Punch trajectory

Hi Finley,

Not sure if I have understood you right, but my preferred trajectory for a hook is to go straight through the target as opposed to arcing back off it. At the point of impact I ask my students to “hook with their triceps and not with their biceps” and this tends to get the right arc. Basically, if the hand ends up coming back towards the ear, then it is glancing off the target to some degree.

My good friend and training partner Steve Williams explains this very well in the clip below which it taken from one of our Extreme Impact downloads. Steve is unquestionably one of the most powerful strikers I’ve ever trained with. People who think they can hit “hard” should hold the pads for Steve as their aching hands and arms may get them to reassess what they think “hard” actually is.

If you got to around 1:45 in, that is the point where Steve explains the arc of the hook. However, the whole thing is worth a watch. I hope it helps answer your question?

All the best,

Iain

I think there is time for in-out and in-through types of striking.

In training with bogu, I prefer in-through striking to the torso area, sometimes the head might get some in-through suffering aswell. This is not to be done often, since it is really heavy on the neck and spine. Since it is training, we try to keep eachother safe as possible.

The in-out striking is used more often to the head in bogu-kumite, but also in non-bogu-kumite situations. This is because it serves another training purpose.

Striking in-through really rattles the body in bogu-kumite. I've recieved some heavy blows, lucky to have been wearing bogu.

I must say, we hardly use hooks in kumite, although I do value them.
 

Great post!

Iain Abernethy wrote:

At the point of impact I ask my students to “hook with their triceps and not with their biceps” and this tends to get the right arc.

I understand what you mean by "hook with your triceps", as the biceps should play a minor role in the punch.  Though the biceps tend to be flexed, I find this happens upon impact, the triceps play most of the role in the punch.  As far as arc goes, I was taught to make a 90deg with my forearm, tri's and bi's.  As for the tilt angle, i make it parallel to the floor, with emphasis on the elbow joint being tight...i find this the key for me to delivering a tight and dense blow.  Going throw the target as a visual was suggested as well in earlier posts...this works well, i find, because of the momentum of the force...the carry through force. 

I find the higher the elbow, the more denser the shot.

As far as the video clip goes....I love the drill.  I usually practice it with more foot movement with my partner.  So the feeder (your partner) will be moving around with real alive energy....trying to cut you off, forcing you to circle and create distance etc., he may or may not feed you shots with the pads....strike you, push you, even kick you, knee you etc., then he flashes the pads for the hook or uppercut, and you respond fast, and the drill continues back to footwork again......i'm sure you guys have trained it that way too!

Well...thanks for sharing!

Peace.

Chris.

I have always reasoned that the rule of punching in some (most?) karate clubs having to hold the same trajectory in and out was due to the sports rules and limits to hitting only (with snapping punches), no swings or follow through. So as with all sports, the rules dictate the training - because people are training for the win. Once you get away from this, there is no reason one shouldn't train all types of striking including thrusting the fist, swinging, hitting, snapping, etc... just be careful on how you implement it with a partner if you've never done these kinds of punches before. Be aware of injury potential. Once you get some proper drills and feedback from your trainign partners- your imaginations the limit for striking combinations. 

Now, as far as actual trajectory in the flight line of the punch goes, I likened it to weight training. Imagine 3 different kinds of bench press training. #1 you are using a machine. #2 you are holding onto a barbell. #3 you have a dumbell in each hand. All 3 exercises you are carring the same weight. So wich one allows for the most natural movement in the arm through the complete motion? Once you load the weight to near max, you will really see how your body uses all the surrounding muscle groups including you back for this motion. When the weight is close to your chest the arms are usually wider than at full extention. Your body will put your arm into the most supported (and strongest) path for the motion. 

Now think about your straight punch. Are you punching like #1, #2, or #3? are you forcing the line of the punch into a less natural flight path becuase it 'looks' better? Are you developing the power you want to with the strike? When you think about it, it is hardly surprising that the meat-head from the local gym (who does free weights all the time), when in a pub punch-up, is able to generate huge amounts of power from his wild looping lunches, where someone of the same strength and body type would be hard pressed to develop equal strength if their strikes are stuck in a rigid pattern or along a preconcieved fixed line and angle. 

There is something to be said for the fluidity and natrual smoothness of a motion that agrees with the body, not to mention the added support of the structure of the body -as it is right now. Now through training you can adjust the body's posture and muscular support system, so this ideal natural trajectory is always in motion- it is never fixed, but it is simple to find, Just relax and let go...and then strike. Let your body do the rest. 

Apply this to all your punches and striking motions. When swinging through a target make sure you are not throwing your body out of optimum recovery and power by trying to force the follow though 'swing'. 

HI there

Thanks for the response Iain very nice video, one thing that i find interesting/inspiring (in a kind of there's hope for me yet way) is that your friend Steve doesn'appear to be very large, Iknow that size isn;t everything but it certainly help. With his permission could you post his stats?

Thanks everyone else for the punching input as well. I thoguht for a while that tearing through the target would be better but sometimes from training speed and verocity is given up for speed.

Finlay wrote:

Steve doesn't appear to be very large, I know that size isn’t everything but it certainly help. With his permission could you post his stats?

I’ve no idea what they would be … so I called him! He’s 6 foot 2 and half inches (1.88 meters) – the half is very important apparently – and 14 stone 2 pounds (90kg).

It’s the superb technique that generates the impact and Steve told me that when he has been heavier he finds that it “roots him” and hence it is harder to dynamically get the whole body into the technique. He feels that at this weight he hits harder than he does when he is heavier.

I hope that helps?

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy wrote:

It’s the superb technique that generates the impact and Steve told me that when he has been heavier he finds that it “roots him” and hence it is harder to dynamically get the whole body into the technique. He feels that at this weight he hits harder than he does when he is heavier.

Iain

Could that be because he tends to bring both feet off the ground on the hook punch to the head?

swdw wrote:

Could that be because he tends to bring both feet off the ground on the hook punch to the head?

Not really because he doesn’t do that all the time. Just when appropriate and the specifics of this drill were mentioned in an alternate thread: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/fist-face#comment-758

You’d have to ask Steve really as it is his observation, but the rapid transition through techniques may well be part of it i.e. fighting the body’s inertia?

Steve feels he’s at his best at around 90kg, and I think we all have weight that we feel is best for us. From my perspective, I’ve never felt that any extra weight had a negative effect on my power. But moving that extra weight takes energy so it can adversely affect my endurance. It’s all “swings and roundabouts” though as the increased strength is useful. For me, the optimum weight seems to be around the 95kg mark. That’s where I feel my strongest, fittest and most explosive. But that’s me though and the way that I’m put together. Muscle is something I find really easy to gain and I joke that I can look at a weight and get bigger. So it’s not really the “weight” that makes the difference to me but the muscle and the condition of that muscle.

The bottom-line though is that striking power has much more to do with good technique than muscle mass. Brian Seabright 7th dan (who is on this DVD with Steve and I: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/news/training-day-3-new-peter-consterdine-dvd) weighs 10 stone and has amazing power. As I say, good technique is the key.

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy wrote:

The bottom-line though is that striking power has much more to do with good technique than muscle mass. Brian Seabright 7th dan (who is on this DVD with Steve and I: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/news/training-day-3-new-peter-consterdine-dvd) weighs 10 stone and has amazing power. As I say, good technique is the key.

All the best,

Iain

Won't get any argument from me there. We had a woman who trained with us until she moved that hit hard enough the men griped about it among themselves. She grasped the principles of delivering power very quickly.

Claudia was only about 110 lbs (41 kg). Because of her I started giving the guys a hard time about how they needed to learn to "hit like a girl".

My comment about the feet coming up was because that's easier to do at a lighter weight and a heavier weight would then make you feel too rooted. So it makes sense why he'd say that. One of those when yu look back at your reply and go- 'that did not come across how I intended". It didn't sound snarky in my head

As far as size vs muscle condition, that can lead into a whole different discussion on how you train, the type of lifting you do, etc. But I'll agree there is an ideal mix of muscle and weight for any body, and what feels best depends also on your skeletal structure(length and density of bone), the ratio of fast and slow twitch muscle fiber, the mass of the muscles themselves, and the type of training you do.