Cocking the Fist at the Hip

In martial arts, some anyway, there seems to be this “requirement” one cock the fist at the hip to apply most strikes. I have commented on this as a great teaching tool for the beginner but when applying principles of martial systems the cocking to the hips ceases for other more practical reasons including the important adherence to those principles. 

Then, reading or re-reading the book “In the Name of Self-Defense” by Marc MacYoung I came across a quote that gave me a “Oh really” type moment. He states that, “next to getting off line, getting people NOT to draw back is the second most difficult unconscious behavior to break. Cocking back is deeply embedded in our psyches and in some weird ways.” The weird ways explanations is this, “read the book.”

It then seems to me to explain why so many higher graded karate-ka tend to stay with those inefficient “cock the fist” type moves because it matches up with our embedded instinctual habit of cocking back or drawing back a fist to either warn of impending danger of violence or actually applying an overhanded punch to an adversary - usually in social monkey dance situations I think. 

Think about the cocking back to the hip then striking forward. First, can you say telegraphing. Second, can you say too much time to cock and then strike allowing you to move off centerline, if you have broken that embedded aspect of your psyche, and then applying your own, more appropriately applied principles of power, technique. 


I can also now see why it has been difficult for me to adjust to this paradigm but also why so many default back to this more instinctual way of humans to apply such things in violence vs. the fast, hard, close, surprise like application of immediate, direct and explosive action in a violent conflict. Can we say, “Doah!”


2 comments:

  1. I agree that telegraphing a strike -- either out of incompetence or posturing is bad news. Clearly that's what MacYoung is talking about. This needs more context, though. There are other reasons for pulling your hands back.

    If you're using kata as a primer for self-defense applications you'll know that when a hand retreats to the hip it usually has something in it. When it retreats to the armpit it's a rear-elbow strike.

    Think of Seisan, Charles. (For your readers' edification this is the first kata taught in Isshinryu karate.) Open-hand (haito) grab-and-pull to the hip, and especially double-stacked fists on the hip are not preludes to strikes; they're the completion of a move.

    The stuff that's taught to beginners in haste and what's understood properly at the higher levels tend to be vastly different. It needn't be that way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks John, all good points but as to the striking aspect alone as a technique for self-defense my post stands. All that you present as you state are great teaching tools especially for the novice levels and taking it beyond that level when you reach a higher level of understand counts absolutely. I guess I am making a point that many don't move up to a higher level and distinguish such things as you eloquently present in your comment. So, thanks for adding it in, it does make things a bit clearer.

    ReplyDelete