Gyaku Zuki/Double Hip in Kata

In my experience this is a stylistic decision. I have been told to use the "extra" hip snap, similar to what Consterdine shows. I have also been told that this is an extra motion and not a part of the kata movement in another school. These are the details that often add up to make one ryu different form another I guess.

I worked both variations and arrived at my own opinion. I think there are a number of good ways to generate power in a punch. Not all of those ways seem to work in combination though.

I have reached a point where I am experimenting and determining which methods I like for me. I'm finding what works and what doesn't seem as effective for me personally. While I think that the kata can show you some useful techniques for striking, the ability to generate powerful strikes eventually rests on the individual. Of the ways I have seen, most or all of them can be incorporated into the kata's movements once they are understood. At least in my system's kata. Maybe our kata are more "middle-of-the-road" than some others but, there has been no method yet that radically varied from the mechanics of the kata techniques.

Hi,

As far as I know, Peter Consterdine has a Karate background in Shukokai Karate (Tani ha Shito Ryu) under Kimura Shigeru. So that double hip movement is a Kimura specific trait.

I am a Shotokan adept as well and every teacher has different concepts of power generation. The methods of Asai Tetsuhiko were different to those a Kase Taiji or Nishiyama Hidetaka promoted.

So when you like it and you can generate more power with that method than with the method you learned before, you should use it, Shotokan or not doesn't matter here.

Me personally I like the wave form Russell Stutely is promoting.

Regards Holger

Well the difference I see with Peter Consterdine's method and the traditional gyaku, is that in the traditional form you have a hikite that is usually included in the power generation. As Peter mentioned in the clip, if you are rotating through the centre you will have part of the power coming through the rotation on the returning side, but the point is if you have hold of the opponent you are pulling the oppoenent into your strike, adding to its effect.

What Peter Consterdines method does is lengthen the lever that is generating the strike, like going into 5th gear in a car. That means you get increased velocity in the strike. It looks fantastic. It's the same sort of action as you get with a baseball pitcher, or batter,or even a straight drive in cricket.

However, it's not the only means of generating power, but it is arguably the most powerful.

Kenwa Mabuni, in his book "Empty Hand - The Essence of Budo Karate" points out that the gyaku strike is realtively modern, that the older masters predominantly used oi tsuki for the strikes, and offered the theory that the reason for this is that gyaku was awkward with the traditional clothing. In fact, when people walked they did not walk with arms swinging on opposite sides as we take for granted now, but sort of strutted, with the same arm swinging forward as the leg moving forwards, and the suri ashi that accompanied it and is synonmyous with keeping our weight centred in karate today, had more to do with stopping their traditional footwear from falling off as they moved.

Another point he made, and one I have laso heard from Kris Wilder who also knows a thing or two about power generation, is that the hip movement as we think of it, is an artefact of power generation. There is inevitably some hip movement, but that is not what the focus should be. The same sort of whipping action occurs by first relaxing as you throw out the punching arm, but the body tenses on impact in a specific way and connected with the ground. So the focus is more on the leg tensing and ensuring the structure is as strong as possible timed with moment of impact. It works - it's very powerful and you can generate the power over a very short distance with this method, and return to kamae just as quickly.

I have been thinking ahout this quite a bit lately. There is another important aspect to power generation than merely force - which is mass times acceleration. There is impulse - which is the length of time the force is acting. I think the traditional hip generated gyaku will allow for a more powerful punch, but it requires a larger longer action to generate, and it does not necessarily maintain the force for long (impulse). The Kris Wilder approach of locking in the structure at the moment of impact has the effect of giving you a lot of impulse - so you get a strike and strong pushing action as well. No doubt about it after trying it out myself, I can regularly knock back someone holding the focus pad in a strong stance with relative ease using that method. Pretty sure if it was someones head they'd know they'd been hit.

Hi all,

the Gyaku-Zuki shows up in Pinan Shodan (Heian Nidan), Pinan Yondan (Heian Yondan) and at the beginning of Pinan Godan (Heian Godan). I currently hold the rank of 4th Dan in Shukokai karate, the double hip twist is the trade mark of Shukokai karate. Founded by the late Sensei Tani and developed further by his student the late Sensei Kimura. Sensei Kimura was said to have a punch which was like being hit by a cannon ball!

Shukokai is recognised as one of the hardest hitting styles of Karate due to the double hip twist, for those who train and teach Shukokai will know that once you have got that double hip twist, it filters into most of your other techniques such as blocks, kicks, Oi-Zuki and so on.

However, its not easy to pick up and like any style of Karate it takes a lot of time, practice and a life time of study. Our style of Karate Jikoboei Ryu (self-defence school) is a branch of Shukokai/Shito Ryu, but also combines elements of Shotokan such as Kokutsu-Dachi (back stance) in our Pinan Kata aswell as Neko-Ashi - Dachi (cat stance). One of our main studys is the double hip twist and spend much time on impact, puching thin air is ok but one must know and be confident that their techniques has power.

Dont forget that Shukokai, like Shito-Ryu Karate has a relatively high stance for quicker movement etc, so training the double hip twist i would say is easier to do than trying it from a deeper stance of that of Shotokan. Again, there is no right or wrong regarding stances, i train with some great Shotokan friends / Instructors and find training in deep stances very beneficial and would highly recommend training in both.

Kind regards,

Jason

P.s regarding the double hip twist on impact, also try training from a kneeling postion.

Hi Stevenson,

your exactly right about being relaxed untill the point of impact, this is key. Also the more relaxed you are the quicker you will be, and the faster and harder you pull the pulling hand the quicker and harder your punch will be also.

I also find that i hit a lot harder without lifting my heal, but everyone must find what works for them best.

Jason

I never will accept that this oi tzuki gyaku tsuki are punches. I would take it as a form of kazushi - of a push and pull, of a form of stand up grappling, but never punching.

To me punching is exactly what a Boxer/Kick boxer or the average Joe on  the street does.

Naturally one brings their hands up to a boxer type stance, and one naturally punches in boxer like strikes, not the standard karate formal striking. I never teach this oi tzuki/gyaku tzuki as punches ever.

Most arts even through the years of training etc stilltake a boxer stance and resort to kickboxer like sparring discarding everything that they've been taught - so what does that tell you?

but that's just me

Good thread

The double hip is now a part of almost every motion I make. I’ve trained with Peter for years and the double hip is far more versatile that the large “A, B, C” version he normally uses to initially illustrate the concept. It’s a mistake to view that version as the totality of the method and the finalised double hip can be far more “subtle” in appearance and very versatile. It can be used in all punches, kicks, even throws. Naturally it’s now part of almost every motion we make and that includes those in kata.

Power is an easily testable so I would recommend that everybody go with the most powerful method they have experienced. For me that is the double hip, and by a long way too. I’ve been lucky enough to learn it, and all the many ways it can manifest, directly from Peter over a period of many years, but it was the first time he hit me that convinced me that was the methods I wanted to make “mine”.

ky0han wrote:

As far as I know, Peter Consterdine has a Karate background in Shukokai Karate (Tani ha Shito Ryu) under Kimura Shigeru. So that double hip movement is a Kimura specific trait.

It was indeed Kimura who introduced this method to Peter. It was experiencing how hard Kimura hit that lead to Peter switching styles to Shukokai. Peter has further “contextualised” it (to quote Peter directly) for use in both self-defence based pre-emption and full contact karate competition. Kimura eventually moved on to other methods of power generation, but Peter stuck with the double hip as he believed that to be the most effective method and hence the subsequent innovations by Kimura were not to his tastes.

Stevenson wrote:

Well the difference I see with Peter Consterdine's method and the traditional gyaku, is that in the traditional form you have a hikite that is usually included in the power generation.

Personally, I’ve never seen hikite as having anything to do with power generation. To me, it is a method of controlling limbs (i.e. moving them out of the way of the target) or feeling where the target is through the body’s innate ability to make use of proprioception (i.e. grabbing the enemy with one hand while you strike them with the other). You see both of these methods used in real situations all the time as it is highly effective and comes to most people quite naturally. Karate kata simply take these innate and effective methodologies and build upon them. It is also entirely possible to use the hikite in this way and also use the double hip. It’s a damn fine way to do things if you ask me :-) I know people often explain hikite as being for power, but to me it simply does not hold up to close scrutiny no matter how widespread the view is. It does not add power and it leaves you wide open. If the hand is coming back to the hip it should have something in it otherwise it’s pretty pointless in my view.

Black Tiger wrote:

Naturally one brings their hands up to a boxer type stance, and one naturally punches in boxer like strikes, not the standard karate formal striking.

I disagree with this observation. Real fights look nothing like boxing matches and it’s very common indeed for a person to grip with one hand and hit with the other. That’s all hikite is. Most karateka don’t get this, but once that connection is made what you see all the time in kata (in an optimised form) is also what you see all the time in the rough and tumble of live situations.

Black Tiger wrote:

Most arts even through the years of training etc still take a boxer stance and resort to kickboxer like sparring discarding everything that they've been taught - so what does that tell you?

Sparring (as most do it i.e. consensual one on one fight using complementary techniques) and self-defence are very different beasts. If people approach self-defence like a spar it tells me that they’ve been badly taught. This thread is also relevant here so I’ll avoid repeating what has already been said in it: http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/content/why-do-so-many-styles-resort-kickboxing

Good thread this folks! Thanks to all contributors!

All the best,

Iain

Stevenson wrote:

Kenwa Mabuni, in his book "Empty Hand - The Essence of Budo Karate" points out that the gyaku strike is realtively modern, that the older masters predominantly used oi tsuki for the strikes, and offered the theory that the reason for this is that gyaku was awkward with the traditional clothing. In fact, when people walked they did not walk with arms swinging on opposite sides as we take for granted now, but sort of strutted, with the same arm swinging forward as the leg moving forwards, and the suri ashi that accompanied it and is synonmyous with keeping our weight centred in karate today, had more to do with stopping their traditional footwear from falling off as they moved.

This is quite interesting, Ive never heard that before, thanks for sharing it. 

Great thread and Appologise my response wasn't as clear as I wanted ti to be. the boxer like stance is when one steps on a back foot but with hands open in a naturally defensive way not literally stood as a boxer would stand; fists clenched ready to strike within a nano-second

To add to this awesome thread, I feel its good but compare it to General Choi's Sine Wave in ITF TaeKwonDo; practically every single Dojang in the world took on board this techniique without question. 

Is it a "Fad" that everyone adds to their catalogue with argueing or researching it because its come from "upstairs" as with the "sine wave" is suppose to add  the extra power etc as is the hip twist etc

Iain Abernethy wrote:

The double hip is now a part of almost every motion I make. I’ve trained with Peter for years and the double hip is far more versatile that the large “A, B, C” version he normally uses to initially illustrate the concept. It’s a mistake to view that version as the totality of the method and the finalised double hip can be far more “subtle” in appearance and very versatile. It can be used in all punches, kicks, even throws. Naturally it’s now part of almost every motion we make and that includes those in kata.

So back to my original question, then are we, for the most part, saying gyaku zuki and subsequently double hip is primarily a modern technique?  However, as Iain points out, that the double hip can be used in most every technique?  Are there more videos out there on double hip (whether from Peter, Kimura, Iain, etc?) and how to apply it to different techniques?  Id be very interested to see how make it more subtle and applicable to our repetoire.  Again, fascinating post, and thanks everyone for the input!

Here is an article on the "con" side of the double hip movement.  Very interesting article,

http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/08/whole-lotta-shakin-pre-loading-hips.html

Hi all,

As Iain has mentioned he trains regularly with Peter, so if what I say here is incorrect hopefully he can straighten things out.

I have had the pleasure of attending a couple of small group session with Peter a couple of years ago. Naturally the double-hip was the subject. Peter observed us striking the foam shield in the first instance, most of us there thought we knew how to apply the double-hip, we were wrong.

As far as I'm aware the double-hip moves away from the ''revolving door'' analogy of a conventioal Gakuzuki to a ''3 hinge door'' concept.

What I was doing wrong whilst training under Peter was failing to transfer my weight forward over my front foot, thats the common mistake  people who think they are properly doing the double-hip technique. When doing the technique you feel a sense of weight almost over balancing over the front foot, which for me encourages forward momentum. Add to this the ''C'' back rather than a ''forward arch'' is another unusual element. The front leg is required to be a little straighter, the rear leg should be shorter in stance to avoid rooting power in the back leg, preventing transfer of that power, which as Peter said, is a waste.

Then the arms, as you charge up the lead hip the striking arm should lag, the shoulder, at the last moment should move in the manner of piston, think of the drive motion of an old steam trains wheels.

All that for one punch.

Peter then took us through flowing combos using straights with both hands and hooks with both hands. Once the basic principle explained above starts to work the combos flow , the gaps between techniques becomes incredibly short even when adding kicks, and the power becomes significant. Getting the pads in place in time is a job in itself.

I teach double-hip in my dojo, the guys, after a number of weeks perseverance are, to a man, amazed at the increase in the power they can generate, with no extra physical effort.

The technique works on pre-emptive strikes, blitz punching or techically demanding combos using hands and feet, awsome. I personally can't do it any other way these days.

I hope I made sense, it is difficult in words, any technical errors or inconsistencies will hopefully be corrected by Iain.

All the best

Mark.

Hi all,

here are a couple more great Shukokai videos.

http://youtu.be/qkJi1ZaOmMA

http://youtu.be/T1pzUFBnkGE

Jason

Kevin73 wrote:

Here is an article on the "con" side of the double hip movement.  Very interesting article,

http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/08/whole-lotta-shakin-pre-loading-hips.html

Thanks for adding that link Kevin – it’s an interesting article. Unfortunately some of the arguments made are based on a misunderstanding of the double hip. Once we are beyond pre-emption (where things can be hidden through deception) the “prime” of the hip happens naturally as one technique flows to the other. It will actually reduce the gaps between techniques making the argument of unnecessary telegraphing null and void. People often see the big ABC version that Peter teaches initially (as in the clip) as the totality of the method. It’s a little like someone being taught a basic straight punch from horse stance during their first karate lesson and believing that is the totality of karate.

Mark B wrote:

As Iain has mentioned he trains regularly with Peter, so if what I say here is incorrect hopefully he can straighten things out …

… Peter then took us through flowing combos using straights with both hands and hooks with both hands. Once the basic principle explained above starts to work the combos flow, the gaps between techniques becomes incredibly short even when adding kicks, and the power becomes significant. Getting the pads in place in time is a job in itself …

… The technique works on pre-emptive strikes, blitz punching or technically demanding combos using hands and feet, awesome. I personally can't do it any other way these days.

That’s exactly it Mark. The double hip, when done right, increases power while reducing the time between techniques. More power and a faster rate of fire is the reason why I have fully adopted the method. It this “transitions” element that is missed by those who don’t fully understand the method.

nielmag wrote:

Are there more videos out there on double hip (whether from Peter, Kimura, Iain, etc?) and how to apply it to different techniques?  Id be very interested to see how make it more subtle and applicable to our repetoire.  Again, fascinating post, and thanks everyone for the input!

Peter’s “Training  Day Three” DVD – which I’m also on – covers the transitions element in more depth for those who have not seen it.

All the best,

Iain

Thanks Iain for the clarification.  I am not familiar with Peter's work other than seeing it mentioned here and in the article I posted.  I'll have to try and look further into it!

I am not convinced that the double-hip is a relatively new development. Nagamine and others have written about it referring to it as "Koshi.”  Yes, initial instruction in the principle usually emphasized the revolving door analogy.  It may be that this analogy was over-emphasized, because it seems to have become the last word for some.  There are yet others, who have never heard of it and call the movement “wasted.” 

 My most influential instructor emphasized it heavily in his teaching, and I am grateful for that.   It is in every kata I know in one form or another. The hip / weight transition depends on the stance and intended purpose. For some techniques, it is straightforward.  For others, it takes on a complex serpentine quality. 

 Sensei Constantine’s example is exemplary - particularly the weight transition. I am glad to see it getting more attention. 

My understanding is that beyond considerations of purely hitting hard, the other big question for whether or not you do hip rotation for hitting is what range your style usually operates at. Closer range styles like Goju, and southern Chinese styles  tend  to initiate techniques with the centerline already on the opponent for tactical reasons, rather than having it pointed slightly away to begin with - which is more typical for Shorin type movement - so little to no gross hip movement.

So whether or not you "open" your hips a bit or keep everything closed has dimensions way beyond just hitting hard - though clearly that's very important, it is foundational in different arts, evasion, distancing, everything relies on the "basic" motions of working with power.

Hi all.

If the hip use occurs naturally as the technique flows (ie. you "close" your hips when they are already "open" or vice versa) then it isn't a "double hip".  It is just a "single hip".  If you're "loading up" by turning the opposite way, the back again, this is a telegraph and a indeed a "double" hip.

Peter demonstrates a true "double hip" in that video.  By contrast, I know many people who demonstrate a "single hip": ie. it is already "open" and the person "closes" it - or vice versa.  What Peter does impressively is "open and close" his hips very fast.  

Sadly this is no where near fast enough to overcome telegraphing, as the video below shows:

I discuss this further in my article.  If the smallest twitch in the shoulder (an imperceptible one) "gives the game away" what makes anyone think they can get away with a "double hip" - with the time and telegraphing involved?  And if it is just "moving the hips from where they naturally are, why isn't this just the single hip - where exactly is the "double" aspect?  

http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/its-all-about-technique.html

Now I can actually do a reasonable "double hip" (not like Peter, but still okay).  But I would never perform kata moves in this way (as many do).  Hip use must occur naturally.  Any extra load (one that isn't set up necessarily and naturally - without any extra swinging - by the previous move) is a move that simultaneously takes up time and telegraphs.  This is unavoidable.  And however fast you can do it, it isn't fast enough.  Remember Michael Jai White at the start...  

And in kata, all this does is interrupt natural flow:

http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com.au/2010/01/importance-of-flow.html

If one move naturally sets up a hip load for the next move, then this is fine.  One move can "open" the hip, while the next move "closes" it - all with each open and close powering a different technique.  But these are "single hips".  You're not "swinging one direction to increase your power in the opposite " (ie. making 2 moves where you only have time for one).  

I illustrate a little drill below where the hips naturally "open and close" - each move powering a different technique, and setting you up for the next.  These are sequential "single hip" techniques even if they occur in groups of 3.  I have used one hip move to power each consecutive punch.  There has been no extra loading - no "swinging one way to swing back just for extra power".

And flow is essential to kata - particularly in between related moves (like block and counter).

I'm not saying that hips shouldn't be used, or that a double hip isn't useful practice against pads or in select isolated basics.  Learning to turn the hips quickly and forcefully is a good thing.

One hip swing should set up another in much the same way as a left jab sets up a right cross.  However hips should not be used to break up kata moves that essentially depend on one movement flowing into the next without delay and without telegraph.  Yet that is what I am seeing  - time and time again.  Consider the examples here and my proposed alternatives:

http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/flow-why-it-is-essential-co...

So while I remain deeply impressed with Mr Consterdine's skill and speed, I don't share the view of many that kata is about putting "double hip" practically everywhere - before each block, before each counter (as many do).  If you apply hip movements in the right context (without a load) then you are no longer doing a "double hip" - it is a "single hip".  If you are "loading up", then you are telegraphing, and I don't care how quickly you do it, it won't be fast enough (as Michael Jai White demonstrates in the opening article/video).

Otherwise, connectivity is also very important generally.  Why?  Because my studies in the Chinese arts have shown me that connectivity (flow) allows your whole body momentum to be thrown into your opponent.  Stopping (albeit for a millisecond) to twist your hips one way and then the other interrupts that flow and cuts off that momentum transfer.  That momentum transfer is far more potent that a stationary hip twist will ever be.

It is worth noting that in 33 years of martial training and instruction and many years as a prosecutor, I have never seen anyone using anything like a "double hip" in either civilian defence, the ring/cage or in a dojo.  Why?  You don't have enough time.  Have I seen hip use?  Yes - plenty.  It is ubiquitous.  But it's all "single hip" stuff  - moving the hip from wherever it happens to be.  

Is the "double hip" good for "single hip" training when applied to dummies, bags and pads, isolated basics, etc.?  Yes.  But kata is about connecting related moves - not practising disconnected basics.  We wouldn't need kata if they simply comprised disconnected basics.  The moment you connect things, the connection is as important, if not more, than the things you're connecting.

I might have missed something.  But it's not as if I'm trained in a vaccum over the last 32 or so years.  I've seen the same things as everyone else, trained with many different schools of karate including shukokai, in many different systems (from arnis/escrima to kenjutsu to kobudo, to northern and southern external gong fu, to the internal arts, to western boxing, to grappling etc.) in many different countries.  The "double hip" isn't something I "don't adequately know."  I've known it for longer than most who practise it today.

If I'm missing something, no one has been able to give a cogent argument about what it is I'm missing.

Thanks for reading.

Dan Djurdjevic 

wow Dan!

Quite a lot to respond to... and given that I am about to go out I'll just pick up on the first point.

So,I think you are comparing apples to oranges...

Quote:

Sadly this is no where near fast enough to overcome telegraphing, as the video below shows:

http://youtu.be/wdPP0TmqKiU

I discuss this further in my article.  If the smallest twitch in the shoulder (an imperceptible one) "gives the game away" what makes anyone think they can get away with a "double hip" - with the time and telegraphing involved?  And if it is just "moving the hips from where they naturally are, why isn't this just the single hip - where exactly is the "double" aspect?  

I think if you re-watch the opening statements made by Peter in the You tube video he sets the context for the discussion, i.e. a night-club style confrontation etc. In these kind of cirmumstances the "the smallest twitch of the shoulder" is not something that should necessarily be your top priority. This is probably also true for feinting or any other martial art duel tactic you might consider when trying to "out game" your opponent. 

The reason it is not telegraphed is due to other distractions that you will be using ... as per the usual "geoff Thompson fence strategies".. or just because you will be in a "real" fight situation with all the associated distractions of that kind of charged and emotional, adrenaline filled atmosphere...

Cheers

Tom

Hi Thomas. I disagree that telegraphing and delay aren't issues outside nightclubs etc. They don't relate to "out gaming" but to any altercation.

Employing distractions might help, but it doesn't change the fact that you are both telegraphing and taking more time in executing a "double hip".  And all for what? Extra "power"? Civilian defence is conservative - it is about not being hit, not hitting as hard as you can. The latter priority is actually more appropriate to the ring/cage than the street (though I hasten to add that double hip isn't seen in either environment).  The fact that this approach relies upon such things as "distraction" is an indictment rather than an endorsement imho.

I would agree that by all means, one should practise double hip like Peter Consterdine shows - but one should do so for general hip practice, not for literal "double" implementation.  Good hip use against pads/shields etc. helps your single implementation in resistant environments. Otherwise, attackers read and respond to your movement. Indeed, they usually initiate it in civilian defence. Accordingly, demonstrations of double hip against bags/pads/shields might be impressive and even useful for hip training, but they are not representative of a realistic response to an aggressive, strong, fast and determined attacker.

Btw, I encourage you to read my short article here, which is directly on point: http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/its-all-about-technique.html

In the end "double" hip says it all: it involves using 2 moves where there is room for one. That Peter Consterdine can do 2 moves seemingly almost as fast as one is impressive indeed.  

But it isn't actually "as fast" as one move:  

The time difference (while measured in milliseconds) is a time difference a civilian defence practitioner cannot afford - not when their goal is to secure their safety as opposed to landing a "maximum power punch" (which something like "double hip" only does in a stationary posture, as demonstrated by Peter in his video).

dvitkus wrote:

I am not convinced that the double-hip is a relatively new development. Nagamine and others have written about it referring to it as "Koshi.”  Yes, initial instruction in the principle usually emphasized the revolving door analogy.  It may be that this analogy was over-emphasized, because it seems to have become the last word for some.  There are yet others, who have never heard of it and call the movement “wasted.” 

 My most influential instructor emphasized it heavily in his teaching, and I am grateful for that.   It is in every kata I know in one form or another. The hip / weight transition depends on the stance and intended purpose. For some techniques, it is straightforward.  For others, it takes on a complex serpentine quality. 

 Sensei Constantine’s example is exemplary - particularly the weight transition. I am glad to see it getting more attention. 

Apart from select karate instructors in Okinawa (eg. Yuchuko Higa) and certain kobudo schools (Yamane ryu) I have seen nothing to indicate that the "double hip" was ever part of mainstream karate/kobudo. It's popularity today seems entirely modern. Like "sine wave", I think it is a trend arising from a postmodern "power generation theory" that is actually at odds with conservative traditional civilian defence methodology.

Past references to "koshi" are just references to hip use - which all martial artists employ.  I see no references from days gone by - in video or in text - that would indicate "double koshi" use (at least, as anything other than a particular emphasis confined to select individuals or schools).  "Double koshi" has, in other words, never defined karate in the way some people have started to imagine in the last decade (just as "sine wave" hasn't defined taekwondo until recently).

For what it's worth, similar Chinese martial techniques to those found in karate do not employ (and have never employed) a "double hip" as such.  The closest you get is the "shaking" fajin in various crane and even internal martial arts.  But these are not the same thing as the presently "popular" karate "double hip" (just as natural rising and falling of arts like taekyon in Korea have nothing to do with the "sine wave" of  ITF taekwondo).

(I might add that confining double hip to isolated basics/dummy practice might produce some of the same benefits as fajin in that you might develop a better ability to use your hips in a "whip like" fashion when the context actually permits it.  That is because all dummy/pad work envisage some wind up - you might as well do it smoothly like Consterdine.  But  inserting it in dynamic contexts like kata is totally contrary to traditional martial principles requiring connectivity between related techniques.)

dvitkus wrote:

I am not convinced that the double-hip is a relatively new development. Nagamine and others have written about it referring to it as "Koshi.”  Yes, initial instruction in the principle usually emphasized the revolving door analogy.  It may be that this analogy was over-emphasized, because it seems to have become the last word for some.  There are yet others, who have never heard of it and call the movement “wasted.” 

 My most influential instructor emphasized it heavily in his teaching, and I am grateful for that.   It is in every kata I know in one form or another. The hip / weight transition depends on the stance and intended purpose. For some techniques, it is straightforward.  For others, it takes on a complex serpentine quality. 

 Sensei Constantine’s example is exemplary - particularly the weight transition. I am glad to see it getting more attention. 

Well it clearly wasnt in Matsubayashi Shorin Ryu in the 1960's -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2drhrqqp_E

IMO its a modern development that proberly started with Tani Sensei, then actually went back to Okinawa from mainland Japan, or certainly has been taken on by some Okinawan Ryu who are exploring body mechanics and taking it far further than double hip. (Koshi and Gamaku combined wiggling etc..........).

It's a great method IMO, for simply smacking someone, but it has no place in classical Okinawa kata, which are about far more than just that.

I used it to great effect when I was a Shito Ryu student (and before that a Sankukai student, a derrivative of Shukokai), it's a good method for what it is. I have no issues with its deployment from the fence etc, I have used it myself in reality and found no issues with telgraphing, real world is nearly always to chaotic for anyone to pick up on such minor physical signals.

whilst I have respect for Peter Sensei, I wonder how the reaction would be against someone his own size, or bigger holding the impact pad? Of course he hits real hard, but so do many people from all different methods.

Our Ryu is about as classical as they get via Matsumura, we have no concept of double hip at all, and even less of Koshi, Gamaku combined wiggling.......

I must stress that what Peter Consterdine is doing is absolutely fine - excellent in fact.  I say this because he is demonstrating hip use in very fast, fluid and efficient manner - in a context where such hip practice is appropriate, ie. an isolated and static context (fixed and non-resistant target, with no preceding movement required on his part, such as thwarting an attack).  

But to swing your hips the opposite way so as to load them up for a technique is not feasible  in any other context, especially a resistant one (unless your opponent is so compromised that it makes one wonder why on earth you would consider this a "defence" context).  

Kata is, of course, not a resistant context.  But, most relevantly, it is not an "isolated, static one" either.  Its moves (comprising related sequential techniques - eg. a block and a punch) should manifestly not be broken up by such hip movement - precisely because they comprise part of a related and dynamic context that is very different to the static and isolated one.

Some respected friends of mine reserve certain fundamental kata (eg. naihanchi) for static, isolated hip training, and I respect that.  Naihanchi is, after all, what some folks call "heishugata" and is accordingly more "fundamental" or "elemental", permitting its use in a less "dynamic" form (after all, people often pause for shime testing in it - unlike other kata).  

My friends also insert a kind of a "whipping hip action" to certain select techniques of other kata (kaishugata), which is fine if the context permits or requires it.  But the "double hip" I'm increasingly seeing in kata is being inserted somewhat dogmatically between a related block and a punch, then between the punch its following related movement, etc.  I cannot see any merit in this, however laudible double hip is as static, isolated kihon hip training.  It prioritizes "hip power" over the general principle of momentum flow - often to the point that it actually robs your movement of so-called "power".  It ignores factors like telegraphing and delay.

Consider this (now common) way of doing a block/counter with a slide up (with the extra time taken and the "cutting off" of forward body momentum, not to mention the telegraphing of the counter):

http://www.wuweidao.com/downloads_files/Erik-Angerhofer.gif

with this (Chinese internal arts "flowing" way) of doing the same movement (noting the faster time, greater use of forward momementum and reduced telegraphing and, frankly, much greater "power" (ie. force delivery):

http://www.wuweidao.com/downloads_files/dandjurdjevic.gif

Both use "koshi" (ie. hips are employed as a "force multiplier").  But the former tries to insert a double hip movement where only one is warranted in the context.  

Hi Dan,

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

I must stress that what Peter Consterdine is doing is absolutely fine - excellent in fact.  I say this because he is demonstrating hip use in very fast, fluid and efficient manner - in a context where such hip practice is appropriate, ie. an isolated and static context (fixed and non-resistant target, with no preceding movement required on his part, such as thwarting an attack.

I’ve been a student of Peter’s for a very long time and I’m sorry to say that your understanding of his double hip is incorrect. A huge part of his teaching is using the double hip in flowing transitions and I’ve seen, practiced and felt the effect of this for many years. You seem to be basing your view of it on the ABC version he originally teaches to impart the concepts. The double hip works great while moving and in combination with other things. The hips and hands can flow together while using a single or double hip, and anyone who was studied with Peter directly will be tell you this. Because you have no direct experience of Peter’s method I suspect that you are making assumptions that people who have had direct instruction will tell you are not correct.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

I would agree that by all means, one should practise double hip like Peter Consterdine shows

Shows where? The double hip as you describe it is not what I have seen from Peter after many years of training with him.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

Good hip use against pads/shields etc. helps your single implementation in resistant environments. Otherwise, attackers read and respond to your movement.

A big part of Peter’s teaching is using the double hip in rapid fire combinations. Single shots are the ABC starter; they are not the actual method. As someone with extensive personal experience of the methods, I can categorically say that the telegraphing as you describe is simply not part of the methodology. The motion of the hips flows perfectly well.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

Indeed, they usually initiate it in civilian defence. Accordingly, demonstrations of double hip against bags/pads/shields might be impressive and even useful for hip training, but they are not representative of a realistic response to an aggressive, strong, fast and determined attacker.

Again, I would ask which demonstrations? I would restate my concern that you have not seen the actual methods but the initial basic training of it.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

It is worth noting that in 33 years of martial training and instruction and many years as a prosecutor, I have never seen anyone using anything like a "double hip" in either civilian defence, the ring/cage or in a dojo.  Why?  You don't have enough time.  Have I seen hip use?  Yes - plenty.  It is ubiquitous.  But it's all "single hip" stuff  - moving the hip from wherever it happens to be.

Worth pointing out here that Peter himself had used the double hip for many years in his work in the security field. Additionally he has taught it to many bouncers who also use it to great effect. As the author of the metropolitan police training manual Peter has obviously also taught this to many UK police officers who also find it highly effective. I have also been personally present at police training sessions where Peter has been “training the trainers” so this method can be taught to rank and file officers. Peter is requested to do this by the top brass because they know how effective it can be and because it has a good track record. I’ve also been personally present when boxers (including one British champion) have been taught how to increase the power of their shots using the double hip. This has been at the request of their trainers and the athletes can see the logic of it. Indeed the guy who went onto become British Champion said to Peter in my presence that knowing he could hit far harder than the other guy as a result played a big part in giving him the confidence to win.

You criticisms would have some validity if the ABC method first taught was the sum total of the method. However, that’s not how it works at all. To me, this would be a little like going to your first judo class, learning nothing but breakfalls on the first night, and then stating that Judo does not teach you how to throw.

The double hip does flow very well as one technique transitions into the other. It’s no harder to use the double hip on this than the single hip. It’s also far more subtle in motion (but not effect) than you may suspect. It works great when moving and it is used successfully in both self-defence and sport. I see lots of people use it (sometimes unintentionally or unknowingly) and I think the reason you may not is because you are looking for the beginner’s instructional method as opposed to the actual double hip. If you’ve not see it, try getting hold of a copy of Peter’s “Training Day 3” DVD as he explains the use of the double hip in rapid fire combinations on the move in that program. Better yet, see if you can get to train with him so you can put these questions to him personally. Anyone who has trained with him for any length of time will be able to tell you that your assumptions about the methods based on what you have seen are not how it plays out.

All the best,

Iain

I agree totally with Iain,

as a long time student of Shukokai and ex doorman i can honestly say the double hip is without doubt extremely effective and devestating. Once you have mastered (so to speak) the double hip and the more you train the more disguised it comes.

It takes a long time to get hold of it, some people pick it up quicker than others ect, i teach the double hip within our school, if it wasnt effective or seemed no use in isolated area's, i simply wouldnt be bothering to continue to train and teach the method. The amount of power one can create from such a short distance by using the double hip is incredible.

Sadly i have not had the pleasure of training with Sensei Peter but know how much punishment Sensei Iain has been through if being behind the impact pad  : )

Kind regards,

Jason

Hi Iain, thanks for the response.

Of course, I was going on the opening video, as well as the many karateka who have put such a "double hip" into their kata (ie. as a double hip movement for single techniques) - which is the topic of this thread (ie. "double hip in kata").

In my view, when the "double hip" supports a "one-two" combination, then it is no longer a true "double hip".  Rather, it is just a case of "single hips done in combination".  I certainly have no difficulty with the latter.

Should one train a double hip movement in isolation exercise?  Indeed.  And this is what I meant in my preceding comments when I said "I would agree that by all means, one should practise double hip like Peter Consterdine shows [in the above video]."

Unfortunately, I see many karateka never moving beyond such isolation training.  Rather, I see them attempting to interpret kata as such isolation training (when kata is manifestly anything but - it is a series of techniques in a dynamic, related context, not a series of isolated basics).

Do some people manage to use a true "double hip" (ie. two hip movements for one technique - what is effectively a "wind up") in security work or otherwise in civilian defence?  I haven't seen it, but this doesn't mean it is impossible.  After all, any big haymaker involves a wind up.  And people throw such "wound up" punches all the time.  Can a "wound up" punch land, and do so powerfully?  Sure.  In my time as a prosecutor, most assaults I saw on surveillance footage were committed with this kind of powerful, albeit telegraphed and time-inefficient, punch.  

But does a wind up comprise advisable civilian defence tactics?  In my view, no.  You need to punch from wherever you happen to be if you want to ensure your own safety.  Civilian defence is inherently conservative, as I've argued extensively elsewhere.  Your primary goal is to "not get hit" - not to "hit powerfully" (ie with maximum applied force).

Practising a double hip as an isolation exercise can teach you to mobilise your hip maximally and quickly.  Indeed, this is what I think people can and should take from the "double hip" as an isolation exercise of the kind Peter demonstrates so well in the opening video.  Presumably this is what some bouncers have learned from the exercise: to be more aware, and have good control, of their hips.

But in my view one should never take it literally - to be 2 hip moves for one technique.  And to me, that is what the name "double hip" in kata (a dynamic context - not an isolated one) implies.  This is at odds with kata movements which are already in a context - one that should not be "chopped up" with additional hip movements.

In summary, a true "double hip" is fine if you're doing an isolation exercise.  It is fine if you apply it later in combinations (using one hip move to power each technique).  But, as I say, in the latter case you aren't doing a "double hip".

Thanks again for your considered reply!

Dan

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

Hi Iain, thanks for the response.

You’re welcome :-)

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

In my view, when the "double hip" supports a "one-two" combination, then it is no longer a true "double hip".  Rather, it is just a case of "single hips done in combination".  I certainly have no difficulty with the latter.

There seems to be different terminologies being used here. A double hip does remain a double hip when used in combinations. Those who use the double hip have a clear understanding of what they mean by both a “single hip” and a “double hip”. A single hip would be when the spine is used as the central pivot point with one side of the hip going backward and one side of the hip going forward. The reason this is frowned upon is because it means half of the body is moving away from the strike. A double hip – whether used as a single shot or as part of a combination – uses one side of the hip as the pivot point such that the whole hip is moving in the direction of the strike. An analogy that Peter often uses is that a single hip is like a revolving door (pivot point in the centre), and a double hip is like a normal door (pivot point at one side).

It is therefore possible to do a combination with single hips (pivoting around the centre) or with a true double hip (pivoting from the side of the hip). So where the double hip is used in combination it does not revert to being a single hip, but remains a true double hip.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

Unfortunately, I see many karateka never moving beyond such isolation training.  Rather, I see them attempting to interpret kata as such isolation training (when kata is manifestly anything but - it is a series of techniques in a dynamic, related context, not a series of isolated basics).

The double hip can easily be used in combinations due to the overlap and side pivoting discussed in this post and my others in this thread. It can therefore be used in flowing kata sequences and it certainly does not need to be relegated to isolation training only. The double hip works extremely well in combinations in my experience – both in kata and elsewhere –and that is why I have adopted it.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

Do some people manage to use a true "double hip" (ie. two hip movements for one technique - what is effectively a "wind up") in security work or otherwise in civilian defence?  I haven't seen it, but this doesn't mean it is impossible. After all, any big haymaker involves a wind up.  And people throw such "wound up" punches all the time …But does a wind up comprise advisable civilian defence tactics?  In my view, no.  You need to punch from wherever you happen to be if you want to ensure your own safety.

I think this is because you and I mean different things when we say “double hip”. Having trained with Peter for many years I can assure you it is not what you seem to believe it to be. There is no big wind up as you describe and it can be used from any position you find yourself in. I do think you are viewing the “ABC demonstration” used to illustrate the basics in the beginning to be the sum total of the method. Police officers, bouncers, athletes and civilians have all learned this method from Peter and others and have used it to good effect.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

But in my view one should never take it literally - to be 2 hip moves for one technique.

That’s not what those who practise the double hip understand it to be. The key points are that the hips never move away from the strike, the hips lead the hands, and that the techniques overlap such that the end position of one technique is capitalised on for the next.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

In summary, a true "double hip" is fine if you're doing an isolation exercise. It is fine if you apply it later in combinations (using one hip move to power each technique). But, as I say, in the latter case you aren't doing a "double hip".

The double hip works great in combinations and this is the universal understanding of those with direct experience of the method. Those who state it can’t be used in combinations, or that is becomes something else when it is, are misunderstanding what a double hip is. It is the same whether used in single shots and combinations. I’ve training in it and taught it for years and I can assure you it does not change when used in combinations. The mechanics are exactly the same and remain entirely consistent. If you’ve not seen it, I would strongly recommend Peter’s DVD “Training Day 3” where he builds on the basics explained in other DVDs to show how the double hip is used in fast and flowing combinations. If you were to see that DVD, you’d see that it does not revert to being a single hip.

As I said in previous posts, your critique of the “double hip” is certainly valid for what you understand it to be. But it seems clear that your understanding of the double hip is not what those who have trained in the method know it to be. We seem to be discussing different things.

Dan Djurdjevic wrote:

Thanks again for your considered reply!

You are most welcome. Thank you for ensuring a detailed discussion which I feel brings out many of the issues around this method. Whichever method people ultimately decide to employ, there is plenty to ponder over from both positions in this thread.

All the best,

Iain