Seriously, why does the TCMA fighting stance favor a right lead?
Yeah yeah I read the Bruce Lee TM theory- but it doesn’t seem to be the best option once you start to ad real sparring to your curriculem… especially the straight up hardcore TCMA fighting stance which has that baby almost all the way extended. It’s an easy bridge- lacks power- and takes your left almost completely out of play making a person too much of a one dimensional striker.
So why? 
Why would it almost take your left out of play?
No more than the right is take out in an orthodox stance.
because…
Old school TCMA IMO closes the gate too much-- the right hand- waist- hips- pelvis- chest- etc. are extended too much . The rationale is that the stance closes off your center line and protects the groin- true to a point… but it also blocks your left- you could respond with a left to an attack- but there’s an awful lot of distance to cross to strike your opponent.
[QUOTE=MightyB;838272]Old school TCMA IMO closes the gate too much-- the right hand- waist- hips- pelvis- chest- etc. are extended too much . The rationale is that the stance closes off your center line and protects the groin- true to a point… but it also blocks your left- you could respond with a left to an attack- but there’s an awful lot of distance to cross to strike your opponent.[/QUOTE]
Wich old school TCMA advocate such a closed and ill advised stance?
plus…
if you’re already right handed- the tendency will be to stay with the right hand- I mean it’s your strong hand- the Bruce Lee TM thing. But that’s why old school matches on youtube look like to doosh bags poking each other with nuth’n but weak rights even when they’re right handed.
all of them
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;838275]Wich old school TCMA advocate such a closed and ill advised stance?[/QUOTE]
pick any style and watch it’s open-handed forms- well- wing chun might be an exception.
[QUOTE=MightyB;838278]pick any style and watch it’s open-handed forms- well- wing chun might be an exception.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm, are you saying that ant TCMA, or at least the vast majority, fight off a right side lead that is so “closed” that the left side gets almost zero play?
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;838281]Hmmm, are you saying that ant TCMA, or at least the vast majority, fight off a right side lead that is so “closed” that the left side gets almost zero play?[/QUOTE]
that’s my opinion.
One of the markers of a northern system is that when a northerner holds a spear or staff- they lead left. When you hold a sword- dao or gim- you lead left. The stances- all of them- are the same for weapons and empty hands. There is some thinking that the weapons came first- before empty hands- so why the migration to a right lead?
[QUOTE=MightyB;838282]that’s my opinion.
One of the markers of a northern system is that when a northerner holds a spear or staff- they lead left. When you hold a sword- dao or gim- you lead left. The stances- all of them- are the same for weapons and empty hands. There is some thinking that the weapons came first- before empty hands- so why the migration to a right lead?
-[/QUOTE]
Greater control when hitting his PPoint with a foot long missile!?..
I’m okay boxing with the left jab right cross, but if I switch it I own a Nice Right lead…in a real fight with the basic understanding of Hop Gar footwork I’m going to use my strongest weapon to impact with which is my right as I’m right-handed…when I do ratchet work or bang a hammer I prefer the right hand…
don’t know about it not being effective, but if your right handed and you use the strong/power side forward stance, both of your best weapons are placed closest towards the OP and more likely will be successfull. I have no trouble eluding from this stance either
I think the right lead is a bit outdated. Having your strong side closest to your opponent isn’t always a good idea, especially if you face off against an opponent trained in limb destruction. If you lose your power side, you’re pretty much done for.
[QUOTE=MSphinx;838303]I think the right lead is a bit outdated. Having your strong side closest to your opponent isn’t always a good idea, especially if you face off against an opponent trained in limb destruction. If you lose your power side, you’re pretty much done for.[/QUOTE]
but realistically against a bsketball player built like a nfl champ all I could rely on is hopefully tapping his chin with a jab…I’d prefer to use my strongest hit option.
[QUOTE=diego;838307]but realistically against a bsketball player built like a nfl champ all I could rely on is hopefully tapping his chin with a jab…I’d prefer to use my strongest hit option.[/QUOTE]
That’s a good point. I do see where you’re coming from; a strong lead would most likely be better if you want to open your strikes powerfully.
Disclaimer: I practice Muay Thai so I have to deal with a lot of attacks to my lead (low kicks of dooooooooom). This is how I formed my opinion.
I train both sides equally, though I prefer an orthodox stance from my time in boxing and MT, but the “false lead” is also a great option.
I don’t have issues with a strong side lead ( prefer the term dominate side), IF I can still get my other side into the action, silly to limit the arsenal when your opponent doesn’t.
lead with the right is very effective to defend against this technique as demonstrated by van damme.
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j227/yetiyutish/dammedance.gif
let me clear up my post a little:
I do also train both sides forward because you may not always be able to get into your perfered stance. To say it’s outdated,IMHO, is wrong. I’d rather have my best weapons at my disposal and closest to the target than have my poer side back were it is alot easier to be picked off,blocked,parried or countered
One can wonder why is it then that in pro fighting venues, you don’t see more “dominate side leads” ?
Frankly, you can develop either and make it work.
most ‘pro-venues’ get their handwork from boxing or muay thai which is predominantly taught as left lead. Largely because the handwork in boxing is all about setting up for the ‘bomb.’
Having taught both sport stuff and CQC, a lot of the sport evolution is not alays good for the street - and vice versa. Although an absence of resistant partner training is a big gap too.
There is no perfect answer. I use a right lead and never met a boxer I could not shut down using the strategies of my method. (Not to say I never got hit or am superman.)
I know boxers that can put most TMA types into sleepy land. Just show them how to shut down kicks and basic throws and the control of spatial relationships boxing develops is very formidable.
But the idea that a left lead is ‘the truth’ because you find it in ‘pro’ combat sport arenas is laughable.
Some historical boxing methods did not use any lead.
More of a square guard, that used either hand and elbows for protection, kinda like typical silat bone shields.
[QUOTE=Black Jack II;838359]Some historical boxing methods did not use any lead.
More of a square guard, that used either hand and elbows for protection, kinda like typical silat bone shields.[/QUOTE]
the boxing lead is related to the history of fencing (and many men did BOTH)
original fencing had “switching leads”, however once one school established the single lead and thrust the others either got killed (yes, literally) or switch to single lead. Boxing subsequently adopted single lead based upon this
As an interesting note, they say (impossible to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt) that ancient greek boxing was right forward, with the left used to block and the right used to strike. In some ways it sounds like a lot of CMA usage