Question about the Warfields and pre-emptive strikes

Hi Dave. I was just wondering if the Warfields taught pre-emptive strikes as part of their system? If so, did they get them from Kenshiro Abbe?
All the best,
RGC

The answer is a tentative yes.. tentative because they perhaps waited a second or two later than say Geoff T would have done..

let me see if I can illustrate it..

Geoff's mainstay 'Fence' is very 'face on', where-as we tended to be more 'mobile' in the Goshinkwai, sort of controlling the three main elements of 'Space' .. 'Distance' .. 'Time'..

So we wouldnt face off with one or both hands out front like the Fence.. more moving about a bit to prevent the assailant from getting a target fix on you... This would usually be done whilst talking to him.. not necessarily shouting "Stay Back" stuff.. more "Come on mate ,,whats your problem" etc.. then at the instant he decides to 'launch' the attack we attack HIM..

My only worry about the pre-emptive idea is just how far BACKWARDS we can take it.. is it legal pre-emptive to HEAR someone saying they are going to slap you one, and just knock him out?


so by using the Goshinkwai principle of 'Accept the Attack' we can counter attack so much more efficiently

Both ideas have great merit,, but as to who TAUGHT Warfield pre-empts, whether it was Abbe or not I dont know.. but somehow I feel it was something Abbe did anyway but as i said just that milli-second later.

Abbe had a tenet ..

"Attack the moment he attacks, and continue your attack until he is no longer a danger".. so maybe not pre-emptive as we see it

Thanks, Dave, interesting answer.

Interesting stuff.
That seems almost counter to the "fence" principle that waiting for them to attack puts you at a disadvantage.
You used the term "at the instant he decides to launch" - that sounds like some good awareness was part of the training, is that right?

yes Jonathan.. people make 'alterations' in stride, breathing, muscular tension, positioning, focussing, and other aspects as they commence to 'launch'.. that is the critical moment.
Too soon for them to LAND, too late for them to RETRACT.

Their tragetting mode has been activated.. hard to return to passive mode, so the approach phase is used to sort out positioning of yourself, possible attacks from the assailant, distances and about another half dozen aspects.. you will then be in a position to attack thettacker

would it be fair Dave to say that the whole concept of "space, distance and time" incorporates but isn't restricted to pre-emptive striking.

Pre-emptive movement which may or may not result in a strike?

well put Chris.. thats a good observation mate

Moving about whilst maintaining a fence of sorts..? Pre-emptive movement..?
Reminds me of a conversation I had a while back with someone. We were working from a fence, and I said this was more uncomfortable than when we moved to the combat, it was the standing still that made me uncomfortable, almost forcing me to strike out of fear that he will attack me as a staitionary target.

I had asked about being mobile, but the other guy was very sure this would anly aggrevate the would-be attacker, give out the wrong signals.

I am really interested in thsi Dave - how do you go about staying mobile, without sending out warning signals to the other guy? It might be a simple thing, but I can't figure it out. And it might be something that works better for me than the 'standard' fence.

Paul

use talking as a way of moving.. and the word movement isnt meant to convery MASSIVE movements.. just little 'shifts' in all directions..

If he cant get a 'bead' on you he will find it harder to hit his target..

remember if we take a possible 'scenario'.. all semi hypotheticall..
Think .. INTENT ... APPROACH... ATTACK

He says to himself or a mate "I'm sickof that bastard looking my way .. I'm going to have it out with him then take his F****G head off"
That is INTENT

So now he approaches you saying his piece. "You F*****G staring at you T**T?" (the usual Shakesperian prose).. this is is Targetting and fixing method of getting you to answer him, which normally means you are static and have joined the game playing his rules.
That is APPROACH

Now you do your "Sorry mate I want staring at you" routine, which is what he expects and is actually calling him a liar, plus its slightly agrumentative.. just what he wants.. so he bangs you a good big swinger
That is ATTACK

NOW .. on the APPROACH phase you make your Fence, move about "hey come on mate what the problems.. just stay there and we'll talk about it" .. left foot forward, then right, change hands etc etc..
"Yes I WAS looking at you mate.. sorry I'm sure I know you from somewhere".. didnt mean anything by.. but no need to come any closer..

This NEGATES his approach, and you are AGREEING with him not arguing withhim.. so this also negates his planned and potential attack. He now has to re-focus, re-target, and re-design his attack

YOU onthe other hand having practised this manouver 100's of times in training spot every little change in position HE has to make and know exactly the best pre-emptive strike to make should he have re-INTENT (where it all started) and try and approach again..

hope that clarifies it better

Use talking as a way of moving - that makes a lot of sense. Sure it's not so easy to do so and keep it looking natural and unthreatening without lots of practice though.

Thanks Dave

Hi Dave,

Reading the above posts I was struck by one thing, and that is how would you go about handling such a situation in a very enclosed space, which by its nature restricts movement (packed bar etc)?

Cheers,
Chris

good question.. the sort all SD people should be asking about their styles..

most styles and systems presume certain aspects.. thats the main problem with training in a nice warm well lit hall with a good warm up unnder your belt (Obi??)

But the section we study termed 'Adverse Situations'is just about that kind of question.. how do we deal with an attack in any way OTHER than face to face with lots of room.

So as well as restricting YOU a lack of space also restricts your attacker thus you USE the tightness by working the movement and power in and around the lower body and hips areas.
Take something like a phone box as an example.. your attacker cannot swing wildly as such.. and he cannot outflank you.. he cannot 'wind up'.. you meet his centre line by using the 'Smother Flinch' posture, then by say for example use a thumb gouge to his mouth rotate HIM around HIS lower areas... works better than I can describe it.

The same principles will always apply, that is controlling SPACE DISTANCE AND TIME by Body management

Great stuff Dave - note to self - get finger out!

Cheers Dave - another excellent answer!

Cheers,
Chris

Dave,
It sounds like we are beating them to the punch at the moment they chamber or lean, as opposed to trying to jam the strike at the source and counter, thus employing the philosophy, If you have time to jam them , you have time to strike them. Would that be a correct observation.

spot on mate .. I firmly believe most martial systems defend TOO Late.. as he sets, you GO!

Just to remind everyone that the course being held at Andy crittendens on oct 22 will be run by Mike Gould, Jeff Keen and myslef will be an opportunity not only to be taught pure Goshinkwai but also talk to the people that new the warfields and the system better than anyone. I'm sure you wont mind me stepping in on the thread Dave it was good chance to remind people of the course.

Krackan
details of the course can be found on the Bazzar

no sweats mate.. more than happy to use my slot to promote the REAL Goshinkwai Yawara..

in terms of YEARS knowing the Warfields.. not sure how I rank, but Mike Gould must have had pushing FORTY years (well over 35 anyway) with the Warfields... Keeny about 30+ by now.. Cammy.. what 30 mate??

me I did 20 so.. yes .. these guys are the ones to meet for sure.. get along if you can

Joshu's Dog wrote:Interesting stuff.
That seems almost counter to the "fence" principle that waiting for them to attack puts you at a disadvantage.

In my humble opinion, and according to my experience (both as an involved player and a witness) the "fence + pre-emptive strike" is the best choice, and the "attack the moment he attacks" is the second-best choice.

The reason I say that is that I witnessed that if you pre-empt the opponent with a powerful and accurate strike, you will end the fight. Therefore, you won't find yourself in the typical chaos of a scruffy struggle because you don't need to control distance/timing anymore -- you need to control that only once.

Otherwise, if you attack the moment he attacks, you can actually end up in a clinch, which is very different in the street than in a thai/graeco ring.... and much more dangerous.

Once again, that's only my personal opinion, but as far as my experience tells me, I prefer to totally pre-empt the attacker and to try to K.O. him quickly.

Cheers