Amusing Tidbit For a Saturday Afternoon

(Via The Volokh Conspiracy) Who knew that Penthouse was a hotbed of martial arts scholarship?

5-Year-Old Nominated For Nobel Prize

When I saw the headline "5-year-old 'Karate Kid' earns black belt" my first thought was "How is that even possible?". It took me about 3 and a half years of continuous study to earn my brown; had I been able to continue in that particular system I would (hopefully) have passed the 1st degree black belt test after an additional year. From where I stood, and apart from any other considerations, the aforementioned 5-year-old had hardly even been alive long enough to get a black belt.

I had, of course, fallen prey to the same fallacy which no doubt prompted Alex Thomas to write the article in the first place: that the phrase "black belt" has some sort of fixed and universal significance. Hearing that someone has "earned a black belt" is analogous to learning that someone has been nominated for a Nobel Prize; it sounds impressive, but when you dig a little bit you find out that it doesn't mean all that much.

The CNN article provides little detail of what Varsha Vinod did to earn the rank; the cursory treatment provided there and elsewhere makes it sound like she learned a bunch of forms. There's not a whole lot more context to be had; neither her school (the KoInChi Academy of Martial Arts) nor her instructor (VZ Sebastian) have a web presence apart from passing mentions in articles about Ms. Vinod. So what we've got is an unknown instructor from an unknown school saying that he's awarded a blackbelt to a fairly young child. Fine, good for her; she may genuinely be a prodigy. But... well... meh... not newsworthy.

The interesting bit about all of this is not Ms. Vinod but rather the fact that people find it newsworthy. The rank of blackbelt has become something akin to Paris Hilton in the popular imagination; notable primarily for being notable. It requires hardly more than a cursory understanding of the martial arts to realize that a 5-year-old 1st degree is not going to have the same capabilities as an adult of the same rank; if they did that would be something to write home about. As such is obviously not the case here you'd expect a good journalist to stop and ponder that disparity for at least a paragraph or so.

Two morals to this particular story:

1. Journalists are insufficiently skeptical about the martial arts.
2. Saying that someone has a black belt means absolutely nothing without context.

Targeting: Musculo-Skeletal Gaps

Alright... we've drifted a bit off-topic recently... shall we try to get back on track?

When we left off we'd just finished talking about the various bits of the human body that are easy to damage directly. The next set of targets to tackle are the various and sundry gaps in the musculo-skeletal system.

Let's start by clarifying just what we mean by "gaps" and why one would want to target them in the first place. The skeleton, in addition to being a rigid, jointed framework upon which to string muscle and tendon, carries around and protects the internal organs. This isn't simply a fluke of history and mechanics but rather an absolute necessity. The internal organs are fragile in comparison with muscle and bones; a design which doesn't protect them is simply incompatible with the basic rigors of daily existence. However, the human musculo-skeletal system, as good at it is at this task, isn't perfect. There are holes where the coverage is thin or non-existent; strikes which target these areas are more likely to hurt a lot, damage the underlying internal structures, and generally further the purpose of coming out on top in a fight.

Our task then is to look at the human body and identify these weak areas. For the purposes of this discussion I'm going to focus on the neck and torso; there's not much going on in the extremities and I have covered/will cover the head separately. The neck and torso can be regarded as an organ/bone/muscle complex has having three concentric layers: internal organs, then the skeleton, and then the muscle on top of that. The first two layers of this complex are shown below:

The first (fairly obvious) observation is that we should show a preference for those areas which aren't covered by bone. This is not to suggest that, as a practical matter, you can't achieve a decent result by punching someone in the ribs. The whole concept of "targeting", however, is primarily driven by concerns over efficiency; why go through bone when you can do more damage by avoiding it entirely? Thus good targets, if they exist, will be confined to the areas demarcated in red above, namely the neck and abdomen.

The Neck

We'll start by looking at the neck. Each side of the neck has multiple layers of muscle, the majority of which are located posterior to the spinal column. Anterior to the spinal column, however, there isn't a whole lot of protective padding. The sternocleidomastoideus provides some protection to important deep structures such as the jugular vein, vagus nerve, and carotid artery, but there are a number of other structures/organs which are essentially unprotected. Especially germane within the context of single combat are the larynx and trachea since these organs are an integral part of the respiratory system. In some individuals the larynx creates a surface marker, the "adam's apple", making it particularly easy to target.

A strike to the larynx, depending on the force applied, can be disabling or deadly¹. Having been tapped in the larynx more than once I can attest that even incidental strikes are really unpleasant. Moderate force can cause muscular tears, edema, and/or hematoma²; the accompanying swelling can cause constriction of the airway (stenosis), making it difficult to breath³. A large amount of force delivered across a small area⁴ can crush the larynx, resulting in asphyxiation⁵. The failure modes for the trachea are essentially the same. Moderate blunt force can lead to tracheal stenosis⁶; greater amounts of force can crush the tracheal rings potentially leading to tracheal collapse and eventual asphyxiation.

The thyroid gland and the esophagus can also be damaged by strikes to the neck, but as a practical matter there doesn't seem to be much reason to try to target them directly. I'm unaware of any surface landmarks by which you can identify the location of the thyroid gland, making it difficult to strike effectively. Moreover, thyroid injuries due to blunt trauma are rare and generally result in impairment of thyroid function^7,8, an effect which isn't particularly germane in the context of single combat. In order to get to the esophagus from the front of the neck you have to go through the trachea, so why not just target the trachea in the first place?

The Abdomen

The musculature of the abdomen is relatively complex in comparison to the neck, so the first step in identifying potential weak spots is to figure out how its all put together⁹.

The bottommost layer is comprised of the rectus abdominus, a pair of long, flat muscles anchored to the pubic bone at one end and the 5th, 6th, and 7th ribs at the other. The pair are encased in tendon (the sheath of rectus), which joins the pair together via the linea alba, creating a single, "v"-shaped sheet of muscle.¹⁰

The next layer is the traversus abdominus, so named because the fibers of which it is comprised are transverse (perpendicular) to the longitudianl axis of the body. Like the rectus this layer is composed of two sheets of muscle, joined at the body's midline via the tendons which form the sheath of rectus. The traversus follows a boundary roughly defined by the cartilage of the 7th - 12th ribs, the lumbo-dorsal fascia, the crest of the ilium, and the inguinal ligament¹¹.

On top of the traversus are the internal obliques. This layer is best characterized as a collection of muscle fibers radiating perpendicularly outward from the curve defined by the ilium and inguinal ligament. The fibers furthest anterior along this line (and thus closest to the pubic bone) are essentially horizontal and terminate in the linea alba. As you move posterior along the curve of the fibers take on more of a vertical character, terminating in either the sheath of rectus or in the cartilage of the 7th - 9th ribs. At the most posterior end of the curve, roughly coterminus with the apex of the iliac crest, the muscle fibers are vertical and terminate into the bottom of the three lowest ribs.¹²

The topmost layer is formed by the external obliques and is a structural complement to the internal obliques. The fibers of the external obliques originate along the bottom edges and exterior surfaces of the lower 8 ribs and proceed at a roughly 45 degree angle towards the midline of the body from their point of origination. Some of them terminate in the sheath of rectus/linea alba while the remainder terminate at the iliac crest or inguinal ligament¹³.

Analysis of Abdomen Musculature

So what to make of the diagram above? What does it tell us about areas of weakness in the musculature of the abdomen? What it reveals is that the majority of the abdomen is protected by a criss-crossing mesh of fibers (both muscle and tendon) several layers thick. It follows from there that weak points, if they exist, will be found on the periphery where the muscle attaches to the bone rather than in the center. The various sheets of durable tissue overlap less at the edges than they do towards the center of the abdomen. There's also less tissue in general as the muscles thin to form the aponeuroses by which they are attached to the bones of the skeleton.

But here we run into a problem as we try to move from generalities into specifics. I've not been able to find any information on the fine anatomy of these border regions. I can't characterize the relative muscle thickness, or look for actual gaps in coverage, or talk in any meaningful way about the durability of the associated connective tissue. If anyone has done any relevant studies they're locked away someplace where I can't find them. Thus we are confronted with something of a dilemma. This blog exists to combat woo and discourage the transmission of hearsay and dogma through the use of empiric evidence. Should I remain mute, then, when the evidence runs out, or should I try to soldier on based on anecdote and personal expierence?

In this case I'm inclined to carry on and simply note in BIG, RED LETTERS that what follows is based primarily on my personal experience and isn't backed up by much of anything else besides educated conjecture. That caveat noted, experience tells me that the following represent weak points at the periphery of the abdominal muscles:

• The tip of the sternum (xiphoid process) and immediate surroundings.
• The gap between the iliac crest (hip) and the lowest ribs.
• The area immediately above the pubic bone.

Go ahead... tense you abdomen and compare the muscle tone of these areas with the tone around the navel. I'm doing just that as I write; here's what I feel:

• sternum: The xiphoid process itself is noticeably flexible and has little or no muscle covering it. The gaps between it and the costal cartilage on either side feel soft, as does a small area immediately South of the tip.
• gap between hip and ribs: Muscle tone is good until slightly posterior of the plane dividing the front and back halves of the body, but then drops noticeably thereafter. This seems to correspond roughly with the transition between the traversus abdominus and the lumbo-dorsal fascia.
• above pubic bone: I can't even say that it feels noticeably softer, per se, but it feels like the underlying muscle has less endurance and might be prone to give out under stress.

For the following discussion we'll posit that I'm not completely making things up with respect to the above. This tells us that we should thus focus on the following locations:

So let's take an inventory of the bits of anatomy in each region and go from there.

Sternum

In the area around the sternum you have:

• Diaphragm
• Liver
• Middle lobe of the lung
• Assorted lymphatic vessels
• The pericardium
• Assorted nerve plexuses
• Xiphoid process

Diaphragm

The diaphragm is essentially a big sheet of muscle whose primary purpose is to inflate and deflate the lungs. Blunt trauma can cause this sheet to rupture¹⁴, reducing its ability to fulfill this role, but the force needed to cause such a rupture is likely greater than what can typically be delivered in a combat situation. Much more common is the experience of "getting the wind knocked out of you".

Reading the Wikipedia article on the subject there seems to be some confusion regarding the exact mechanism of this particular phenomena. It is described as the result of "pressure on the solar plexus", with an accompanying link to the entry for the celiac plexus, suggesting that a strike somehow impairs the plexus thus preventing the diaphragm from doing its job. However, the following paragraph describes a mechanism whereby the sudden stretching of the diaphragm directly induces the spasm. I chalk this apparent contradiction up to confusion over terminology; "solar plexus" technically refers to a bundle of nerves, but is also commonly used to refer to the area around the xiphoid process. The discussion page for the article also includes a reference to a physiology book which suggests that a strike to the sternal region causes the forced exhalation of the lungs' residual volume. This has the potential to completely deflate the alveoli which, once deflated, take more effort than usual to refill.

Regardless of the exact mechansim there's no doubt that the effect is real and correlated with strikes to the sternum/abdomen. Getting the wind knocked out of you makes it near impossible to carry on in a fight but does no short- or long-term damage; this makes it an especially useful technique if you're simply trying to disable someone. As such targeting the diaphragm seems to be highly advantageous.

Liver

The liver is big, fixed, and fragile; blunt trauma can lead to hematoma, contusion, and vascular/bile duct injury¹⁵. None of these are immediatley disabling; there's no point in targeting the liver specifically.

Middle Lobe of the Lung

Blunt trauma to the lung most commonly causes pulmonary contusion (aka bruised lung) leading to decreased lung function¹⁶, but causing that kind of damage in the context of unarmed combat seems unlikely. The little chunk of the lung that's not covered by the ribs doesn't seem to merit special attention from a targeting standpoint.

Lymphatic Vessels

The lymphatic system is a series of vessels which carry lymphatic fluid, much like the circulatory system in many respects. These vessels are fragile and easily damaged; trauma can lead to lymphadema, the build-up of lymphatic fluid in body tissue¹⁷. Because the lymphatic system deals with low volumes of fluid it takes awhile for lymphadema to manifest itself; since the fight will long be over at that point there's no reason to care about the lymphatic system.

Pericardium

The pericardium is a fibrous sac that contains the heart and the ends of the largest blood vessels. Blunt trauma to the pericardium can cause a host of fairly serious injuries¹⁸ which, unlike damage to the liver or lymphatic system, have the potential to greatly impair an opponent. I was able to find several case studies indicating that such injuries can be caused by assault, suggesting that the heart/pericardium represents a viable target.

Nerve Plexuses

Nerves nerves nerves... there's a lot to say about them. Enough, in fact, that I'm going to postpone discussion of nerves altogether for the time being and dedicate my next targeting post to the subject.

Xiphoid Process

Yeah, you can break it and yeah, it's somewhat distracting. More importantly, its right out there in front just waiting to be punched. It certainly represents "low hanging fruit" from a targeting standpoint.

Hip/Rib Gap

This area has a couple of interesting features but is nowhere near as complicated as the area around the sternum. There appear to be two structures worth mentioning, the kidneys and the colon. Kidney trauma most frequently leads to hematuria ("peeing blood") and can, in theory, lead to general vital sign instability¹⁹. Getting punched in the kidneys hurts, but it appears doubtful that damage to the kidneys, in and of itself, can significantly cripple an opponent²⁰. Trauma to the colon can lead to bruising and perforation, resulting in hemorrhage and/or peritonitis²¹, but the latter kills slowly and I haven't run across any evidence that the former can be serious enough to matter in a fight.

Pubic Region

Lastly we get to the area right above the pubic bone; there's not a whole lot of anything here apart from the bladder. It's possible to rupture the bladder, especially if its full, but the affects of the rupture are subtle and might not be detected for days²². As such the bladder (and the pubic region in general) don't present a particularly efficacious target.

Closing Chatter

What we've discovered (or, perhaps more accurately, confirmed) is that most of the internal organs are well-protected. There are only a few gaps in the coverage provided by the skeleton and abdominal muscles which can be exploited for immediate effect. The throat is almost entirely free of bone and muscle, leaving the larynx and trachea vulnerable. Striking the area around the xiphoid process can cause sternal fractures, spasm of the diaphragm, and pericardial bruising. But other targets which initially looked promising, above the pubic bone and iliac crest, fail to pan out on closer examination. While getting struck in these areas is undoubtedly painful, damage to the associated internal organs is unlikely to significantly disable an opponent.

One glaring deficiency (and a fruitful area for future refinement) is that, while we've identified potential injuries and their effects, we've no idea how probable it is that such injuries will actually occur. Many of the case reports on which I have relied reflect injuries caused by high-speed collisions, falls, and similar occurrences, none of which match the conditions of single combat all that well. Absent more definitive information I've had to rely on my gut in judging the likelyhood of substantive organ damage. It would be very useful to understand both the range of forces which a typical martial artist can deliver and the range of forces needed to cause various injuries.

Finally, the discussion of the weak areas of the abdomen is heavily reliant on my personal experience and opinion. Rebuttal and/or better information is welcomed.

---

1 One of my instructors had a particularly pithy expression for this, something along the lines of "You can turn out the lights or turn them off for good".
2 http://www.bcm.edu/oto/grand/081299.html
3 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6487011
4 Such as might be generated by a shuto, leopard's paw, or ridgehand strike.
5 http://www.bcm.edu/oto/grand/081299.html
6 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/362175-overview
7 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BUM/is_8_81/ai_90869434/
8 http://www.jultrasoundmed.org/cgi/content/citation/25/7/943
9 My apologies if I make any mistakes in the following; the references that I'm using are hard to follow at times.
10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectus
11 http://www.bartleby.com/107/118.html
12 ibid.
13 ibid.
14 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T78-4WJG8S3-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2009&_rdoc=7&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%235052%232009%23999599990%231351075%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=5052&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=25&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=9f3cc4648e56a30ad52b5d6dd0c8ab6e
15 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/370508-overview
16 http://www.trauma.org/archive/thoracic/CHESTcontusion.html
17 http://books.google.com/books?id=5Yl1LNe69lwC&pg=RA2-PA2361&lpg=RA2-PA2361&dq=lymphatic+vessels+trauma&source=bl&ots=7pngdfhncq&sig=rWFC9jKkNeFttt2wf9jzoulqNAg&hl=en&ei=22--SvT3J4SAswPToLE1&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=lymphatic%20vessels%20trauma&f=false
18 http://books.google.com/books?id=ooH1nH81_h4C&pg=PA402&lpg=PA402&dq=pericardium+blunt+trauma+assault&source=bl&ots=41TaOYEyk8&sig=jVNPH7lyiMyKrTr6Lng5izfzYIg&hl=en&ei=6d-_SvfsGpS2swPI6tk7&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10#v=onepage&q=&f=false
19 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/379085-overview
20 http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0090429504006995
21 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/364264-overview
22 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/441124-overview

Correction Regarding Martial Force, or, BP Web Design of Durham Engages In Questionable Business Practices

Update: See here for a discussion of the redaction on this page.

---

The Director of REDACTED was kind enough to leave a comment on my post regarding someone spamming my blog. The perfidious individual is not REDACTED, as I previously speculated, nor even Martial Force itself, but rather BP Web Design of Durham.

You know the neat thing about the Internet? It brings such a wealth of information to your fingertips. For example, it tells me that BP Web Design is none other that Blaine Patton, a UK Sole Trader residing and/or doing business at

109 Front Street,
Tudhoe Colliery  Spennymoor
DL16 6TJ
United Kingdom
+44.1388810461
blainepatton@hotmail.com

What's even better is that you can figure out with whom he has a business relationship. For example, he's apparently some sort of web design for Allison Wall, owner of The Spotty Dog Shop. Like Ann and Russell from the original post, I'm sure that Allison is probably a lovely person, but she needs to know that she's outsourcing her tech to someone who's contributing to the downfall of the intertubes.

So, Allison Wall, aka alison@thespottydogshop.co.uk, here's a personal message just for you: If the Director of RS Creative Solutions is to be believed Blaine Patton is likely spamming blogs on your behalf and earning the ire of various and sundry individuals. I recommend that you give him the rough side of your tongue.

But wait, there's more! It seems that BP Web Design has also done work for the AFS Group, a vehicle financing firm of some sort run by one Lauren Turnbull. Lauren, same thing goes for you... Blaine Patton has been defacing my blog and generally making a hash of things. Are you sure you want to be doing business with him?

But you know what really makes me giggle? People leave their fingerprints all over the place. Did you know that REDACTED? Now, I know, it could be some other Blaine Patton... except for the fact that REDACTED. Coincidence? I think not!

And Jebus... would you REDACTED?

Targeting: The Breakable Bits (Part II)

Last time we spent a great deal of time looking into the characteristics of long bones with an eye towards which ones make good targets. Let's continue the discussion and work through the rest of the list of easily-damaged structures which we previously identified.

Bridge Of The Foot

The bridge of the foot didn't show up in our inventory of breakable bones in Part I because none of the bones of which it is comprised are ideal candidates under the criteria we outlined. The metatarsals are thin, but they're also short and thus difficult to break. Similarly, the bones of the bridge proper (naviculus, talus, etc.) are thick and round, about the exact opposite of ideal. However, because the foot is the base of the pillar which is the leg, it spends a lot of time in direct contact with the ground. This makes the foot a good target for the following reasons:

• Anyone with any degree of flexibility can strike the foot.
• Gravity is on the attacker's side: Done correctly a strike to the bridge of the foot is backed by most of the attacker's mass.
• It's hard to move the foot at will: Generally at least one foot must remain planted at all times.
• The ground is the worlds best brace; it completely prevents the foot from recoiling from a strike.
• It's really hard to fight with a broken foot.

That said, it's also important to note that getting in close enough to effectively strike the foot is dangerous business. As such it's a target of opportunity; go for the foot if you find yourself in close, but don't close in just to attack the foot.

There are two main types of injury which are typically inflicted by a strike to the foot, either a fracture of the metatarsals or a Lisfranc Fracture/Dislocation, depending on where the strike actually lands. The former is painful but rarely disabling while the latter, if serious enough, will prevent the foot from bearing weight¹, recommending that, if you find yourself in the position to choose, you aim for the bridge proper rather than the toes.

Interestingly, strikes to the foot are greatly affected by the type of footwear which one is wearing. In the classic case, fighting bare-footed, a strike to the foot is usually delivered via the attacker's heel³ which, since the heel is a blunt, rounded instrument, spreads the force out over a fairly wide area. Compare this with the scenario where you take after someone with the heel of your cowboy boots. The heel of a boot has a sharp edge and thus distributes the force over a relatively narrow area; it's going to do a lot more damage.

So what about the vital points associated with the bridge of the foot, the koori and uchi kuro bushi? Searching for "koori acupuncture pressure point" turns up two sources, here and here, though the latter appears to be a copy of the former. Reading the material presented on the koori should give you a good sense of why I took up writing this blog:

13. RESULT: Fainting , Senseless, severe pain to the foot and the loin, by stimulation to the inner foot nerve and shin artery and bone nerves, causing loss of motor organ.

Uh-huh... and than only happens if I strike a point 0.3 - 0.5 (in? cm?) deep between the first and second toes? A good strike to anywhere on the bridge of the foot will result in pain to the foot, could cause shooting pains up the inside of the leg, and may result in the foot becoming non-functional. And there's bugger-all in terms of body systems in that area, no nerve bundles or lymph nodes or anything else that could possibly cause unexplained, knock-on effects. Why invoke an "energy meridian" when the result being described is easily explained using basic physiology? And it gets better...

14. CURE: In the case of a light press (tread), massage then use ice pack. If hit heavily (crush) medical help will be needed.

Translation: "If someone steps on you foot, get an icepack. If someone really steps on your foot, get a doctor". Uh... duh? If the injury is caused by a disruption of the flow of chi doesn't that imply that the appropriate remedy is to undue the disruption, maybe by humming or something? Anyway, it's the same deal with the uchi kuro bushi... the only relevant results for a search on the term are this blog and pressurepointkarate.com. I love the description they provide:

15. RESULT: Certain, long term slow death.

16. CURE: None, what so ever.

Let's stop and think about this claim for a second. People get sick and die all the time whether or not they've been jabbed in the foot. It would take a tremendously large number of observations to establish a correlation between being struck in the uchi kuro bushi and "certain, long term slow death". I'll go so far as to say that there's absolutely no way that anyone has actually observed such a correlation; any support that can be mustered will be anecdotal and likely subject to selection and/or recall bias. So, as far as the uchi kuro bushi goes, I'm going to call bullshit and chalk it up as one more example of the credulous transmission of dogma.

Tailbone (Coccyx)/Bitei

The tailbone (or coccyx) is a vestigial structure left over from when we used to have tails. It's not load-bearing nor does is serve any secondary function; it's basically just hanging out not doing much of anything. If you fall on your backside hard you might end up breaking it, which will probably hurt and may impair mobility, but that's about it.

In my humble opinion it makes a piss-poor target. You can only reliably strike the coccyx if your opponent is facing away from you, but if you find yourself in that position there are lots of targets to go for that'll get you a better return. Even if you do manage to fracture someone's coccyx it's likely not going to slow them down all that much, so don't bother.

So let's look at the associated striking point, the bitei. A google search on the words "bitei striking point" does turn up a number of relevant hits, the majority of which simply define "bitei" as "coccyx" without further discussion, though it's more specifically defined as the tip of the coccyx here and here. The Pressure Point Karate people give this description:

11. RESULT: Long term pain in any case, due to pressure, fracture or breaking to the tip of the Coccyx. The length of time of pain in any case can last from weeks to years.

12. CURE: The tip of the Coccyx, is one of the bodies shock absorbers, and can be easily broken. May or may not heal on it’s own, unless broken, In the case of a complete break, medical help would be necessary.

Again, I'll point out that they aren't describing any effects that can't be explained by "dude, you broke your butt".

The Ear And Related Bits

I had initially thought to treat the hinge of the jaw (aka "mandibular condyle"³), the ear, and the mastoid process separately but I realized that, from the standpoint of target selection, they're basically all the same thing. If you aim for any one of the above you may very well hit one of the others given that your opponent will generally present a moving target. So it's probably better to treat the entire area around the ear as one large target and then talk about the different ways it can be damaged.

A blunt-force strike to this area can result in any of the following:

• Rupture of the eardrum (tympanic membrane) and/or longitudinal fracture of the temporal bone, both of which can lead to hearing loss and possibly dizziness⁴.
• Fracture of various portions of the jaw (mandible), usually the condyle or mandibular angle⁵, leading to jaw pain and/or numbness.
• Swelling and hematoma of the ear proper (pinna)⁶.

It's also possible to punch someone hard enough to fracture their cranium⁷, but it would be extremely unusual for that to happen in the context of typical standing combat. Note that I've said nothing about any knock-on (pardon the pun) effects such as concussion; I'll deal with those later in a separate post.

There's not much cause to go after the jaw or the ear itself. A fractured jaw is an annoying distraction, but its not going to put someone out of commission. Likewise, having your ears boxed is unpleasant, but its the type of injury that you might not even notice until after the fact. The real winner here is the eardrum; an open-handed strike which cups the ear can increase the pressure in the outer ear to the point where the eardrum ruptures. Such a strike is close to ideal from a self-defense perspective: it doesn't take a lot of strength or flexibility to execute and can cause significant, but short-term and reversible, disruption to your opponent.

Eye/Seidon

Not much to say about this; the eye is soft and easily damaged. Strikes to the surrounding bone and tissue can lead to a black eye which, if severe enough, will effectively force the eye closed in a very short time. Poking the eye itself can, in the most extreme cases, rupture the eye leading to blindness. As far as the seidon goes it looks like more of the same; it basically amounts to "strike the eye hard enough and you can cause unconsciousness". Well... duh again.

Nose

Last, but not least, is a mass of cartilage and a little bit of bone that you and I know as "the nose". Of all the facial bones the nose is most often broken because it is a) fragile, b) protuberant, and c) situated right in the middle of the face where someone is just bound to come along an punch it⁸. Between the accompanying bleeding and the swelling a broken nose can be, in the very least, somewhat distracting; a really severe fracture can prevent you from breathing through your nose entirely. There's zero question that the nose is a highly effective area to target though, contrary to popular belief, hitting someone's nose isn't going to drive spikes of bone into their brain.

---

1 http://www.rushortho.com/ot_foot.cfm
2 The ball of the foot can be used as well but, because the foot pivots at the ankle, that will always be less effective than striking directly with the heel.
3 Which I've previously referred to as the "capsular ligament", though that designation is slightly inaccurate. The actual hinge of the jaw is the condyle; the capsular ligament connects the condyle to the skull.
4 http://www.utmb.edu/otoref/Grnds/Trauma-ear-021023/Trauma-ear-021023.htm
5 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview
6 http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1283150-overview. This type of injury leads to cauliflower ear in the long run.
7 http://www.astm.org/JOURNALS/FORENSIC/PAGES/JFS2002024_482.htm
8 http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec21/ch312/ch312d.html

Targeting: The Breakable Bits (Part I)

So, let us talk for a spell about the breakable bits of the human body. Yes, I can hear you raising an objection already... "All the bits are breakable"... and I'll grant you that's true. But some of them are much more breakable than others; we're here to figure out why that's the case. So let's dig into the subject of breakability a little more and see what we can come up with.

Cortical Bone Structure and Fracture Mechanics

At the smallest scale cortical bone is composed of tiny (~15 μm long and 50-70 nm in diameter) collagen fibers which are bound together with apatite crystals to form larger lamellar (plate-like) structures oriented longitudinally (e.g. parallel to the long axis) within the bone. These fibers don't tear easily under load, resulting in a material which is relatively resistant to transverse (e.g. perpendicular to the long axis) fractures¹. A picture is probably in order:

So why do we care? Barring a few notable exceptions, strikes will result in the point application of force in the transverse direction. Both ends of the bone are fixed, so the application of a transverse force generates equal and opposing torques which generates a strain on the far side of the bone at the point of impact. The collagen fibers provide a counterforce to this strain, thus reducing the likelyhood that the bone will fracture. But the composition of the bone is only one variable; bone geometry also plays a significant role.

Consider for a moment what its like to break a stick across your knee. A thin stick is easier to break than a thick stick; the same thing is true of cortical bone. The force required to fracture a bone is (with some minor caveats) proportional to the cross-sectional area at the point of impact where the force is being applied². Why is that the case? The cross-sectional area is proportional to the number of fibers resisting the applied force; the greater the number of fibers the smaller the strain to which each fiber is subjected.

Continuing with the stick analogy: long bones, like long sticks, are easier to break than short ones; the amount of force required to break a bone is inversely proportional to its length³. This is due to basic mechanics; the application of force to a bone fixed at two ends exerts a torque at the point of impact. Torque, in turn, is proportional to the length of the lever-arm with which it is applied, in this case the distance between the point of impact and the end of the bone.

Target Selection

All of the above indicates that long, skinny bones make the best targets. A quick survey of the human skeleton provides us with a short list of candidates:

• clavicle
• radius
• ulna
• fibula

There are a few other long bones, the humerus, femur, and tibia, but I feel safe in excluding them right off the bat. They didn't show up in any of the target lists that I found, and my personal experience suggests to me that they're simply too thick to fracture in the context of standard, unarmed combat⁴. But of the four bones on the list above only one, the clavicle, shows up on target lists. What's going on with the other three that make them look like good candidates on the basis of bone geometry but not-so-hot in real life?

If you look at the analysis above there are a couple of subtle assumptions which should be called out:

1. Both ends of the bone substantively oppose movement.
2. The strike applies force at a discreet point.

These items explain why the radius, ulna, and fibula are relatively difficult to break. The radius and ulna, in particular, violate assumption 1; neither the wrist nor elbow naturally provide substantial resistance to movement. If you strike someone in the forearm the entire arm will generally recoil from the strike; the force of the strike is translated into rotational motion rather than causing strain at the point of impact. The ends of fibula, on the other hand, do offer a fair degree of resistance; the knee can only move so far without your opponent falling over (in which case you've won anyway) and a properly planted foot is damn near immobile. But the fibula violates assertion 2; it is encased by muscle,front and rear, which protects the bone. The muscle serves as a cushion; a strike to the tibia will be dissipated over a relatively wide area by virtue of the presence of this muscule. This is true, to a lesser degree, of the radius and ulna as well; the various flexors and the brachio-radialis do a decent job of covering both bones. In order to effectively break one of these bones you need to anchor them and/or strike with a tremendous amount of force. Various grappling techniques use the former approach, while the later can be achieved through the use of weapons.

Compare this with the clavicle:

The clavicle screams "Break me! Break me!". It has no protection to speak of; there's just a thin layer of skin between it and the outside world. Additionally, both ends of the bone are fairly immobile. A downward strike to the clavicle is (mostly) transmitted to the spinal column by way of the sternum, scapula, and ribs. The spine is specifically configured to oppose this type of compressive force and provides exactly the kind of resistance needed to make such a strike effective.

But Wait, There's More!

Funny enough, we've gone through all of this dicussion but only crossed one item off the list from my original post. What about all of the other targets that were listed? I've got plenty on those as well, there's just too much for one post. Stay tuned for Part II, same bat-time, same bat-channel.

Striking Points And Targeting (Introductory Thoughts)

The discussion resulting from my most recent post on notation made me realize that I needed to think more about targeting. Specifically, in order to translate the next piece of the form I'll need some way to indicate the target of a strike. There was also a comment about striking accupuncture points, a practice which I really don't know anything about. So now seems an appropriate time to look at targets/targeting in more detail.

First step, lets see if we can put together a list of common targets on the human body. A quick search via Teh Google reveals that the web is awash in sources:

• http://www.essortment.com/all/martialartsstr_rlna.htm
• http://www.self-defender.net/article20.htm
• http://www.defend.net/deluxeforums/urban-street-combatives-r-b-m/21422-vital-striking-points.html
• http://www.pressurepointkarate.com/vital_point_striking.htm
• http://arnisclearwater.com/PointsofInterest/PressurePoints.aspx

There's also a striking points poster that a huge number of people seem to be selling, but for which I haven't been able to track down the original source.

Here's a consolidated list based on the contents of the above sites (plus a couple that I've been taught but didn't see listed anywhere), grouped by region of the body:

• Head: pterion (temple or kasumi), eye (seidon), nose/nasion, philtrum (jinchu), mastoid process (dokko), underside of chin, tip of chin (genkon), ear (mimi), capsular ligamaent (hinge of jaw), inion, top of skull (tendo), midline of cranium above hairline (tento), midline of forehead (uto), auricular point
• Neck: hyoid bone/thyroid cartilage/cricoid cartilage (mikazuki and sonu), third cervical vertebra (keichu), trapesius/sterno-cleido-mastoideus/platysma (shofu), clavicle, top of the sternoclavicular articulation (hichu)
• Upper Torso: infrasternal notch (solar plexus), lowest (floating) ribs, upper spine (1st through 5th thoracic vertebrae), lumbar region
• Arms: elbow (kote), wrist, lower anterior portion of shoulder joint capsule
• Lower Torso/Abdomen: the gap between the floating ribs and iliac crest, the midline of the hypogastric region (kinteki), groin, tailbone (coccyx or bitei)
• Legs: ankle, knee, bridge of the foot (koori and uchi kuro bushi), inside of thigh (yako), outside of thigh, achilles tendon, hamstrings (fukuto), anterior crest of tibia, medial surface of tibia (muyo)

I'm making no claims at this point regarding any particular item above making a "good" or "effective" target; I'll get to that in future posts. Rather, we should treat the above as an ontological inventory that will form the basis for further analysis. But this inventory isn't particularly useful as is; it's just a list of points that various people claim make effective targets. It would be much better if we could impose some sort of order on the chaos and perhaps start to figure out what it is about the above that (ostensibly) makes them good targets.

To do that we need to go back to basics and ask ourselves "What is the purpose of striking someone?". Seems like a pretty straightforward question, yes? But my first 4 or 5 attempts at writing down an answer were unsatisfactory; they didn't really capture the essence of what a strike seeks to accomplish. After putting some more thought into it I believe that the most complete answer is that "The objective of a strike is to reduce the current capabilities of the target". This reflects the fact that a strike can be a distraction, can be painful but do no permanent damage, or can cripple/kill.

Defined that broadly, however, any point on the body becomes a legitimate target. The fact that we have a concept of "striking point" or "target" at all suggests that we have a shared understanding that some parts of the body are inherently more vulnerable than others. This, in turn, tells me that the list I've given above should be viewed through the lense of "vulnerability" i.e. what is it about these points that makes them particularly vulnerable to attack.

Suddenly things start to fall into place in a systematic fashion:

• Structures that are easily damaged by strikes: bridge of the foot/koori/uchi kuro bushi, tailbone/coccyx/bitei, clavical, capsular ligamaent/hinge of jaw, ear/mimi, mastoid process/dokko, eye/seidon, nose/nasion
• Gaps in the musculo/skeletal system: area between the floating ribs and iliac crest, lumbar region, solar plexus, sternoclavicular articulation/hichu, hyoid bone/thyroid cartilage/cricoid cartilage/mikazuki/sonu
• Places that cause disproportionate pain when struck: anterior crest of tibia, groin, auricular point
• Joints: ankle, knee, wrist, elbow/kote
• Areas that shield/affect important internal structures: hypogastric region/kinteki, 1st through 5th thoracic vertebrae, upper spine, floating ribs, trapesius/sterno-cleido-mastoideus/platysma/shofu, third cervical vertebra/keichu, midline of forehead/uto, midline of cranium above hairline/tento, tip of chin/genkon, underside of chin, philtrum/jinchu, pterion/temple/kasumi, inion
• Mechanical necessities: hamstrings/fukuto, achilles tendon
• Targets that lack an immediately apparent benefit: medial surface of tibia/muyo, outside of thigh, inside of thigh (yako), shoulder joint capsule, top of skull/tendo

There's a little bit of arbitrariness in how I categorized these targets; there are good arguments to be made for putting some of the above into serveral different categories. S'alright, I wouldn't dwell on that, since there's enough meat in this particular discussion to span a number of posts..

Book Review: The Bodhisattva Warriors

I've noted a number of times before it's hard to find good, well-researched works on the martial arts. As a consequence I'm always on the look-out for quality titles; when I ran across The Bodhisattva Warriors¹ at Powell's I thought that I'd found a winner². On casual review it looked to have a lot of interesting information that I hadn't encountered elsewhere, which is what compelled me to purchase a copy, but a thorough reading ultimately left me disappointed.

A large part of this disappointment stems from the fact that the book fails deliver on the promise in its title. I would expect that a work which dealt with the "origin, inner philosphy, history, and symbolism" of a martial art would spend a fair amount of time on the art itself; it's hard to discuss and analyze a thing unless you've defined it first. But the author, Shifu Nagaboshi Tomio (aka Terence Dukes), spends surprisingly little time discussing specific current or historical practice.

The section of the book focused on physical practice ("The Mandala of Movement") starts with a brief but lucid description of the arts of the Ksatreya caste of ancient India, focusing specifically on Vajramukti (the system of unarmed combat) and nata (roughly equivalent to form-based training). That portion is interesting, and certainly relevant to a discussion of the origins of Buddhist martial arts, but the book then goes off the rails in attempting to make a connection between Vajramukti / nata and Buddhist thought/practice.

The biggest weakness of this book is that Mr. Dukes is an apologist for Buddhism; he doesn't make a serious effort to critically analyze received wisdom. So, when it come time to talk about what Buddhists actually did in ancient India, he says the following:

Buddhism has a long and extensive influence within India, its teaching spreading far into China, Malaysia, and westward into Iran, Turkey, and beyond. Indian history can be classified into four great historical periods in which monarchs goverend their realms according to Buddhist ethics and precepts. We can assume that in all of their monarchical regions the cultured arts of Buddhism were all well know. (p. 172)

Maybe, but even if you accept the basic premise that these periods were governed according to "Buddhist ethics and precepts" it's still a big stretch to assume that the distribution and interpretation of the "cultured arts" was universal. Slightly further on he says:

The Muslim invasions and subsequent slaughter of Buddhist monks and nuns caused many to flee into Southern India, China, and elsewhere. Because of this, much of what we know concerning nata within Indian Buddhism comes to us via Chinese tradition and Buddhist writings. Refugees carried with them living knowledge, not only of Buddhist spiritual teaching, but also of its cultural arts and skillful means of teaching. The Gupta and Pala Dynasty nata would have been among these, and doubtless continued to be developed by subsequent Buddhist masters [Note 34a]. (p. 174)

The problem here is that he's asking us to assume a tremendous amount about the Indian Buddhist nata. He provides enough material that we can be certain that some set of physical practices called nata existed in Buddhist India, but anything further than that is supported primarily by post-diaspora oral tradition and writings. The text is riddled with such logical leaps:

According to traditional and reliable temple accounts, there were several seminal methods of unarmed combat training which came into China from the second to eigth centuries A.D. All of these came from India and thus stemmed directly or indirectly from the martial traditions of the Indian nobility, that is, the Vajramukti method. (p. 207)

He doesn't even bother to provide a citation for that; what do these accounts consist of? How do we know that they are reliable? etc. Moreover, even if we accept the premise that one or more unarmed combat methods came to China from India, it doesn't follow from there that they bore any relation to Vajramukti. Mr. Dukes mentions a "people's army" which existed contemporaneously with the Ksatreya (p. 159) which had its own military practice; absent any good evidence one way or the other it's just as likely that the unarmed combat methods which arrived in China could have had their roots in that tradition.

He also spends a lof time time drawing unwarranted inferences. Take, for example, this passage:

In the countries to which Buddhist nata were taken, particularly Thailand, Korea, and Malaysia, we find evidence of various unarmed martial arts, which were (or are) still practiced with nata movement patterns and techniques, even though Buddhism, itself, has been largely forgotten or replaced by other teachings. It is not difficult to recognize their connection to the Buddhist nata if one knows something of them. (p. 174)

Again, no cites, no notes, no nothing. He's saying "it looks like nata if you squint just right", despite the fact that he hasn't ever defined what nata look like. In a similar vein, he spends a lot of time talking about esoteric mudras (hand configurations) used in Buddhist rituals, seeing the similarities between the mudras and hand configurations found in various martial arts as evidence that the latter descended from the former. He's either unaware of (or totally discounts) the possibility of convergent evolution. There are a finitie number of things you can do with the human body, so the fact that two techniques look similar isn't sufficient to demonstrate a lineal relationship.

And then there are some random, toss-away lines that made me go "WTF?". For example, in talking about the evolution of various schools of Buddhism he has this to say about Sahaja-yana, a type of "left-handed" Mikkyo:

It is said, however, that the aim of this school was to realize voidness by means of what was symbolically designated Mahasukha (Great Bliss) in one's body and mind. Popular in the Bengal region of India, it become [sic] influenced by Hindu Tantrism and rapidly degenerated into a teaching of depravity advocating Maithuna (ritual sexual intercourse) and other titillations. (p. 204)

Huh? Exactly how does rendering judgement on an extinct Buddhist/Hindu hybrid do anything to forward the purpose of the book? There are a number of questionable statements similar to the one above scattered through the main text and endnotes which, taken in gestalt, demonstrate that Mr. Dukes is a polemicist who's primarily interested in defending his interpretation of Buddhism. For example, he really has a hang-up about monks and the use of weaponry, stating several times that no "real" Buddhist monk would ever use a weapon. Evidence to the contrary is either explained away ("the sistrum is not a quarterstaff") or dismissed as the work of non-monks pretending to be monks (p. 216). So who died and made Mr. Dukes the arbiter of all things Buddhist anyway?

That said, the book isn't a complete loss. The first few chapters are interesting in their own right, especially the bits about perception and the Buddhist concept of self-as-process. I found it helpful, in reading those parts, to have first read Zen and the Brain; without that background material the discussion probably would have been to esoteric to be easily comprehensible.

---

1 The full title is a mouthfull: The Bodhisattva Warriors: The Origin, Inner Philosophy, History and Symbolism of the Buddhist Martial Art within Indian and China.

2 Of course, my wife will tell you that I'm just a sucker for any thick book with big words on the cover.

Don't Buy Anything From

Further Update: See here for the backstory on the redaction.

---

Update: It was Blaine Patton of BP Web Design.

---

So you gotta wonder whether spamming my blog really helps Martial Force in the long run. I suppose that people who maintain sites which get more traffic just turn on comment moderation and are done with it. But this here blog doesn't get much traffic (or many comments), so when someone decides to spam one of my threads I can take the time to be properly petty and vindictive.

The neat thing about search engines these days is that they're smart, but they're not that smart. For example, I could say something along the lines of "REDACTED" or "REDACTED" or even "REDACTED". I'm not asserting the truth of any of those statements, but search engines aren't to the point where they can figure that out yet. All they see is "REDACTED" or "REDACTED".

Which is a pity to some extent. For example, I can truthfully say that Martial Force is trying to game search engines by spamming blog threads. If Google were smart enough to figure that out then maybe they could take some sort of punitive action.

So, as long as I'm at it, I might as well mosey on over and take a gander; I've had a bad day at work and feel up to the challenge of mocking someone's website. For example why, if they're Tae Kwon Do specialist, do they have a picture of Bruce Lee on their header? And why is their selection so shitty? I mean, really, they don't have anything you can't find at a dozen other martial arts stores on the web. Except maybe the martial arts greeting cards... don't know that I've seen those anywhere before. Is some 4th Dan really so desperate for cash that he's hand-crafting greeting cards?

Though, you know, I wonder if the spamming is really even their fault. Russel and Ann Shaw are probably decent folk, and spammers don't generally leave their mobile number lying around their website. Possibly it's the guys who designed their website, REDACTED, that's responsible. REDACTED offers REDACTED; if I were going to guess who's the spammer I'd choose an SEO consultancy over the people who run an internet Tae Kwon Do store. Meh... whatever.

Notation: Translating A Form, Part 1

Alright, now I have a free moment to try translating an actual form and see where that leads us. It's not going to be perfect, but that's ok. The only bar that we're trying to clear right now is "better than English", which shouldn't be too hard to do. So I'm going to start by attempting one of the most basic forms that I know and seeing what sort of practical problems I encounter. Without further ado then...

I'm going to start with a very basic form that's mostly just blocks and punches. Here's the first movement:

Assume Front Position and bow. Right foot steps out into Horse Stance. Bring arms together vertically, then Knuckle Roll with Dragon Breathes Fire.

So what do we need? Well, as discussed in previous posts, we need a concise system of symbols to represent atomic actions: blocks, kicks, punches, etc. The question arises as to whether I should develop a list of symbols or just use one which already exists. I think that if I were to try to develop symbols at this point the effort would be largely fruitless; I have only a vague idea at this point of the problems I'm trying to solve. So it seems that I should use a system which already exists.

And here's where we run into problems, because there's bugger-all in terms of martial-arts dictionaries with both English and Asian character sets. The most likely candidates I've found so far are the Japanese Martial Arts Dictionary and 汉英英汉武术词典, but I don't have access to a copy of either. So, absent any argument to the contrary, I'm just going to use Simplified Chinese.

That being said I should note that I'm not a linguist and don't speak Chinese; I'm relying on Google's translation service. There are undoubtedly much better translations than what I'm going to use; the reader is encouraged to chime in with any suggestions. So, here's how I'm going to render the atoms from the first movement¹:

• Front Position: 前线立场
• Bow: 弓
• Horse Stance: 马立场
• Dragon Breathes Fire: 龙呼吸火

And already things are getting complicated; how do I render "Right foot steps out into Horse Stance"?

What's going on in the form is that the performer transitions from Front Position to Horse Stance; that much can be inferred simply by rendering the motion as "前线立场 弓 马立场". But in performing that transition you can step out with the right or the left; how to render that?

One possible candidate is

We could choose to interpret that as a transition via the right foot. But that, to some degree, defeats the purpose of the dan tien line. Horse stance is fundamentally a movement (specifically, a lowering) of the dan tien, so my instinct is that the glyphs for horse stance should live on the dan tien line.

If we choose to go that route we need some clean way of indicating "by way of the right foot". How about

So what I've done here is to rearrange the relative positioning of the attention and dan tien lines. I originally placed them "on top of" the arm and leg lines, respectively, to mimic their spatial relations. But I don't know that that positioning adds anything. The above, on the other hand, makes it easy to indicate "by way of" using something as simple as a couple of lines. Also, I find that it makes it easier to keep the left and right sides straight, since they've visually separated by another line.

A fair criticism at this point is that the lines indicating transition via the right foot are superfluous; in the system that this particular form comes from you always step out to the right under normal circumstances. My response is that I'm looking to create a more generalizeable system, so its useful to be able to indicate such transitions. If a particular system were to use the notation herein being developed it could certainly decide to make such transitions "silent" by convention.

I find also that, since the action proceeds from left to right, I'm envisioning the hypothetical practitioner facing to the right of the diagram as if I'm looking down on em from above. In that case the left and right sides should swap like so

Thus the final rendering of the first movement is

Compared with the quoted text above I think it conveys just as much, if not more, information in a more concise format. We'll see if this is born out by subsequent movements. That's enough for now; I'll attempt the next movement time permitting.

---

1 As a side note I recommend BabelPad as a quick-and-dirty way of working with Unicode character sets.

Reflections On Previous Notation Proposal

I've had some time to think about my initial proposal for a notation system. I think I'm on the right track but need to refine the system.

Thinking again about music I realized that a musical score doesn't tell the entire story; there's tremendous room for interpretation within the bounds of the notes on a piece of paper. A notation system for MA should have the same property; it needn't specify the form down to the smallest nuance. Rather, focusing back on the original problem, it just needs to be better than English (or your language of choice) in describing the form. I imagine that a performance of a form based on a literal "reading" of the notation would look rather wooden.

That being the case, I expect that using the notation to describe something like a front ball kick is a dead end. No matter how hard you try, you can't use the notation to convey the nuance of executing a front ball kick correctly, so why try? Rather, basic strikes need to be treated as axiomatic/atomic; when you say "front ball kick" you have to anticipate that your audience knows how to do that.

I also noted, in my previous post, that I know forms which would be difficult to describe using the proposed notation. Some of them are esoteric, but the first form I learned also breaks the system. The problem is that I didn't provide any way to deal with the 3D nature of a form. Most forms don't exist on a single, straight line; they change direction and range over an area.

So we have to establish some way to change direction. Direction, at least in the systems I've studied, is a function of your hips; the direction you are facing is perpendicular to the line defined by your hip sockets. But that's only part of the story; striking/blocking also has direction. Additionally, there is also a direction of "attention", e.g. what am I paying attention to as I execute the form. These three directions are correlated to some degree, but any system of notation needs to be flexible enough to allow each of them to vary individually.

So here's what I'm thinking: I need to add a couple of lines to the "staff" that I proposed earlier. Rather than 4 lines there will now be 6 lines. The first line from the top is the "head" line. We use this line to indicate changes of attention (though I suppose it could also be used to indicate a head strike if need be). I've also added a line between the hands and feet that represents both the hips and the dan tien; since the relation between those two regions is more or less fixed there's no need for them to have separate lines. We use this line to indicate changes in direction and also sudden/unusual shifts in mass. For example, I know a form that involves jumping, turning, and landing in a new stance; the "jump and turn" portion of that can be indicated using this line.

But that still leaves the issue of indicating the direction of a block/strike. I'm inclined to think that direction should be

• Indicated as part of the basic strike notation.
• Measured in relation to the center line that runs perpendicular to the line defined by the hips e.g. the performer's direction.

Most actions are executed with 0 degrees offset from this direction vector; to keep the syntax clean its not necessary to indicate direction in those cases. Its only necessary to indicate direction of action when it deviates from this center line. For example, if I execute a "front punch" it goes straight out and comes back parallel to my center line; this is the standard, default behavior, so there's no need ot indicate anything special about it. However, if I'm to execute "spear hand to left 45 degrees", this needs to be noted.

In addition to having a direction strikes and blocks also have a target. It's important to have some mechanism to indicate target because a single strike can often have multiple targets which make sense. At the same time most strikes also have a "canonical target" e.g. they're typically delivered to a particular area. Again, going back to the "front punch", this strike is usually delivered to the chest/solar plexus, but it can also be delivered to the face, the stomach, or even the groin.

I'm still toying with notation for all of this. I figure that the best way is to try translating a form and see what seems to work best. More as I have time.

Book Review: "Chinese Martial Arts Training Manuals: A Historical Survey"

One of the things I've noted before is that its really hard to find good books on the martial arts. It's doubly hard to find critical texts given that the martial arts as a whole doesn't have a strong history of self-criticism. Even the non-woo-ish books tend to present their material without feeling the need to question or defend the presentation.

So I was quite pleased to find Chinese Martial Arts Training Manuals: A Historical Survey by Brian Kennedy and Elizabeth Guo one day while browsing the MA section of my local bookstore. It is exactly what it claims to be, a historical survey of Chinese MA training manuals spanning a period from the late 16th century to the mid 20th century. More importantly Kennedy and Guo aren't rooting for a particular school or style. Rather, the seem genuinely interested providing solid information regarding the evolution of the martial arts in China.

The book is divided into two sections. The first part, which I found most interesting, is a general history of Chinese MA and training methods. It has all sorts of good stuff including a commentary on the academic study of the martial arts, a investigation of the historical evolution/understanding of 'qi', and a discussion of the amount of pure BS that is to be found in historic manuals. They also introduce a interesting character, Tang Hao, an early historian of the martial arts who did quite a bit of primary research in the field.

The second section is a review of various exemplar manuals. Its interesting to see how manuals have evolved over the year and how they compare to modern publications, but I found this section to be less useful overall than the first.

As I said above, I think this book makes a good addition to a MA library because of its critical nature. One of the recurrent concerns of MA practitioners (in the US at least) is that we've inadvertently ruined a noble discipline due to the commercial nature of most of our studios. In reading this book you quickly realize that Chinese martial arts was as a whole never some pure, spritual practice unsullied by commercialism or pragmatic concerns. The way we "do" the martial arts in the US is certainly no worse than historic practice and may indeed be (a slight bit) better because we're more open to empirical/historical inquiry than past practitioners have been.

One improvement that I might suggest to Kennedy and Guo for a future revision would be the inclusion of a "Further Reading" list of some kind that's accessible to English speakers. Some of the sources cited in the text are available in reprinted form from Lion Books, but being reprints rather than translations they're all in the original Chinese. I, for one, would love to read Tang Hao's works, but I've had no luck finding English translations.

Back. W00t!

Turns out that I'd much rather write about the martial arts than spend time on my MBA. Most of my free time is being sucked up by another project so it's unlikely I'll get around to my grand MA synthesis any time soon. But I've continued to ponder the idea of a MA notation; that's a smaller chunk that I might actually may manage to make progress on.