16 posts / 0 new
Last post
shotokanman70
shotokanman70's picture
Too much Emphasis on hip rotation in Shotokan?

In the name of generating power, hip rotation is highly emphasized in Shotokan karate. The truth is, there are many ways to increase impact into a target. With the obsession on hip rotation, other opportunities for power generation are often neglected by Shotokan practitioners. In this video I use the standard reverse punch (gyaku zuki) as an example of how what is perceived as "good form" can sometimes come at the cost of potential power loss.

Side note: This video was picked up by a couple of Karate Facebook pages and generated a lot of discussion/debate/emotion. Some insisted that I was confusing kihon and kumite and missed the point entirely. IMO, kihon needs to be functional. I think Shotokan kihon is far too formal and because of this has lmitations. Note that in the video I am not suggesting that hip rotation is a bad thing. It's just not the only thing.

Hope you enjoy the video.

cheers,

Andy Allen

Zach Zinn
Zach Zinn's picture

Interesting video Andy, some good food for thought.

There are a bunch of correct ways to punch. I've felt insanely hard punches from wildy different styles - both heel up and down by the way, which are two separate approaches to my mind. My issue with the classic gyaku-zuki (which btw, exists in a "smaller" version in some Shorin Ryu) is that people's spinal posture (kind of leaning back with the head straight up) dampens the power gained by the big hip shift...the power only moves on a horzontal plane that way. it's also just bad to have your head sticking up and back for other reasons, like it being easier to hit. So, I strongly agree on "the lean."

A smaller hip shift and less rotation combined with better combative posture might be a more balanced approach. Even after boxing though, I'm not convinced that heel up punching is "best", it's definitely best before someone makes tactile contact, when you have room to move; after that a stable posture is a good idea. In my experience it's not always a good idea to fully pitch your weight forward when punching, as there are concerns other than power. Once limbs are entangled at closer range, we will not have room to do tsuri-ashi anwyay. Same with rotation, I think it's good to know how to have shorter , more conservative punches, and longer ones that rotate heavily and use the shoulder. I don't see those as exclusive tactics.

So, I also think useful to learn to hit from static positions, to me that is as much a tactical question as a power generation thing, Sometimes there is no room to move forward.  I start students off with static, then add in tsuri-ashi. Now that I've experienced Boxing footwork, I'm integrating that also, which is basically tsuri ashi in every direction!

One interesting thing to note, when you learn boxing footwork, part of what you learn is going backwards and laterally with combinations, you  cannot use the back foot the same way when moving backwards, and not when moving laterally with the back foot either, it only works when moving laterally with the lead foot or straight forward. When you move laterally with the back foot, or move back, you end up punching "off the back leg" in practice, it doesn't look like one, but honestly it feels more like a "heel down" Karate punch. In other words, you "root" into the back foor when you have to move and punch this way. Similarly, you only use the  forward mass and hip twist (via the foot in boxing) when it is a "power punch" - that goes for hooks too, and of course not all punches thrown in boxing are power punches at all. Not a direct comparison to Karate, but even in boxing context matters, I'm learning there is not just one boxing punch, there are a number of ways of doing the same thing.

I think that frankly Shotokan stances are too deep sometimes, period. I mean we know there are historical reasons for that change. I've seen some arguments for them in terms of leg strength etc.,  to me though they tend to favor people with well, your body type, and don't work as well for stumpy people like me. I have no mobility whatsoever in stances that are typically "shotokan deep", once I shorten them up they are fine.

On the hikite thing, the place where we use hikite is is to grab a piece of clothing or something else, pull and strike. It was never meant as a motion to be utilized at "free movement" range in my opinion.  I'm sure you do it with the belt attached to your heavy bag. So, the issue might not be that people are punching using hikite, but that is (often) the -only- kind of punching that beginners do, and they do not understand it's purpose. I do agree that it creates bad habits when done alone, but it works fine in the context it was intended for - which probably should be taught along with the technique itself.

Heath White
Heath White's picture

Andy, I thought that was a great video, and Zach, I am again interested in your input.  (Thank you for the long reply comment on the other thread btw!  Extremely helpful.)  I had one question after viewing Andy's video.

In the comments on the video, there is a short discussion about punching form.  Traditional karate punches have the elbow tight to the ribs and pointing down on impact; boxers generally wing the elbow out a bit more, which feels more natural to me, and that's the way Andy does it in the video.  I wonder if Zach has any thoughts about this difference after  his boxing lessons.

I think keeping the elbow down stacks your bones better and minimizes "squish" upon  impact.  (Try winging the elbow out on a makiwara and you'll immediately feel the difference.)  And I  have wondered  if that traditional method of hitting might work better if you don't have gloves, which are going to add squish anyway.  I'm curious if anyone has thoughts on this.

Zach Zinn
Zach Zinn's picture

Heath White wrote:

Andy, I thought that was a great video, and Zach, I am again interested in your input.  (Thank you for the long reply comment on the other thread btw!  Extremely helpful.)  I had one question after viewing Andy's video.

In the comments on the video, there is a short discussion about punching form.  Traditional karate punches have the elbow tight to the ribs and pointing down on impact; boxers generally wing the elbow out a bit more, which feels more natural to me, and that's the way Andy does it in the video.  I wonder if Zach has any thoughts about this difference after  his boxing lessons.

Generally yes, but it's hard to compare, since (in the Olympic style boxing I am learning at least) the default "chamber position" is basically with your hands up against your ears, so it is in some ways kind of a short punch in comparison to Gyaku-Zuki. You are taught to throw it straight out, but for a few different reasons people's elbows sometimes flare out. The basic 1-2 at my gym also has a defensive component, you over-rotate your punch so that your shoulder pops up to defend you. In practice, this makes people's elbows come out...though my coach insists it doesn't need to. You also extend yourself forward in boxing in a manner that would get complaints in Karate. I think in some ways this is just karateka being stodgy, on the other hand, in boxing you do nto need to worry about someone exploiting your posture or over-extension by grappling you, and that has to be kept in mind. this is one of the reason that the standard MMA stance is not the standard boxing stance.

e wrote:

I think keeping the elbow down stacks your bones better and minimizes "squish" upon  impact.  (Try winging the elbow out on a makiwara and you'll immediately feel the difference.)  And I  have wondered  if that traditional method of hitting might work better if you don't have gloves, which are going to add squish anyway.  I'm curious if anyone has thoughts on this.

Not only gloves but handwraps completely change how you punch, there are some serious benefits to it - you can hit a moving target hard without worrying about your hands much, and you can really let loose. It basically turns your fists into these dense, heavy little bags, the quality of impact is different. It's completely neccessary to take care of your hands in boxing, even on bags. In my gym there are ten bags of different kinds all suspended together so that the more they are hit, the more the others move. The bags flop around everywhere and that is part of the training, moving around an awkwardly shifting target, hitting it, slipping it etc. It's different from how Karateka (or even Muay Thai etc. people) use bags generally. It really adds a whole new dimension to striking, it tfeels like going from 2d to 3d! It's kind of hard to go back to my garage heavy bag and it's limited movement.

I definitely feel like the Karate style punching is better for bare hands, and I also honestly think it's probably a better method as you age as well. I try to integrate as much of the Karate style punching into my boxing as I can without getting yelled at. It's not too hard for me because, being a Goju Guy my posture just needs a little modification to be acceptable for boxing, and I don't really do a big hip shift anyway. All the power stuff I learned in my Goju (granted, I've had an exceptional teacher) I have found easy to apply on the bags using "boxing posture", and so far the one thing I have not been faulted on at all is my ability to hit hard. Everything else the coach rides me about constantly!

Anyway you have to keep in mind that with boxing, the loyalty is to winning boxing matches, and some tactics will reflect that specifically. I think it teaches a fantastic set of basic skills that could be applied to self-defense in an intentional program (and in fact it does so very efficiently, probably more efficiently than anything else I've seen if I'm honest), but the primary concern is winning boxing matches, not self-protection. There are lots of artifacts from that that may or may not transfer - as we discussed in the other thread.

http://www.functionalselfdefense.org/boxing/

This guy has some interesting stuff on boxing for self defense vs. boxing matches.

I hope I didn't derail Andy's thread too much, I hope it's somewhat relevant just because we are talking about different methods and their purposes.

Nate Tam
Nate Tam's picture

Andy, this is copied and pasted from your page, but I responded with this. In short I think you're totally on point if you regard power generation as our priority in Shotokan.

" I think noting that we emphasize hip rotation, especially in techniques like gyakuzuki is worthy of mention.

That being said. I think this video leaves too many stones unturned.

1. Yes any additional transfer of bodyweight provides extra power in the technique. However, by Andy's own definition, you're moving your mass forward by swiveling on only 1 hinge of the hips. Of course you can transfer more mass by stepping in, or by using tsuri ashi, or yori ashi- but we already practice doing these.

2. Grounding your technique through the heel is probably one of the biggest issues in traditional karate, but here's what I'll say about that. IT ALL DEPENDS. Firstly, you're always going to have a better ground reaction when your heel is on the floor, so depending on your own personal connection and skill level, you may get better power this way. For me, this is true, but I also am measuring power by penetration force, not just pure impact, which is where lifting your heel and pushing with the balls of your feet could work better. Yes you're inherently restricting some movement, but that's also by using a deep stance. My personal opinion is that too many shotokan schools teach deep stances as a means of stability, but that's not true. You can have lots of stability and MORE mobility, including space to keep your heel on the floor with a smaller stance. Keeping your heel down may be better suited in a go-no-sen timing situation, where your target has already moved close, and your footwork has led your rear foot to carry most of the weight before striking. But if you're trying to catch sen timing or earlier the distance may call for the heel up-depending on if you can maintain a stable kinetic chain through your body that way. (again- whole other discussion that may need another video)

3. I'm all for rotating your shoulders past square. ;) the caveat here is that if you over-rotate you could be losing power cause you're pushing your shoulder out too much, and losing the connection to your lats, and then core. This also means that the sweet spot for impact is farther out from your center, taking more time to deliver, and also has the potential for creating injury over time if not properly executed.

4. If your goal is ONLY to create more power, then yes, leaning can be a great tool. However, this brings me to my main concern with this video. Power shouldn't be the priority- it can sometimes, sure. But for me personally, I think what makes good technique is how usable and efficient it is. I wan't to still be able to perform when I'm older and weaker. I also think this dips into combat a bit. Yes, boxers and muay thai practitioners produce more power, and they're more front heavy, that doesn't mean they practice timing and striking the same way we do, or that it's better only because they produce more power. I'd rather deliver a punch at 80% my power capacity with great timing and still have the control and balance to be able to switch my positioning, cover, or continue if I miss the target or get blocked, pushed, trapped.

IN GENERAL, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING SAID IN THIS VIDEO- with the caveat that this puts power over other elements of our technique.

The emphasis on power may sidetrack from what makes shotokan so useful. Just ask Lyoto Machida, widely regarded as the one of the most elusive and difficult fighters to go up against in all of MMA history. He personally attributes this to his shotokan background with a style that emphasizes timing and balance to outmaneuver and outlast his opponents.

Not that producing more power is ever a bad goal, or option, but isn't my personal choice when sparring at least.

Great video! Great discussion!"

btw, I'd love to see a video or video series on each of these elements. There's seminars of information and nuance within each of your points, but I get it- you can't really go into the weeds in a YouTube video.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

shotokanman70 wrote:
… an example of how what is perceived as "good form" can sometimes come at the cost of potential power loss.

I call this “artificial success criteria”. They pick something arbitrary and label it “good”. It’s an entirely subjective measure. We pragmatists (true traditionalists) measure by effect and hence “good” is objective, testable and measurable.

Power always needs to be balanced against tactical considerations of course. However, it remains measurable. We can see, better yet feel, how powerful or not something is.

My experience is that debates around this are pointless and we should skip to the test. Years ago, I posted a video about heel up vs heel down. The point I made was that which is best is dependent on circumstance. A swathe of pseudo-traditionalists argued the heel should always be down. Realising the pointlessness of the discussion, I said there were hundreds of videos of me hitting with the heel up on YouTube and asked for video showing someone doing the same strike harder with the heel down. Zero takers and one claim of “I would, but my camera is broken.”

shotokanman70 wrote:
Side note: This video was picked up by a couple of Karate Facebook pages and generated a lot of discussion/debate/emotion.

There’s so much dogma here. If a method is truly better, then it will be demonstrably better. I think the best debate tactic is “OK, show me”. Otherwise we go round in circles as they attempt to justify things from an emotional perspective.

I generate power in the way I do because I’ve not come across anything that works better. If I do, then I’ll adopt it (as I have done in the past).

I’m simply not emotionally invested in dogma and choosing to be a poorer martial artist as a result.

shotokanman70 wrote:
Some insisted that I was confusing kihon and kumite and missed the point entirely.

No wonder karate doesn’t have the greatest of reputations when we have some of our number are claiming non-functional practises lead to functional application via an unidentified process. Kihon is not an independent practise but one that should be inextricably linked to kumite (as Motobu, Funakoshi, Miyagi, Mabuni, etc all said it should be!).  

3K Karate: Kihon, Kata and Kumite and never the three shall meet :-)

shotokanman70 wrote:
IMO, kihon needs to be functional.

I agree and one would like to think that’s a no-brainer. Thankfully, the tide is turning precisely because practicality can demonstrate its utility. Dogmatic adherence to something less functional can plainly be seen to be exactly that.

Keep fighting the good fight!

All the best,

Iain

shotokanman70
shotokanman70's picture

Great insights. I agree with all your points! Definitely, heel down may be a better option at close range for a straight punch. Not the captions in the video read "Potential Power Loss". I guess I was targetting the Shotokan audience which is generally focussed on long range striking without arm entanglement. I should have mentioned that explicitly. Thanks for commenting. 

shotokanman70
shotokanman70's picture

A number of people called me out on my "bad form" re my flaring elbow. I have punched that way for years as it feels more natural to me. It certainly makes it easier to find the head in a jodan punch. You can get over the guard or a raised shoulder that way. I even flare my elbow a bit when I'm doing kata but not for any particular reason other than it feels better to me. I have spent a LOT of time on the heavy bag during the early pats of Covid. I don't find keping the elbow tucked any better. I think the makiwara is a different tool which requires diferent technique. The more you bend the board, the more it pushes back which is not the case for a human body. Iain mentions this in a "heel down" video.

shotokanman70
shotokanman70's picture

Hey Nate. Good points. I mentioned above that I was targetting the Shotokan crowd which I failed to communicate in the video. Oops. Shotokan is sold as a powerful and explosive type of karate.... (although many Shotokan peeps never actually hit anything). So my point was that for a style that promotes itself as great for power, it is missing some key elements for producing powerful straight punches.

Cheers

A

shotokanman70
shotokanman70's picture

Thanks, Iain. I'm thinking of starting a series of videos on "Karate Myths". Nothing that hasn't been done before but it might be fun to stir the pot some more ;)

A

Nate Tam
Nate Tam's picture

Andy, I'm a Shotokan practitioner as well. I've been around too many dojo's that practice what I believe we both agree are pointless philosophies in Shotokan- never hitting anything, 3k karate only, no flexibility in applying the fundamental aspects.

I feel lucky to be a part of a school who does teach these things, but also encourages exploration and application. My sensei trained under Nishiyama for 25 years for reference. At the end of his life, he started recognizing the aspects of Shotokan most people miss out on and emphasized timing, health, and efficiency over power. Power can come from all kinds of body mechanics, but if you have good timing, it can make up for a lot.

My points are in conjunction and support of your video- I just wanted to add to the power generation heavy conversation.

All in all, I totally agree (mostly), and like Iain said, all depending on circumstance. I'm inherently weary of anyone that says unequivocally there is only 1 way to make the "best" karate technique- because "best" nearly always depends on your own definition and circumstantial framework.

Cheers.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

shotokanman70 wrote:
I'm thinking of starting a series of videos on "Karate Myths". Nothing that hasn't been done before but it might be fun to stir the pot some more ;)

I look forward to those! We need them too! Those myths are still not considered myths by many.

All the best,

Iain

Joseph O'Neill
Joseph O'Neill's picture

I really enjoyed the video Andy, was really well thought out and presented, and having done Shotokan, as well as boxed and kickboxed, I overwhelmingly agree with your comments about the shortcomings of Shotokan's power generation techniques and how a lot of beneficial techniques are overlooked.

Shotokanman70 wrote:
A number of people called me out on my "bad form" re my flaring elbow. I have punched that way for years as it feels more natural to me. It certainly makes it easier to find the head in a jodan punch

With regards to the winging elbow, I think if you can hit properly with it there's not generally a problem. The three reasons I tend to teach with a tucked elbow position are:

1) People can sometimes end up hitting with the palm/front of the knuckles (what I call "knocking on the door" punches) if they rotate too early. This can be mitigated slightly by keeping the elbow tucked (among a couple of other cues).

2) I tend to teach from a lower guard position from what it appears you do, which makes teaching the tucked punch easier than it is from a higher guard where you'd need to drop the guard to initiate the punch.

3) Winging can open you up for grappling much more than a tucked elbow position. English martial arts has a good video on this where he's discussing the vertical versus the horizontal fist (I can't find the video as I'm at work nd can't go through them all, but here's a link to his channel - some good stuff generally for us I think https://www.youtube.com/c/EnglishMartialArts/videos ) and how the vertical fist was often popular in classic English boxing precisely so you were harder to grapple with as it was easier to keep the elbow in. This is a practical case to be made for tucking the elbow compared to the aesthetic.

That said, if it works it works, and I do teach an over jab which has an extreme level of winging precisely because it's striking down over obstructing limbs. If people can't understand that there's things that work better for different people, different contexts, and different reasons, that sounds like their problem not yours.

Just my 2 pence. Really like the content.

Joe.

Zach Zinn
Zach Zinn's picture

It's worth noting here that Kata contain all sorts of punches. I think part of the issue with Karateka is that the way Kihon is often taught is somewhat incomplete, people ending up thinking a straigh seiken punch is the only thing to do, when really that is just a starting point.

For instance if I take the Goju Ryu kata and analyze punches used, a straight seiken punch is actually only there in a couple of places. Other places there are uppercuts, backfists, hooks of a kind, etc. There is arguably even an overhand in Sepai.

I think one of the biggest tasks for Karate to re-functionalize is to develop kihon which accord with kata and combative principles. Most of the modern post WWII kihon setups don't, they weren't desgined for function and it shows. In way, I think we are better simply re-designing the map based on kata, rather than using the kihon some of us were likely initially taught. I'm not saying throw the baby out with the bathwater, there's good and bad there, but much of the kihon and Karateka line drills out there can be greatly improved, and probably should be.

On people and their saxcred cows:

I decided long ago that much of the Traditional Karate community is not actually interested in anything functional. They say they are, in the manner of claiming "yes of course it works for self defense", then continuing with the same flawed approach. I have long time friends and Karate acquaintances that will just accuse you of "thinking too much" when you bring up these issues. So, I've given up trying to convince those people in any way that there are different ways of approaching things. It doesn't really matter what you say, some people have already made up their minds and will not apply critical thinking to their practice.

shotokanman70
shotokanman70's picture

All good points. Iain has said before that "You can't reason with the unreasonable". 

Zach Zinn
Zach Zinn's picture

shotokanman70 wrote:
All good points. Iain has said before that "You can't reason with the unreasonable".

You can't, but putting good stuff out there for people can attract people who -are- interested. The applied Karate world is small, but many people in it (unlike some of areas of martial arts) are "lifers". So, good material really gets used when it gets in the hands of the right folks I think. I've enjoyed your stuff and encourage you to continue with the vids, there's a lot of value to it.