I got to thinking about this from watching some of the 'members in action' vids here on the site. We all know that hip movement is important for power generation in strikes. But how important is it relative to some of the other factors, like 'dropping' your weight, overall joint alignment or 'launching' into a strike? My stand up training did not really emphasize hip motion over anything else, but it was taken into consideration.

The other thing is, what do you consider to be the most effective timing for hip movement? Should hip movement precede the striking implement (ie; hand, foot, elbow, etc)? Should they move as a unit? Does the striking implement move before the hip does? Does (should?) using a weapon change hip timing or other integration?

Wow, you’re into the granular basics…
Of the three – Hip torque, Body Weight Transfer, and Joint Alignment I would call them equal it’s just learning to use them together and at the same time is a bit tricky.

Timing – Everything starts and stops at the same time.

Does the timing change – I think at this level if it needed to change it would be ineffective, this is just basic power generation.

Just my .02
-JBC-

I like the tech threads so far. keep em coming.

First, hip movement should always procede the striking weapon. Think of striking as popping a whip, or towel, or ball and chain. The movement starts at one end and explodes outward. If you threw the ball first, what good would it do to push the chain behind it?

How important is hip movement relative to other factors? Well, how important is power and speed to your training?

"Lead with your belt" is a phrase I would use many times. It helps with that transfer of power as well as keeping down telegraphing.
I had some white belts doing some simple front thrust kicks against the bag. One in particular was having the bag knock her back when she hit it. When I told her to lead with her belt, in fact drive the belt foreward first, she knocked the person holding the bag backwards.

I think there is a confusion here about the difference between hip torque and weight transfer. Surely the hip torque is a method of effectively transfering your body weight into a strike, as is sinking down as you punch and having a strong stance. The hip torque makes the whole body accelerate into the target meaning that the greater the hip torque the more acceleration and weight a punch will have.

The second question: I think the two should happen at the same time, because, as I said above, it will increase the acceleration of the limb towards the target and therefore increase power.

I'll leave the third question to those who have trained with weapons, I have never done so.

I think I see what you are getting at, Supremor. But I do count hip torque as something seperate from "weight transfer", because I am considering weight transfer of the entire body. Because hip torque does not directly involve the legs like weight dropping, or stepping into the target.

But do I concede that hip torque could be considered a form of weight transfer. Now quit making me look stupid, Poindexter. J/K

hip tourque with proper timing and weight transfer produces incredible amount of power....but only at full range. for ranges closer up, a different power generation needs to be employed from spinal rotation and leverage. The reason for that is, time...you simply don't have enough time to pull off hip tourque at very close range.

Whilst all three of the elements of power generation are essential, weight transfer produces the most force. Without your bodyweight behind a strike, there is little chance it will have any effect. That said, no strike is effective without all three.

Hi Matt. Interesting technique threads you have going here.


I think that the timing of hips/striking implement varies given the technique. However, with most techniques I find that the best power generation comes from the striking surface slightly preceding the forward drive of the hips, with the hips and the striking surface landing in synchronicity at the moment of impact. For example, when we teach a basic straight line reverse punch, we tell our students to think about firing the punching hand in a straight line toward the target first, with the hips following via a drive off the back leg. The hip and the knuckles should then both be driving into the target together at the moment of impact.

I find that this method works well for me. IMHO, if one fires the hips first (at least with most techniques), and the implement after, the connection between the hips and the striking implement is broken. That is, with the reverse punch example, the hips would arrive first, and then the knuckle, resulting in a punch that was "whippy", but without much bodyweight behind it. What one wants is a reverse punch that is rooted into the ground and "felt" from the back foot, which is facilitated by the forward drive of the hip in conjunction with the impact of the knuckle - not the hip arriving first with the knuckle to follow.

Does this post make sense? Words so often fail me when describing technique - we all really ought to train together to best swap ideas. Besides, I am hopped up on cold medicine today, and the fog in my head may keep me from posting clearly .

Peace,
Mike