one strike/one kill

mikemurphy · Post by **mikemurphy** » Thu Jun 29, 2000 11:56 am

One strike/one kill. A very interesting concept. We train in all our kata (Uechi) that our counter-attacks will be the end-all to the confrontation. Is this the practice of budo seeping through? The perfection of technique? The simple fact that the more we train, the more likely that this one technique will actually end someone's life just like that? Is it possible? Of course it is. We know that everything is possible. Ask Dr. X or Sensei Bill Glasheen about the medical implications and possiblities of hitting anyone anywhere. You simply do not know what the reaction of your opponant will be. Do we? Anyone tells you different then they are way beyond me.

In the Jujitsu arts, the strikes are much different in this aspect. Instead of hitting along a meridian point and sending a shock along a vital path, I'm simply breaking an arm, wrist, or hand. Instead of waiting for some mystical reaction that "everyone" is supposed to have, I'm choking someone out. I'm not pitting my Uechi-ryu against my jujitsu, but does it seem to you that the strikes in the jujitsu are more realistic? Just pondering.

mike

Evan Pantazi · Post by **Evan Pantazi** » Thu Jun 29, 2000 3:36 pm

Murphy Sensei,

We will never know anyones reactions or if a particular person will react to a particular strike. I have not been able to affect Kyusho on several people (you even witnessed it). However please do understand that when we do target these points we do not stop to see if it worked, we merely continue wuth a transitional flow until the opponent is subdued. Many more people are susceptable than not to point strikes (and if trained properly targeting is possible in rapid spontaneous motion).

In comparrison when we grapple (standing or grounded) and attmpt a choke but miss, or try for the Nage and miss, we don't stop...we continue to flow with theopponent waiting and searching for that weakness. It used to really crack me up watching old Kung Fu Theater when a "Special Art" was used but they targeted about 72 point strikes without response. Then it actually made me take note: you try everything in your capability until the opponent drops, not harboring on why that one didn't do it.

------------------
Evan Pantazi
users.erols.com/kyusho

Jake Steinmann · Post by **Jake Steinmann** » Thu Jun 29, 2000 4:52 pm

Coming from a boxing background, I've always been very skeptical of the one shot/one kill concept. After all, if two pro heavy weight fighters can go at it for half an hour before a knockout, how likely is it that I'm going to be able to accomplish it with one shot?

Yes, I know that they're pro athletes, wearing gloves, can't target pressure points, ect.

However, I've seen in sparring a number of karateka who bought into this concept a little to much catch me with a good shot, only to stop and let me retake the offensive. Why? Because their one shot didn't drop me, plain and simple.

Can it be done? Sure.
Reliably...no. Hit/throw/choke/whatever in combination. The worst that'll happen is one punch will miss because the guy is falling down from an earlier punch.

Food for thought.
Jake

------------------
Defeat is worse than death. You have to live with defeat - Seal Team Slogan

mikemurphy · Post by **mikemurphy** » Thu Jun 29, 2000 8:53 pm

Evan and Jake,

Great comments! I guess it brings to the table the question of why we have a tendency to stand back and look at someone after we strike them. More often than not, we are actually giving our attacker time to recover and come back at us. This, to me, is the wrong way to practice. We must practice sequence so that we don't get caught relying on our "one punch." In jujitsu we look to Atemi, Nage, Kensetsu/Osae, and finish. Any one of these could end the fight; however, a person must be prepared to run all of them through.

Nothing is 100% reliable in the martial arts for sure. Perhaps practice/training should consist of more realistic situations in order to get people more accustomed to continuing the fight.

mike

Robert L · Post by **Robert L** » Thu Jun 29, 2000 11:00 pm

Hello Mr. Murphy,

Great new forum!

I think a throat shot or an elbo to the temple are 1shot/1stop.(either could kill easily) Beyond that I'm skeptical of 1strike/1kill.

As far as the strikes in jujitsu being more realistic than other arts. I tend to disagree. Jujitsu is a sport where eye gouging, biting, weapons, multi-opponents, ect. are never taken into account. Yes - jujitsu works aginst jujitsu, but only if all involved follow the rules.

I have done jujitsu for a number of years and I can see the value of cross-training in it. But it is not an "end all" either.

Geezzzz, that sounds harsher than I wanted it to. No offense intended. Just my $.02 cents worth.

Sincerely,
Robert Langford

mikemurphy · Post by **mikemurphy** » Fri Jun 30, 2000 4:10 am

Dear Robert,

I hate to say this, but a shot to the throat or temple do NOT necessitate a kill. I have seen many people take these shots full force either in person or on tv (UFC) and no one had died yet. Like I said before, it all depends of the person's body and the right timing.

I didn't mean to say that jujitsu strikes were more realistic, just that they are trained to be more realistic (budo vs bujitsu). That's all.

Jujitsu is NOT a sport where I come from. Although I am seeing a lot more competitions for jujitsu, I am skeptical of them for the rules that you state. But as for the techniques you state, my theory is that if it works, it's great. Therefore, if you can bite as an atemi or on a kyusho point, gouge whatever, then that's great. Remember, jujitsu is a combat art. As for weapons, jujitsu is a sword art first (it just doesn't have a sword to work with). It's the art of the samurai without the sword. So weapons??? yes! Multiple attackers?? yes!!

I consider nothing to be an "end all."
Through cross training, I feel I get the best of all worlds and hopefully I can achieve the budo (perfection of technique) that I am looking for.

Your 2 cents is always welcome!!

thanks,

mike

RA Miller · Post by **RA Miller** » Fri Jun 30, 2000 11:37 pm

Mike,
I don't think the strikes are necessarily more realistic. The big advantage we have is the two-man kata. I don't need to guess at targets and if in doubt of the effect we can just use some force.

Robert, I don't know where you train, but classical jujutsu has no sporting aspect and eye gouging, multiple opponents, weapons and even biting are specifically addressed. (Well, biting is rare in armour, but sometimes you just got to say "If you're so tough, wht do you taste like chicken?")

Another difference that I've noticed with classical vs modern or even imaginary styles is that the new stuff tends to separate grappling from atemi. Most strikes will not stop a threat, but a strike delivered to an opponent who is immobilzed by an armlock and pressure point is far more likely to.

Rory

Gary Santaniello · Post by **Gary Santaniello** » Wed Jul 05, 2000 4:30 am

Having studied Aikido for a few years and had some Jujitsu exposure and being a 25 year Uech-Ryu practicioner, with some Kyusho practice, i would add some comment and/or opininion to this topic.

First, it is not the "Art" that is defeating ones opponent. It is the ability of the defender to adapt to the attack and utilize whatever opportunity the situation presents.

As we practice most of the arts that involve joint locks, jokes and throws, we may forget that in the dojo, the "Uki" is usually co-operative to the techniques. Going with the flow of the partner. Grab a construction guy's arm and twist it into a lock or hold ! Very different from the classroom mate.

Karate punches and kicks ? We practice our open hand techniques in kata but in sparring we must utilize "safer" striking, controlled fist and restricted leg shots. I would beg to differ with those who believe that a Shoken, Nukite, or Shuto executed properly with power to a vital neck area would be unaffective.

In other body area i can see how our strikes may be unaffective to a strong aggresive person. Although throat strikes "may" render useless, i believe they are a better shot for efectiveness and preferred in life threatening situations.

Kyusho, for those who believe it does not work at all, we who study it agree that it is not 100 % effective. But, what is ?
So, you try for vulnerable area and/or arm breaks, control techniques etc. IT ALL WORKS TOGETHER !

Many people question, which is better ? What is more effective ? I believe that it is the persons ability to utilize whatever art form they know when and if that opportunity presents itself.

------------------
Gary S.

Jake Steinmann · Post by **Jake Steinmann** » Thu Jul 06, 2000 3:54 am

"I would beg to differ with those who believe that a Shoken, Nukite, or Shuto executed properly with power to a vital neck area would be unaffective. "

I'm not sure anyone here would disagree with that sentiment, however...

Relying on the idea that you can successfully strike someone like that in a fight is, in my opinion, foolish. Yes, you might drop the bad guy with a good shot to the neck...or you might really make him MAD!

Why not hit him a few times? If the first shot gets him, great! You performed an awesome karate technique, and go home happy.

If not...well, you slug him a few more times and go home happy anyway...

If you rely on one technique to finish the job, you might find yourself in a bad position when it fails.

Food for thought...

Jake

------------------
Defeat is worse than death. You have to live with defeat - Seal Team Slogan

Gary Santaniello · Post by **Gary Santaniello** » Thu Jul 06, 2000 5:02 am

Jake,

I could also be pointing a 357 magnum at you. It is perfectly capable of "killing" you if it hits you in a vital area.

However, does that mean that because it "can" kill you, it neccessarly will ? Of course not.

I can appreciate the difficulty in hitting a particular area in a real fight situation. I would not argue that. However, those that continue to downplay any value in the open hand techniques within our system, i would question, why then spend years studying it if one believes it is all meaningless and inaffective ?

To be honest with you, i never worked on any controlled acuracy of open hand strikes to neck area points until training with Evan Pantazi.

Some choose not believe there is any validity in that either. Fine, however, if one "never" goes deeper into those applications in a way that programs one to think that way, you never will have a chance to use those strikes if needed.

Want to think in the minset of "punch, kick and block" ? That is fine to, for that is our sparring training, correct ?
There are occassions that the opportunity to strike more vulnerable area "may" present itself.

It is just another tool, no guarentee in any of it. The more you are familiar with, the better your chances.

------------------
Gary S.

Jake Steinmann · Post by **Jake Steinmann** » Thu Jul 06, 2000 7:27 pm

"However, those that continue to downplay any value in the open hand techniques within our system, i would question, why then spend years studying it if one believes it is all meaningless and inaffective ?"

It's not a question of open hand vs. closed hand. A shoken is a closed hand, if you want to be technical about it. But it can still be quite effective.

A closed hand strike can knock you out just as fast...it all depends on where you hit.

"Want to think in the minset of "punch, kick and block" ? That is fine to, for that is our sparring training, correct ?"

No..I want to think in terms of "hit, hit, hit...". Coach Blauer uses the creature from Alien as an analogy. Christiano Sensei refers to a rolling ball, building momentum as it goes forward. However you think of it, the idea is an overwhelming forward offense...in multiple forms.

"There are occassions that the opportunity to strike more vulnerable area "may" present itself. "

Absolutely. And if you can hit it, and knock the guy out, so much the better.

I'm not knocking training for the one shot ko. But many people I've known who trained it became so reliant on it that they were incapable of throwing a combination. When faced with someone who wouldn't fall down against their attack, they were clueless.

Practice both, be ready for either.

Jake

It is just another tool, no guarentee in any of it. The more you are familiar with, the better your chances.

------------------
Defeat is worse than death. You have to live with defeat - Seal Team Slogan

RA Miller · Post by **RA Miller** » Fri Jul 07, 2000 6:13 am

To bring this back a little to Jujutsu- the old styles were based on a specific assumption: For reasons beyond your control, you have been disarmed on a battlefield. When surrounded by people intent on killing you it is foolish and suicidal to try to immobilize one. Any injury that does not incapacitate leaves an opponent in your backfield, who may come crawling on hands and knees with a knife while you engage his brother.

The classic jujutsu strategy is the fastest, most efficient kill possible. It relies on focused impacts (most judo practitioners have never been taught the follow throughs that transform the basic throws into killing techniques) with the earth; spine breaking, and full power impact combined with _simultaneous_ blows, locks and throws. Continuous is good simultaneous (shoulder lock, knee strike, throw, elbow break and knee drop as a single continuous move, to draw one example from kata) is better.

The training is to break bones- it is nice if you hit the point on the corner of the ribs three fingers below the nipple line- but if you are off by an inch it makes less difference if you are striking to break then to "disrupt chi".

Rory

mikemurphy · Post by **mikemurphy** » Sat Jul 08, 2000 11:58 am

Again, whatever we train for, whether it be Aikido, Karate-do, or Jujitsu (be it old style or a more modern version style), we have to wonder whether or not the strike will actually do its worst (or best depending on how we look at it). I say that you just don't know. One person's anatomy will be different than another's, regardless of what art or methods we train by.

mike

Gary Santaniello · Post by **Gary Santaniello** » Sun Jul 09, 2000 3:48 am

Mike,

I agree with your comments completely. For we never really know what results we will get in a situation until it happens.

When some speak of strikes that can kill, not working under pressure, i think of a "special forces" friend who spoke of the "Mind set" in real life and death combat.
It was stated that the "element of suprise" was a great factor. Also the training was not of exchanging punches with the enemy, for ones "life" was at stake. Such tactics as breaking necks, collapsing windpipes, gouging eyes, cutting juggler vains, etc. was realistically used.

I doubt many martial art practicioners or instructors will ever be in a life threatening situation of that nature. But i am sure that swat teams, military secret operations, seal teams, etc. train in a much different manor as we do.

Food for thought.

------------------
Gary S.

RA Miller · Post by **RA Miller** » Sun Jul 09, 2000 4:42 am

Santaniello-san:

http://www.multnomah.lib.or.us/sheriff/CERT.htm
http://www.multnomah.lib.or.us/sheriff/CERT_award.htm

I am the DT instructor for the team. Hope I'm not being too sensitive.

Rory