Uechi-Ryu.com

Well this is certainly a nuanced discussion. I appreciate you articulating your point of view, Van. That will make it easier for us not to talk past each other.

The issue here really is defining what we mean as carefully as possible. Once that's done, then there won't be much in the way of disagreements.

Let's start here.


Attack what/where? And to what end?

Let's now go way, way back to the original quote.


As I interpret this, Bishop means that the end of the exhalation phase is more-or-less in timing with the intended moment of contact. Note my use of the word "intended."


What does Bishop mean by this? I know what I'm thinking with respect to interpreting Seisan and Fuzhou Suparinpei. And it's completely in line with what Ali is doing to Foreman above.

To answer your question, Van... Ali is hitting Foreman at the moment Foreman is EXPECTING to hit Ali. How is this done?

• In Seisan, you have your left going under/inside their right, or your right going under/inside their left. Their attack and your attack are completely in synch, with you triggering off their intent to attack. They don't hit you because you deflect their attack with your attack.
  ...
• In Fuzhou Suparinpei, you have your right going over/outside their right, or your left going over/outside their left. Their attack and your attack are completely in synch, with you triggering off their intent to attack. They don't hit you because you deflect their attack with your attack.
  ...
• In the Ali/Foreman fight, you see Ali's right cross going over/outside Foreman's left jab. (This is actually classic Wing Chun.) Ali's attack and Foreman's attack are completely in synch, with Ali triggering off Foreman's intent to attack. Foreman misses because Ali deflects Foreman's attack with his attack.

So... That's what *I* mean and am thinking when I'm agreeing with Bishop above. Breathing here is associated with the timing of the attack (usually...), but you're really not trying to aim for a particular part of the breathing cycle. Instead you're getting in synch with the attack cycle, and their breathing is going along for the ride. That MUST be the case if - as Bishop states - the breathing is "undetectable."


OK, Van, I agree with you. You are right and Bishop is wrong. I also teach how to attack WHILE moving. Hence there's absolutely no reason to assert that you can't be breathing while moving. Not being able to do that is just a sign of a beginner. (Mack Fisher, UVa's 2-time Most Valuable Boxer, taught me this circa 1977. He said it was a way to differentiate the veteran from the rookie boxer.) Perhaps Bishop is exposing a lack of depth of training and time in grade when writing this.

So this is where I go back to what I'm focusing on - synchronizing with the attack and not really focusing in on their breathing per se.

- Bill

Bill replied

The article I posted provides the reasonable answers to this, with which I agree in the general sense.

And also

_________________
Van

Bill

I agree. So if indeed Bishop meant to say that attacking the exhale was really an attack of an attack, then we have no disagreement.

But to put it as 'attack the exhale' is something I cannot buy because I don’t have enough information. What does he mean by it exactly...and
does he mean it in the context of a sparring match or in a reality situation?

Good luck in trying to attack an exhale by some punk[s] in a street gutter fight.

I have always marveled at the martial artists' total ignorance and denial of the effects of the chemical dump which are immediate upon perception of danger with ensuing physical and emotional/chaotic turmoil.

Imagine telling a student to attack the exhale of someone hell bent in causing you serious injury or death in a street fight_ as he really could _under the grip of the dump.

And not all, street attackers or other karateka, exhale with the delivery of force. So telling someone to attack the exhale sounds really ridiculous to me.

Attack the attack, yes, and even better 'move first' as Rory puts it_ to forestall any intended attack about to come your way.

_________________
Van

Or better yet, choose not to be in certain situations in the first place. It's really not that hard for all but young knuckleheads.

Unfortunately as parents of young boys, we must guide them through the years where they think more with the little head than the frontal cortex of the big head. One it seems gets big years before the other develops its synaptic network.

This is a bit of an aside, but... Lately I've been spending lots of time getting acquainted with the field of behavioral economics. It's the field that explains why people often don't act in their economic best interest, and what it takes to reverse this. I'm finding it fascinating how much that field parallels that which we've learned in the last 2 decades about the field of self-defense. In both situations, the tiny amygdala has more influence than we ever knew. And the more stressed someone is, the more marked that phenomenon.

- Bill

Excellent point, Bill. I would really be interested to hear more.

_________________
Van

LeDoux was positive about the possibility of learning to control 'the amygdala's hair-trigger role in emotional outbursts: "Once your emotional system learns something, it seems you never let it go. What therapy does is teach you how to control it - it teaches your neocortex how to inhibit your amygdala. The propensity to act is suppressed, while your basic emotion about it remains in a subdued form"'.

_________________




SILENCE!!! I Kill You!!!!

Chuck Norris wrote in his first autobiography (1987's Secret of Inner Strength) that when he was a tournament competitor one of the keys to his success was at each tournament to watch as many other bouts as he could to learn all he could about fighters he might be facing later in the tournament. But my question is how do the Ali and Norris examples translate to the streetfight scenario Van is talking about? A streetfight would presumably be against someone we have not been able to watch in action or via video to pick up on queues that we might be able to take advantage of. Also, could operant conditioning be a disadvantage if the opponent has a different follow-up to the trigger we use or if they use a fake to trigger the conditioning and then take advantage of it like Norris and Ali did?


As an aside to your aside, my Microeconomics Theory professor considered the naming of that sub-field as "behavioral economics" to be redundant and misleading, as economics as a whole inherently studies human behavior. As he pointed out numerous times during the course, one of the biggest challenges in the economic modelling we were learning is that we are attempting to model human behavior so all of the models have limitations. He did not object to the study of "behavior economics", it focuses on a major cause of the variability in economic models after all, just to the name chosen for it. Since the counterpart of behavioral economics is called "rational economics" he preferred the name "irrational economics".

_________________
Glenn

The Norris example is a non sequitur.

The Ali example shows that operant conditioning works. Since the military uses it in basic training, then we can pretty much presume it's relevant on the street.

You are engaging in operant conditioning when you train a move in a bunkai thousands of times.


Of course. Deception works as well. The 9/11 plane hijackings involved a massive deception. The conventional wisdom of a hijacking situation is that time is your friend. Delay, delay, delay, and negotiate. The PLANNERS of that scenario - and that's the key - knew this and took advantage of it. Only on United Airlines Flight 93 was additional information made available to the victims which - at the very least - allowed them to choose the way they were going to die.

But frankly most "street fight" situations do not involve sporting tactics. Most "street fighters" aren't that clever. They're just neurohormonally stimulated and want to hurt you. And the more "jacked" they are, the more predictable they become. A moth after all will always go to that flame. In some cases they have a complete lack of empathy (a.k.a. sociopaths), which can make them very dangerous.


Since it's not my primary field of study, then I didn't get to name it. But "irrational economics" is as good a name as any. It pretty much describes the phenomenon.

Irrational... but predictable. That's the key.

- Bill

Glenn, good questions. And there are so many ways to look at these concepts as you can see by the replies.

Let's go back to base one…

…the attacking of the exhale_ this was never qualified to my satisfaction, and it does not make any sense at all to me in particular, after my experience in 'sporting events' i.e. karate tournaments, and, unfortunately, in several real life fights….and in my studies as well as training with professionals in deadly force scenarios using guns.

During the deadly force scenario training at the lethal Force Institute, headed by the well respected Mas Ayoob and John Farnam of Defense training International, Jim Maloney and I were also treated to poignant accounts of real life deadly encounters by a number of attendees with various skill sets, from policeman to martial artists.

We were then placed in a 'duelatron' scenario where all those concepts became the real test for us as to survival or perish.

Operant conditioning does work, but as we were warned during the deadly force scenarios, we must be careful of what we 'condition to operate' and under what situations.

OK…

One very important lesson was that the fear response and the fight or flight response are hardwired and will trigger when our primal brain…senses a threat.

Is it really possible to inhibit the 'the amygdala's hair-trigger role in emotional outbursts'? Very possibly so as to emotional outbursts, but not very likely when survival is at stake.

The amygdala, is the brain’s threat center, and fear signals follow two paths on their way to the amygdala, the brain’s threat center.

http://www.fearexhibit.org/brain/wired

_________________
Van

It is now that we have to worry about our 'operant conditioning' _what have we fed this 'animal within' over time?

This 'feeding over time', will impact on our reaction time and quality of our response action.

Reaction time

The pioneer reaction time study was that of Donders (1868). He showed that a simple reaction time is shorter than a recognition reaction time, and that the choice reaction time is longest of all.

Now take the example of the counterpunch of the Ali/Foreman fight. Just plain consummate skill. But counter punching is a high art and boxing is the best example . It is the epitome of sport fighting, and because sport fighting eliminates most of the disruptive street-fighting nastiness_ it makes it more refined, and this high art becomes the pinnacle.

The best counter punching involves only a few things:

Intersecting the line of force_
Preferably getting off the line of force_
Beating the line of force_

Action beats reaction every time, I don't think anyone on the forums needs to rehash that. This is what I see in that counterpunch.

But if one is preconditioned to waiting for the exhale, so he can attack it… forget about it.

Here is one game we can play in the dojo:

Take two partners, one's the attacker one receives, get one to attack and attack with a forceful exhale, the other focuses on the breathing and can counter on perception of the exhale......
That will get dull really quick

Now same drill but let the receiver attack on perception of intent, and watch the difference.

You'll notice how hard it is for the better fighters to wait for the breath, which in itself should tell something to the rest. Often these perception skills are missed and taken for granted, but identifying them and focusing in on them can speed the learning curve, not techniques but experiences change us.

Trying to condition us to operate in detecting an exhale cue, is really 'measuring' _ measuring is a really small window , this is really all about measuring , It works in sport because that window is artificially made bigger , the game lives there .

A street fight is a situation totally removed from this 'measuring skill set' if you think about it.

Uechi kata, for the ones who really understand the underlying concepts, is all about disruption and taking the lead, and this is the best 'operant conditioning' we should be aware of and practice.

In the real world, you are better off attacking when you sense the intent of an adversary to cause you serious injury or death, and to keep attacking until the threat is stopped…that is if you had no other choice…making sure that you will later be able to articulate the reasons for your actions with credible grist for the legal mill.

Some very good advice is this:

Conditioning to watching for anything in particular slows the reaction process, every stimulus slows the reaction time, and every conscious thought the same.

The best fighters encourage in not looking for particular cues , but to observe everything that is happening , not an exercise in looking for triggers but an exercise in mindful watching , shutting of the internal chatter and trying to absorb every detail from every sense .

These fighters try to personally cultivate a curious mindset , to watch curious to see what they will be handed next in life, simply a preconditioned investment in the now and what is actually happening, eliminating faulty distracting thoughts and perceptions(perceptions are often wrong)…and combine this mindset with the 'operant conditioning' to shut down the opponent's intent and the willingness to engage first.

_________________
Van

No offense.. But I often wonder why such theoritical discussions about things people know inside themselves??? I know(very well, unfortunately) what will happen in a Street Fight if I'm envolved.. I know my intent, and I know what the outcome will be... One of will be hurt (pretty badly) and usually, the other one won't be much better off..All you can do is train enough intelegently(or not) too be a little better off..The only reason I believe in Uechi is because I've felt it and used it in hundreds(if not thousands) of "real" situations...Am I a "thug" or am I a a "martial artist"??? At the end of the day... I'm alive!!!!

_________________




SILENCE!!! I Kill You!!!!

PS... So far and today... Tomorrow I'll think about new stratagy and defense.... LOL

_________________




SILENCE!!! I Kill You!!!!

_________________
Van

No offense taken, Stevie. Your part sobering, part humorous assessment is taken in the good spirit it was given.

Stevie does have a point. You can overthink something and miss the point that "it" works.

I'm not the most gifted person in the world when it comes to reaction. My reflexes are what they are. If I was that good, well I might have cashed in on the track in the Olympics. First off the line and first at the end of 100 meters gets you the Stud of the Year award.

But I'm not Study of the Year; I'm a mere mortal. And yet I can make this scenario work. Now how is that?

The secret to it all happens. "It" works because "it" is happening at places in our brain where we aren't overthinking something, or even thinking about it at all. Operant conditioning methods help get us there.

Here is a hint. I have noted that people with no musical skills can't do this. When working with folks in Seisan bunkai or dan kumite, I can spot them from 100 yards. The conversation goes something like this.

Bill: Have you ever played a musical instrument before?

Student: No

Bill: Have you ever sung in a choir?

Student: No

Bill: I can tell...

Class: I can't believe he just said that!



Remember what I said above.


Savor what I say in the next few posts.

- Bill

Let's start with comedy. Read carefully. Look for key words.

- Bill