Sunday, March 19, 2017


[rōˈbəst, ˈrōˌbəst]
  1. strong and healthy; vigorous: 
    synonyms: strong · vigorous · sturdy · tough · powerful · solid · 

    (of an object) sturdy in construction: 

    synonyms: durable · resilient · tough · hardwearing · 

    (of a process, system, organization, etc.) able to withstand or overcome adverse conditions
    1. So this relates to a number of previous posts. Considering how there are no guarantees that some technique, tactic, or strategy will work at a given moment, acknowledging the intrinsic complexity of a fight, it's less a question of whether something "works" or "doesn't work," and more a question of odds of working or not, and how robust a thing is in general. A prime example would be our (i.e. "my") view regarding the high corner block and strike ("biu sao da") versus the modified high cover and strike as a defense to the high hook ( the wrist is braced just behind the head, with the elbow slightly out, no more than 45 degrees, and between eye and nose level, with the shoulder hunched up, while moving slightly in towards the opponent while the free hand is finger jabbing the eyes or throat). The thinking behind this is that you form a very strong structure that that dissolves the force of a hook because you are not giving a surface to bite into like the “telephone” cover, standard in boxing. You can do it almost too late and be safe whereas the corner block has to be executed a bit earlier in the opponent's strike and therefore has a higher failure rate, especially against tight hooks which it is not particularly designed for. So as part of our thinking about various responses, we should always ask "How well does this technique/tactic stand up in the real world?" Also, the more movements required to accomplish something is directly related to how likely things will go sideways, which is why joint locking, for example, is not considered a base skill to me (other than the finger grab, which may easily be found in a standard combative mess. Food for thought...