The fake strike becomes the real strike

[D_Glenn]

I think it's supposed to be more like 'The hidden hand becomes the real strike while the obvious hand becomes the fake strike.' Most Chinese martial arts hit with the 'hidden hand' and have different strategies to achieve it like always hit 3 times, close-in fighting, drawing out the opponent etc. The basis for it comes from observing the devastating effects from an unseen sucker-punch opposed to the effect the same strike has when it's seen. It's all about the yi (somatic) and weiqi (autonomic) responses of the body when defending against a strike.

[DeusTrismegistus]

Definitely not the responses I expected.

Personally I see feinting as a valuable tactic that really goes beyond any style. Sun Tzu said "make a clamor in the east, and attack from the west." To me that is the essence of feinting. For a style to say "we don't feint in this style" seems to me to be throwing away a perfectly valid tactic.

The way I am taught, it's not about feinting. It's about the interplay of Yin and Yang.

You initiate an attack (Yang) on the opponent. If he fails to block or tries to block but has weaker structure than yours, you simply issue power and blast through him because you are Yang and he is Yin.

If he blocks with superior structure and/or can neutralize/counter your initial effort, the Yang part that touches the opponent should immediately shift to Yin and becomes passive, receiving, and neutralizing. And as that Yang part shifts to Yin, another part that was Yin becomes Yang -- active, attacking, and aggressive -- to attack the opponent.

It can go on and on and on..........until one side is down.

If all attacks start as real attacks then they can go from real to fake, but not from fake to real. To go from fake to real the strike must start as fake, which I interpreted as a feint but it seems other people interpret that as empty? maybe.

Your yin and yang explanation is a very good way of looking at how the interplay between two should work within IMA, however unless you are saying that yin is fake and yang is real then I am not sure I see how it really connects to the saying.

Well said. This is very similar to my understanding of I Liq Chuan where there is also no feinting.

I thought this is what all IMA say. There is no obvious beginning and end of issuing force. I don't know what that means as far as feints. If someone perceives your bridging move as a feint and it trips them up, is it a feint if you had no feinting intention?

If a strike is perceived as a feint then it is not a feint - where's the deception. If your bridge is not effectively dealt with by your opponent then it lands as a successful strike. As I see it, when you feint with your left for example you are essentially committing to your follow up strike with your right. That decision makes you less responsive to your opponent's reaction so that if your opponent blocks/evades the left as he moves to his right(your left) your committed follow up right is a non-issue and you have a gap in your attentiveness to your opponent.

If a person perceives a strike as a feint they wouldn't react to it and would get hit. To successfully feint you must get them to perceive the feint as a real strike and react to it. If they perceive your bridging move as a feint it wasn't a feint, it was a bridging move that they thought was fake and didn't react to which should make your bridge successful.

The purpose of feinting as I understand it is to illicit a reaction. If you expect a particular reaction though then you can always be outmaneuvered by them simply doing something unexpected. The normal ideal of MA and IMA does not change in that you want to avoid anticipating what the opponent will do. You need to be able to react spontaneously to whatever opening is created.

I think it's supposed to be more like 'The hidden hand becomes the real strike while the obvious hand becomes the fake strike.' Most Chinese martial arts hit with the 'hidden hand' and have different strategies to achieve it like always hit 3 times, close-in fighting, drawing out the opponent etc. The basis for it comes from observing the devastating effects from an unseen sucker-punch opposed to the effect the same strike has when it's seen. It's all about the yi (somatic) and weiqi (autonomic) responses of the body when defending against a strike.

That is interesting too. What you are describing is like pulling your right back and waving it in a big circle and then punching them in the gut with your left.

[dragontigerpalm]

[quote="DeusTrismegistus"]Definitely not the responses I expected.

Personally I see feinting as a valuable tactic that really goes beyond any style. Sun Tzu said "make a clamor in the east, and attack from the west." To me that is the essence of feinting. For a style to say "we don't feint in this style" seems to me to be throwing away a perfectly valid tactic.

This is no doubt one of the greatest stategies ever expressed but I interpret it with regard to leading one's opponent's mind as opposed to a set physical strategy.

[C.J.Wang]

Definitely not the responses I expected.

Personally I see feinting as a valuable tactic that really goes beyond any style. Sun Tzu said "make a clamor in the east, and attack from the west." To me that is the essence of feinting. For a style to say "we don't feint in this style" seems to me to be throwing away a perfectly valid tactic.

The way I am taught, it's not about feinting. It's about the interplay of Yin and Yang.

You initiate an attack (Yang) on the opponent. If he fails to block or tries to block but has weaker structure than yours, you simply issue power and blast through him because you are Yang and he is Yin.

If he blocks with superior structure and/or can neutralize/counter your initial effort, the Yang part that touches the opponent should immediately shift to Yin and becomes passive, receiving, and neutralizing. And as that Yang part shifts to Yin, another part that was Yin becomes Yang -- active, attacking, and aggressive -- to attack the opponent.

It can go on and on and on..........until one side is down.

If all attacks start as real attacks then they can go from real to fake, but not from fake to real. To go from fake to real the strike must start as fake, which I interpreted as a feint but it seems other people interpret that as empty? maybe.

Your yin and yang explanation is a very good way of looking at how the interplay between two should work within IMA, however unless you are saying that yin is fake and yang is real then I am not sure I see how it really connects to the saying.

From reading your posts, I get the impression that you see Yin -- the feint-- as fake and empty, and Yang -- the real hit -- as real and full.

But what I am getting at is that in CMA, Yin is not empty at all; it's just as powerful as yang and can still do damage to the opponent. Whereas a feint, by your definition, is just an empty move that aims to trick the opponent while the real hit, the Yang, attacks.

That's where we don't seem to agree, I think.

[Josealb]

I dont like feints, and in my understanding of xingyi there are none. The "false" attack, its not just that it changes and all of a sudden its a real attack...its also one of those things that the guy bumps into and says "what the hell?"

Thats what Paofali in Xingyi is all about. If the guy moves and you end up hitting him with an unexpected body part, he''ll feel it.

I like more what Dragontigerpalm wrote, about the feint being in terms of intent, instead of physical movement.

[KEND]

I agree with much that has been said but would like to add the following.
The hand goes out, if there is no response it continues and strikes, if the opponent blocks a bridge is made, one's hand which is relaxed on going out is essentially Yin. At this point several reactions are possible on your part: In Hsing yi one would initially expand a little[Yang] eliciting a Yang reaction, which can then be turned into a small circle and nullified-this takes place in a fraction of a second and is often seen as 'blasting through'. In Bagua stepping would shift the force vector of the blocking arm, in TCC the blocking arm would be neutralized , again using a circle but with Yin, relaxed, contact

[H2O]

Thing about fakes is, if the guy isn't afraid of your fake, then it wont work. Best thing I've found, is that sometimes my technique is an attack, sometimes it's a fake. I have to make him afraid of it or else he wont react to the fake.

This one's pretty much true regardless of the actual techinique you use, and something a lot of people miss.

[johnwang]

It's always good to attack 3 times for real. If any of those 3 attacks work then you don't need to use any fake. If all 3 times fail, you use it as fake and change into combo.

The number "3" is a magic number. It's also popular in the western world. If you cheat me

- once, shame on you.
- twice, shame on me.
- 3rd times, enemy action.