in the real world.

I agree, espcecially for beginning students, that the straight line should be the model.

I also agree that personal training experience is paramount, but I also think that modern science has something to tell us about what we do. Olympic athletes are the best because of science being behind their indomitable wills. I think Mr. Seer is correct to call on science to test certain issues. However, science is a protocol or method that is only as powerful as the user's understanding (and this is not a slam on you Mr. Seer). So, we have to be careful with our use of it in examining what we do. Experimental methodology is very tricky.

I appreciate all of your responses, and I am just here to try to come to a better understanding of what it is I think I am doing. Quite often, I haven't a clue...stupid luck keeps me breathing sometimes.

:D

[John Bowden]

Luckily for us, karate isn't really about using Olympic coach-scientists to optimize our punching for that final extra .023% efficiency. Once you can hit hard as hell, you can move on to learning to hit people who don't want you to hit them hard as hell. In fact, learning to hit those guys is the real trick of karate.

Really, in martial arts, so many factors can come into play, you can end up with thousands of competing philosophies on which is the best way. Ultimately, I think they are all good if they are effective for the operator.

[gmanry]

I agree, I just am on an analysis kick right now. So, I thought I would share it. Sometimes I just accept things as I see them, and sometimes I like to examine the details. I am in a details mood lately.

I agree that in the long run you have to just act and react in combat. However, better basics, especially for beginners, can be formed if we dig a little.

Thanks for the thoughtful commentary. I know it made me have to go to the mirror once or three times. :)

[Steven Malanosk]

To loosley quote a person who did what you may call a little research:

"When I first began training, a kick was a kick, and a punch was a punch.

After awhile, a kick became more than just a kick, and a punch became, more than just a punch.

Now that I understand what I am doing, a kick IS a kick, and a punch IS a punch."

End of Quote

You see, knowledge is full circle.

Now the STREANGTH of the individual circle, that is another story.:smokin:

[Joseph Svinth]

[lurk mode off]

Feld, Michael S., Ronald E. McNair, and Stephen R. Wilk. "The Techniques of Karate," Scientific American, 240:150, 1979; see also http://hometown.aol.com/karatephysics/PhysicsofBreaking.html, http://www.discover.com/may_00/featphysics.html, and http://www.u-s-t-f.com/featphysics.htm

- and -

Schwartz, Michael L. and Geoffrey R. Fernie. "Biomechanical study of full-contact karate contrasted with boxing," Journal of Neurosurgeons, 64, 1986; see also http://www.umich.edu/~mvs330/w99/kicks/discussion.html and http://www.dctkd.org/bibliography/readInfo.cfm?pubID=251

- and -

Flanagan, S. "Use of the wrist in the vertical punch and the twisting straight punch," Journal of Asian Martial Arts, 9:1 (2000). To my knowledge, the article and illustrations are not online, but a review appears at http://www.dctkd.org/bibliography/readInfo.cfm?pubID=227 . Back issues are available from ViaMedia for about US $10.

[lurk mode on]

[passions108]

I aways thought the corkscrew was the blocking action prior to the impact. Silly me.

[Jussi Häkkinen]

Passions108: Please, sign your posts with your full name.