Terry Brown's bare-fist techniques

[terry brown]

Hello, people.

I would really like to know about the effectiveness of Terry Brown's stuff. Does anyone with more experience care to comment on this?

BTW, first post.

>
>
Hi,
>
My first visit to Arma but I felt the need to reply to some of the points you raised.
>
1) ' The book uses a fighting stance with the elbows high (at shoulder height).'
>
As has been noted by some correspondents, styles altered to reflect rule changes. However, the high guard position is to deny the opponent the 'Place'. There is no need to have them lower because the lower targets are protected by distance and measure to a greater degree than the higher targets. In effect this means that it takes the opponent longer to get to them and therefore gives you more time to deal with them. This of course presumes that you are at the 'First Distance'. At the 'Second Distance' you are both inside what I term the 'No Reaction Zone' in other words insufficient time to effectively block and therefore we use different but still historical methods. Please note that early boxers were at pains t0 maintain as great a distance as possible to prevent the application of head butts, throws, sweeps, etc. In order to maximise reach of arms the elbows must be kept high, lowering the elbows shortens the range and puts you in reach of the aforesaid, it also reduces your defensive reaction time.

2) 'I have found that the book recommends some techniques that my kickboxing instructors would not agree with.'
>
And I'm sure there would be some of his techniques I wouldn't agree with, that's why we practise different styles:)
>
3) 'It also shows blocks to low punches'.
>
Historically accurate but the important thing to remember is that whether or not a stomach punch is blocked would depend on factors such as distance and measure. In other words some you block because you have to, some you don't because there is no need to. I might also block a punch to the stomach because I wish to widespace that arm in order to create an opening.
>
4) ' It also shows blocks to low punches and kicks being done with the hand (lowering the hand to meet a blow). These techniques are in pages 219 (basic stance, lower block) and 220 (defence against a stomach punch).'
>
I do not teach blocks against kicks. The lower block shown on P219 is just that, the lower block of the two (equates to Low Outside) it is for those punches to the lower torso which need to be defended.
>
5) ' - You should fight with your hands high, but elbows low, unlike what Terry Brown shows.'
>
This shortens your defensiove range and allows people to get in closer to deliver the type of attack I mention above. If you are fighting within rules that bar those things then fine, if not you could have problems.
>
6) ' You should NEVER lower your hand to defend, because this leaves your face wide open to a counterattack.'
>
This may well be true in the system that you follow but in the system I teach one hand CAN be lowered if needed because the other can intercept an attack. Mendoza thought it was fine, his advice was never to have both hands up or down at the same time and Mendoza was a damn fine fighter.
>
7) ' Instead you should defend as follows:
- Low kicks (leg/waist height) are defended by raising your leg.'
>
At the 'First Distance' they are defended by controlling and utilizing distance. At the 'Second Distance' they are controlled by ' knee drops' and 'foot drops'. These are not in the book, just as many dozens of other techniques are not in the book.
>
'Kicks and punches to the ribs or stomach height should be defended with your elbow.'
>
!!! The book shows the floating ribs being defended with the elbow.
>
9) ' This is easy to do, if you bend your back a little bit, your elbow should reach down almost to the height of your navel.
>
One of the things historically taught was the bar or gate where the forearm was placed across the solar plexus. As for bending your back in order to place your elbow in front of your stomach (IIUYC) this widespaces both head and side of body.
>
10) 'I would really like to know about the effectiveness of Terry Brown's stuff. Does anyone with more experience care to comment on this?'
>
It's not really for me to say but I've given a few seminars on it so hopefully someone will answer that for you.
>
As others have pointed out to you, boxing styles changed with the rules but the system I teach is based on the earliest known English sources, wrestling as well as barefist, and those guys were awesome and if it was good enough for them it is good enough for me:)
>
In closing, without wishing to rattle any cages, it has become a bit of a 'Commonplace' that the old pugilists avoided hard targets, this just isn't true. Favourite targets for punches included forehead (just above the nose), temple, and of course the jaw. They could do this because they hardened their fists to the same extent as karate and kung fu masters. Wrestlers hardened their shins - as late as the 19th century wrestlers used steel coal hammers to toughen their shin bones in order to withstand shin kicking.
>
Hope this has helped you understand my system better.
>
Best wishes,

[Jaron Bernstein]

Glad to see you posting here.]

[Kyro_Lantsberger]

I think people are on the right track here, but let me add something not yet considered.

I havent read Brown's book (yet), but we must remember that kickboxing is taught for the purpose of, well, kickboxing. Train striking within a San Shou, Muay Thai, or MMA context and there will be small changes based on the technical exchanges which occur in those styles. Ex: Chuck Liddell is no championship boxer, but within MMA he can crush people, his strking controls distance and timing vs. wrestlers and adapts well to the changing ranges of combat in that sport. On the flip side, no classical boxer has had much success in MMA.

in light of these ideas.........

I would consider the possibility that period clothing would be sufficient padding against body shots, leaving "head hunting" the only effective strategy for striking. Also consider the possibility that you may be boxing assuming that a knife or sword may be drawn at any time.

Again, I have not seen the pics in question. I do agree that what you are describing is not "kosher" in contemporary training, but there may be very legit reasons for the modifications.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

Interesting discussion all....hammerfists are the bomb, I train with them following an elbow for the most part and agree they are too telegraphed for many stand alone applications. If any of you are familiar with the S.P.E.A.R. technique taught by Tony Blauer, the hammerfist is a nice fit for his system.

Tony also teaches a very "instinctive" flinch technique which uses the forearms to block/intercept all incoming strikes and attempts at tackling with one easy manuver, which is actually "hardwired" into our natural "flinch" response to danger anyway- it's a pretty sweet system.

There are numerous ways and systems out there to deal with an incoming punch, but it all will boil down to approach, awareness, training, timing, distance, presure, leverage.....hmmmjust like swordfighting....wierd...

[Jason Erickson]

Must admit, I hadn't thought of hammerfists! You are quite right, a high forearm block would be the obvious defence.

If we are discussing this in a no-holds-barred combat context, then I'm sure your view is a correct and such a block would work, especially if the blocker was on the ground and about to be hit in the face.

However, if we are talking English bareknuckle fighting from the time of Broughton onwards, I think both these guards and hammerfist blows would be redundant. Straight punches are so much quicker to execute and more damaging, and also don't leave the thrower so open - raising the arm for a hammerfist leaves an awfully inviting gap.

I've also never seen a hammerfist thrown in a fist fight, by either a trained or untrained fighter. Since we obviously have exactly the same body mechanics as people 200 (and 2000) years ago, it makes me wonder if they really were used, despite what old pictures and text might indicate.

In one full-contact training session, I had got my opponent down to all fours. Without thinking about it, I delivered a hammerfist straight down, stunning him long enough to deliver a knee for the finish.

Though a hammerfist may not be much use against an alert and ready opponent, they may come in handy in a scramble or when the opponent is already at disadvantage. I see them as being particularly relevant in weapon situations, as a hammerfist would translate directly to pommeling.

[LynGrey]

Hammer fist have there places... usally not to open up, but after you get the opening hammer fist are pretty much the most effective punch you can make for two reasons.

1) Lots of power
2) Less injury to your hands

Hammer fist are just as quick as any other strike just about most people will throw if used at the right time Ie) Blows to the back or side of the head while the oppentent are in a single over wrap. Or as an extension of an elbow.

I've been hit with ever punch known to man.. the hammerfist are the ones that leave the world ringing after i get hit buy them

Also i don't know why people always forget the target the chin with punches.. this is crucial... any strike that makes the chin move alot ie) a clipped punch.. this rattle the brain and litteraly makes it shut down. Great target area.

[Brian Hunt]

the chin is a great target if you are wearing fighting gloves of some kind, but bare knuckle punches to the head are a good way to break your hand. One thing to remember when striking someone in the chin when you are bare handed is to use the edge of your hand or the heel of your hand. Don't ball up your fist and try for a power punch to the chin, you will most likly break something in your fist and then you will really be in trouble. I like the old adage of use your fists on the soft targets, Elbows, chops, knees, hammer fists, heel strikes are what I use on the head, not my fists. Also, there is another fighting concept, if you kill the body then the head dies.

Brian Hunt
GFS

[LynGrey]

the chin is a great target if you are wearing fighting gloves of some kind, but bare knuckle punches to the head are a good way to break your hand. One thing to remember when striking someone in the chin when you are bare handed is to use the edge of your hand or the heel of your hand. Don't ball up your fist and try for a power punch to the chin, you will most likly break something in your fist and then you will really be in trouble. I like the old adage of use your fists on the soft targets, Elbows, chops, knees, hammer fists, heel strikes are what I use on the head, not my fists. Also, there is another fighting concept, if you kill the body then the head dies.

Brian Hunt
GFS

When striking in the head yeah.. but the chin.. there is little to worry about.. if you are punching right... but its an occupational hazard when striking though, even with the hand..... you ideally want to his a fragile area with a ridged area.. Because as much force you place in injure with your and.. that same force is hitting back at your hand.. "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" its just simple physics. But the Chin there is much success cause the chin is going to move on impact, its not going to be static.. and that releases alot of impact on your hand.

[Brian Hunt]

I disagree with you about the dangers of punching someone on the chin. I have seen more broken knuckles and fingers from someone punching somone on the chin in a fight than any other target area. Sure the jaw will move due to the nature of the hinge it sits on, but the bony chin is still a large hard bone. The other thing that frequently happens is that you are slightly off on your punch and drive their teeth through your hand and still break a knuckle. This is why I reccomend elbows, forearms, or the heel and side of your hand for hitting a man in the chin. You still get the effect of hitting them on the "button" without ruining your hands and perhaps your ability to finish this fight. It is my feeling that when one is on the street, a broken hand can mean the difference between going home on your own two feet, or in a box.

all the best.

Brian Hunt
GFS

[LynGrey]

I disagree with you about the dangers of punching someone on the chin. I have seen more broken knuckles and fingers from someone punching somone on the chin in a fight than any other target area. Sure the jaw will move due to the nature of the hinge it sits on, but the bony chin is still a large hard bone. The other thing that frequently happens is that you are slightly off on your punch and drive their teeth through your hand and still break a knuckle. This is why I reccomend elbows, forearms, or the heel and side of your hand for hitting a man in the chin. You still get the effect of hitting them on the "button" without ruining your hands and perhaps your ability to finish this fight. It is my feeling that when one is on the street, a broken hand can mean the difference between going home on your own two feet, or in a box.

all the best.

Brian Hunt
GFS

Man and to think.. i must be a rarity.. after all the people i've hit in the chin, and yet i have caused minimal damage in my hand if any really worth while. Just the other target areas you've guys said... solar plexis.. that a very hard target to hit.. and if you miss.. you are going to do absolutly no damage. But punchign people in the teeth ha! if you are wiffing that much.. you need to reconsidered your attack methods... The worst damage i have taken from is when i mounted and the guy moved his head just enough to make my hand glance and pound the sidewalk.. painful yes.. did it stop me.. no.

Also a punch to the head can cause WAY more damge to the hand than anything, its just like hitting concrete most of the time.

[Brian Hunt]

Wow,

either you are way more arrogant than I thought, or you are taking my statements way out of context. Can you punch someone on the chin and get away with it bare handed. Sure you can, I have done so successfully in the past. Can you miss and hit a concrete wall, or as with your example, a concrete sidewalk and not hurt yourself, you bet. But I have also seen many, many fights in which people have busted their hands up in exactly the manner that I have previously mentioned. Why risk ripping my hands up for a punch when I can do just as much damage or more with other methods to the same target area? I make a living with my hands and broken knuckles or fingers would hurt me financially as well as physically.

As for my personal training methods and abilities, you don't know me from Adam, so please don't try to evaluate me based upon a general statement that I have made about realities that I have seen and witnessed. We were discussing things in a scholarly manner and you had to take it to a personal, sarcastic level. Please keep it scholarly, thank you.

As for my personal training, I regularly train my hands to withstand injury through the time honored use of heavy bags, sand buckets, punching boards, board and brick breaking, etc. Does that mean that every time I hit someone I won't break something, NO! It does mean that it reduces my chances of doing so.

Do you train in European Rennaisance Martial Arts? Or are you a Jujitsu guy riding the current popularity wave of MMA competitions? Your attitude strikes me as the latter. Please remember that martial arts come in fads much like clothing styles. Just because one thing is currently fashionable doesn't mean it is the ultimate way to fight. Just look at some of the past fads, Ninjitsu for instance.

As for the solar plexis being a hard target to hit, I have never had any problems with it. I also find that striking this target will stop a man faster than punching him on the chin. If you can't breathe, you can't fight.

Cheers.

Brian Hunt
GFS

[LynGrey]

Wow,

either you are way more arrogant than I thought, or you are taking my statements way out of context. Can you punch someone on the chin and get away with it bare handed. Sure you can, I have done so successfully in the past. Can you miss and hit a concrete wall, or as with your example, a concrete sidewalk and not hurt yourself, you bet. But I have also seen many, many fights in which people have busted their hands up in exactly the manner that I have previously mentioned. Why risk ripping my hands up for a punch when I can do just as much damage or more with other methods to the same target area? I make a living with my hands and broken knuckles or fingers would hurt me financially as well as physically.

As for my personal training methods and abilities, you don't know me from Adam, so please don't try to evaluate me based upon a general statement that I have made about realities that I have seen and witnessed. We were discussing things in a scholarly manner and you had to take it to a personal, sarcastic level. Please keep it scholarly, thank you.

As for my personal training, I regularly train my hands to withstand injury through the time honored use of heavy bags, sand buckets, punching boards, board and brick breaking, etc. Does that mean that every time I hit someone I won't break something, NO! It does mean that it reduces my chances of doing so.

Do you train in European Rennaisance Martial Arts? Or are you a Jujitsu guy riding the current popularity wave of MMA competitions? Your attitude strikes me as the latter. Please remember that martial arts come in fads much like clothing styles. Just because one thing is currently fashionable doesn't mean it is the ultimate way to fight. Just look at some of the past fads, Ninjitsu for instance.

As for the solar plexis being a hard target to hit, I have never had any problems with it. I also find that striking this target will stop a man faster than punching him on the chin. If you can't breathe, you can't fight.

Cheers.

Brian Hunt
GFS

whoa whoa whoa.. calm down.. i mean no disrespect dude. first.. off..I'm not a Jujistu fan boy... i've made it as far as i have with Grecco-roman, and common sense when it comes to striking.. if you had to catorgize my strike style it would be Krav Maga... but i pretty much have trained basics of everythign under the sun the best to my ability, and retained what suits me while maintaining an open mind about everything. I apologize for any typos that might follow.. i just disolocated my left ring finger by accidently grabring on a piece of clothign from someone that jerked.... rookie mistake i know.....

the solar plexis... in my expereince has just been.. a horrible target area.. i've actually stood still while some people said "I can drop you in one punch to the solar plexis" and taken the hit... most of the time they knock the wind out o fme.. but from just sheer brute force to the chest.

I have a strong interest in combat.. or fighting or combative... i love to spar o r"scrap" with people better than me.. its something that drives me to be a better person in everything i do. but from what i have learned from expeirence... is punches to the chin are a 98% KO.. 2% of the time it just rocks 'em and i can make a killer follow up.. be it a shoot or another strike.

I guess what thru me is i took your reply to my chin shots as an absolute, which clearly now is not the truth in it. I'm willing to say.. you can miss.. or you can damage your hand.. but to someone experienced as yourself or myself... its a rarity. Am I on point with this? I apoligize for awny abruptness i came into this with... but i just feel the chin was clearly excluded from the target areas, when it is just a valid or more crtitical as others.

[Brian Hunt]

Ok,

now I see where some of the miscommunication is coming from. I am not saying the chin is not a valid target, I was just suggesting a different, and in my opinion safer way to attack the chin than hauling off and hitting a larger bone with smaller bones. One thing to remember is that alot of the techniques we discuss are about maiming and killing your opponent rather than knocking out or submitting him. This is because we are studing manuscripts written for a different time period with different attitudes about fighting than exist today. Heck, the empty hand pugilism spoken of in Terry Brown's book came out of the 17th and 18th centuries and is different in it's approach and goals than that of modern boxing. Sometimes it is all about context. I realize of course that since you train in Greco-Roman that you probably already know this, especially if you have studies the info we have from the times of the Romans and the Greeks when men died in the arena while wresting, boxing, etc.

I also agree with you that if someone is expecting a shot to the solar plexis that they can protect it by tighting up their stomach muscles, the secret is to catch them un-prepared through a fient or whatever. I also prefer to hit it more than one time in a row if possible. I find it works really great if you can catch them in the middle of breathing in or out.

Thanks for the clarification on your communication and your martial style. Sorry to hear about the finger.

all the best.

Brian Hunt
GFS

[Randall Pleasant]

The other thing that frequently happens is that you are slightly off on your punch and drive their teeth through your hand and still break a knuckle.

If that happens your doctor will order tests for HIV, STDs, and many other unpleasant things. I had an encounter on a business trip 5 or 6 years back that resulted in my left arm and face being covered in a scumbag's blood. Although I told my doctor that I did not hit the guy the doctor still spent several minutes checking out my hands for teeth cuts because he was afraid that I had hit the guy and didn't remember. Really strange feeling it is sitting at home wondering if a scumbag has killed you but you just don't know it yet.

[LynGrey]

Ok,
. One thing to remember is that alot of the techniques we discuss are about maiming and killing your opponent rather than knocking out or submitting him.

Who said it stops there? I'm of the breed that incatcipates quickly... even if i herd your arm go "snap, snap, snap" you can still flail about it and hit me.. i rather just put you to sleep. Also much better with multiple engagers. And i can still keep going on your skullwith my boot when you are sleeping =)

This is because we are studing manuscripts written for a different time period with different attitudes about fighting than exist today. Heck, the empty hand pugilism spoken of in Terry Brown's book came out of the 17th and 18th centuries and is different in it's approach and goals than that of modern boxing. Sometimes it is all about context.

Yeah, its 100% about context... You are comparing a combat fighting "style" with a "sport". In a combat, your only intent is to kill your enemy, any victory other than that is just a game.... "combat is not a game, its life and death." But you are absolutly correct.

I also agree with you that if someone is expecting a shot to the solar plexis that they can protect it by tighting up their stomach muscles, the secret is to catch them un-prepared through a fient or whatever. I also prefer to hit it more than one time in a row if possible. I find it works really great if you can catch them in the middle of breathing in or out.

Well if you to the points of fients, then you're beyond the "caught off guard/flat footed stage" Which means the solar plexis is ruled off, at this point adrealin and hearts are racing you are prepared to take any hit, don't know where but you are expecting. The difference is HUGE!! Just my expereinces. Its good area, and it can stull be a target, but i rather just KO'd with a possiblity of a second stun vs a stun or nothing. But half of striking a target area is knowing why and when =)