March 2007 EPAK Technique of the Month - Broken Ram

[Rob Broad]

Broken Ram (Front- Tackle; Arms Wide)
1. An attacker at 12 o'clock comes at you to tackle with their arms spread wide.

2. From a right neutral bow facing 12 o'clock, step your left foot to 3 o'clock as you execute a right downward parry to your attacker's left arm simultaneous with a left downward parry to your attacker's right arm. Continue the motion of your right arm and as you settle into a right neutral bow facing 9 o'clock, execute a right inward overhead hammerfist to the back of your attacker's neck. (Left hand should be checking against your attacker's right.)

3. With your attacker's left arm trying to grab your waist, pivot into a right reverse bow as you loop your right arm under your attacker's left arm and execute a left uppercut to 4:30. (With your body as the fulcrum, this should cause a break.)

4. Execute a right rear scoop kick to your attacker's groin.

5. As you plant your foot back to to 10:30, aim to buckle out your attacker's left knee. As you do this, loop your hand counterclockwise and over your attacker's left arm to execute a right outward downward hammerfist to your attacker's left jaw.

6. Cross out to 4:30.

[parkerkarate]

Ok I agree on everything exept your initial move. I have never seen or heard of it done like that. I know we start in a natural stance and than step and hammerfist the guy. We do not do any parries. All we do in the very beginning is nail them with the hammerfist. Other than that it looks good to me.

[JamesB]

agreed - I'd go on to say that it won't be possible to parry the guy's arm if his arms are 'spread wide'. If his arms are held like this his center-line would be wide open why not outward-extended-block to the top of shoulder/base of neck?

[michaeledward]

I worked all the RAM techniques with Mr. Planas last fall. I don't much like the techniques, but after working them pretty hard for a time, I like them quite a bit better.

One of the primary items we worked on was the attacks. As Mr. Planas describes the written attacks, they do seem a bit strange. My instructor, Mr. Hogan, had many times said that the Charging Ram and Broken Ram do not have any forward momentum, and Mr. Planas stressed this point.

The attack on both of these techniques is that the attacker "takes one diving step in, and then stops himself". In Charging Ram, the attacker has his hands extended back behind himself, such that his shoulder makes contact with our bodies before wrapping his arms for the tackle. In Broken Ram, by contrast, the attacker is extending his hands either a) forward toward us, or b) outward, to wrap around us.

So, as with parkerkarate and JamesB, I would say the 'arms wide' description is difficult to read, but maybe not so much to actually execute against.

With Mr. Planas, we discussed two variations on Broken Ram. The first is how our base technique is taught, which has the left hand moving across our center line and parrying the attackers extended right arm in a downward outward motion while we step back with our left foot to 4:30, or so (depending on our initial position - e.g. neutral or natural); leading to the right inward overhead hammerfist. The second adds a couple of dope slaps as a prefix to the technique; a left inward heel palm to the attackers eardrum, and a right inward parry to the attackers left arm (preceeding the left downward outward parry described in the first version).

A couple of other thoughts on this write up .....

The arm break in 'Broken Ram' is, of course, the opposite of the arm break in 'Locked Wing', now, isn't it?

And the right leg scoop and inside buckle combined with the reverse motion on the right hammer fist is so much more incredibly complicated to actually execute than words can describe. That steps 4 and 5 are barely two sentences does not begin to describe the complexity of moving your body in that manner.

The ending position, prior to the cover out, should look a lot like the first move in 'Buckling Branch' / 'Thrusting Salute' - except toward 1:30 instead of 10:30.



Thanks - Good Choice - Still an awkward technique, but not one to be neglected.

[DavidCC]

One of the primary items we worked on was the attacks. As Mr. Planas describes the written attacks, they do seem a bit strange. My instructor, Mr. Hogan, had many times said that the Charging Ram and Broken Ram do not have any forward momentum, and Mr. Planas stressed this point.

The attack on both of these techniques is that the attacker "takes one diving step in, and then stops himself". In Charging Ram, the attacker has his hands extended back behind himself, such that his shoulder makes contact with our bodies before wrapping his arms for the tackle. In Broken Ram, by contrast, the attacker is extending his hands either a) forward toward us, or b) outward, to wrap around us.

Did Mr. Planas or Mr. Hogan give you any idea why an attacker would:
take one diving step in and stop himself
or
extend his hands behind himself while attacking?

Perhaps people with grappling or even actual self-defense experience could answer these, because I am having trouble imagining how these attacks would happen in a real assault.

The first one, maybe I can see that, if you were in very close range and the attacker wanted to clinch and not take you down. So he might level-change and try to wrap you up with little forward momentum... but why hands behind himself?

[KenpoJuJitsu3]

Did Mr. Planas or Mr. Hogan give you any idea why an attacker would:
take one diving step in and stop himself
or
extend his hands behind himself while attacking?

Perhaps people with grappling or even actual self-defense experience could answer these, because I am having trouble imagining how these attacks would happen in a real assault.

The first one, maybe I can see that, if you were in very close range and the attacker wanted to clinch and not take you down. So he might level-change and try to wrap you up with little forward momentum... but why hands behind himself?

As far as a tackle with no forward momentum? EMPHATIC NO. Anyone with grappling experience knows better than that and if they are tackling they probably have experience. A tackle is for the purpose of clinching or taking down. Both work far better when the victim is being off balanced which is what the momentum is for. If they take only one lunge step and stop their own momentum they are beyond inexperienced and you don't need Kenpo to beat that. I know it's not a "fight" but watch any MMA event and observe the tackles. Keep track of how many you see with no momentum. It it's without momentum in the Kenpo system it's just for the purpose of putting the person in the position. But it's by far not real unless we are assuming that the guy knows next to nothing about the attack he is choosing to use.

As far as tackle with the shoulder leading instead of the arms... This is common for non-grappler wrap tackles usually used by football players and the like. Violates several principles of grappling but is common enough none the less due to the large number (in America) or either play or watch football. This type of tackle also RELIES on momentum as that is the only thing it has going for it as the hands are out of position to proceed to phase two of a clinch or takedown.

[michaeledward]

Did Mr. Planas or Mr. Hogan give you any idea why an attacker would: take one diving step in and stop himself ... or ... extend his hands behind himself while attacking?

Perhaps people with grappling or even actual self-defense experience could answer these, because I am having trouble imagining how these attacks would happen in a real assault.

The first one, maybe I can see that, if you were in very close range and the attacker wanted to clinch and not take you down. So he might level-change and try to wrap you up with little forward momentum... but why hands behind himself?

Have either of these instructors given explicit direction as to why these are the attacks for these techniques ... No. Although, let me expand a bit with my own opinion. Usually, when discussing techniques, especially in that 'ideal phase', I hear that we learn "prescribed for prescribed"; the attack is prescribed, the defense is prescribed, the responses are prescribed.

So, for Broken Ram, the prescribed attack is ... an attacker reaches forward (or out) with his arms as he prepares to step in and "tackle". Because we are able to observe the arms moving toward us, we can act with Broken Ram; initiating our defense against the outstretched arms.

Yes, it seems like a goofy attack ... but, I picture myself as a kid fighting my little brother ... I'd grab him around the waist, pick him up, turn his body horizontal, and fall to the ground on top of him.

As for 'Charging Ram', why would an attacker keep his arms back .... <<shrugg>> who knows? But, the result is - the attacker is going to get his arms wrapped around my waist! There is no way I can prevent it. Once his shoulder makes contact with my mid-section, his arms shoot forward, and around my hips, attempting to lock behind my back. I am not going to be able to (pardon the pun) intercept (get it?) his attack before he makes contact, and my defense is predicated on that - step back to create distance - hammer the base of the neck to stop the attack - draw and kick to create some working room.

How about some more speculation ... and I am still pretty much a newb to martial arts, but when did "grappling" become a common activity? I sort of thought as a kid, we 'didn't kick a guy when he was down'. Was anyone saying in the 60's and 70's that 'all fights go to the ground'?

Do we have any techniques against lower attacks than these three RAM techniques? Sure, have some techniques where we thump a guy once he's down ... but not that many, are there? Squatting Sacrifice, Leap of Death, Dance of Death, maybe a few more. Isn't most of our stuff is 'stand up stuff'? (I haven't watched your entire seminar clips Mr. Hawkins - yet).

Net - Net, I think, is that Mr. Planas, known to be a stickler for doing Kenpo the way Kenpo was done back then, teaches these techniques in this manner. Sometimes, they did stuff back then because it was effective, and sometimes, I think, they did stuff to adhere to the idea of 'opposites and reverses'. But, in order to put a black belt around your waist, there was an expected amount of material to be known.

How did Mr. Parker put it ... something like ... what is useful, and what is unuseful will become known through time, logic, and experience?

As I said, I felt the time I worked with Mr. Planas on these, my least favorite techniques, had quite a bit of value. I still don't love 'em. But . . .

[parkerkarate]

Here is a question for everyone. Which would you rather use and why...Intercepting the Ram or Broken Ram? Are they not for the same thing?

For me I would rather use Broken because when I do the knee, hammer fist, and heel palm with Intercepting, I just feel like I could be put on my butt too easily if the opponent had enough momentum.

[michaeledward]

Here is a question for everyone. Which would you rather use and why...Intercepting the Ram or Broken Ram? Are they not for the same thing?

For me I would rather use Broken because when I do the knee, hammer fist, and heel palm with Intercepting, I just feel like I could be put on my butt too easily if the opponent had enough momentum.

Short answer from my corner . No, they are not the same thing.

The attacks are a bit different. Our initial move in Intercepting the Ram anticipates our not having a correct base as executed, resulting in the possibility of landing on our butts. We must anticipate the reaction of force meeting force, of actually falling back when the attacker and defender meet, falling back into a solid stance with Intercepting.

I'll let some others offer their insight, maybe look back at my notes, and think on this question some more. But, really, I don't think they are the same thing.

[Carol]

How about some more speculation ... and I am still pretty much a newb to martial arts, but when did "grappling" become a common activity? I sort of thought as a kid, we 'didn't kick a guy when he was down'. Was anyone saying in the 60's and 70's that 'all fights go to the ground'?

MMA is relatively new but grappling in the wrestling sense certainly isn't. A friend of mine has some vintage posters from some wrestling bouts promoted here on the north shore in the 60s and 70s in mainstream venues such as the Peabody Elks and Salem AoH lodges. Nothing on the posters said all fights go to the ground. However, some of the promotions have some rather...um...politically incorrect bylines such as "Indian Death Match". While the fighters in question appeared to be of Indigenous heritage, I highly doubt that one of them intentionally killed the other on the floor of the Elks.

Perhaps it's safe to say that even in the 60s and 70s fighters...sometimes...exaggerated a bit?

[DavidCC]

MMA is relatively new but grappling in the wrestling sense certainly isn't. A friend of mine has some vintage posters from some wrestling bouts promoted here on the north shore in the 60s and 70s in mainstream venues such as the Peabody Elks and Salem AoH lodges. Nothing on the posters said all fights go to the ground. However, some of the promotions have some rather...um...politically incorrect bylines such as "Indian Death Match". While the fighters in question appeared to be of Indigenous heritage, I highly doubt that one of them intentionally killed the other on the floor of the Elks.

Perhaps it's safe to say that even in the 60s and 70s fighters...sometimes...exaggerated a bit?

Here in Omaha at the turn of the 20th century (1890s-1910s) we had one of the top grappling schools in the country. Farmer Burns... grappling is sooooo old...

[Doc]

Did Mr. Planas or Mr. Hogan give you any idea why an attacker would:
take one diving step in and stop himself
or
extend his hands behind himself while attacking?

Perhaps people with grappling or even actual self-defense experience could answer these, because I am having trouble imagining how these attacks would happen in a real assault.

The first one, maybe I can see that, if you were in very close range and the attacker wanted to clinch and not take you down. So he might level-change and try to wrap you up with little forward momentum... but why hands behind himself?

I'd like to hear the answer to those questions myself. From what I've read so far, none of it makes any sense. I'll read what James says when I get some time.

[KenpoJuJitsu3]

So, for Broken Ram, the prescribed attack is ... an attacker reaches forward (or out) with his arms as he prepares to step in and "tackle". Because we are able to observe the arms moving toward us, we can act with Broken Ram; initiating our defense against the outstretched arms.

As for 'Charging Ram', why would an attacker keep his arms back .... <<shrugg>> who knows? But, the result is - the attacker is going to get his arms wrapped around my waist! There is no way I can prevent it. Once his shoulder makes contact with my mid-section, his arms shoot forward, and around my hips, attempting to lock behind my back. I am not going to be able to (pardon the pun) intercept (get it?) his attack before he makes contact, and my defense is predicated on that - step back to create distance - hammer the base of the neck to stop the attack - draw and kick to create some working As I said, I felt the time I worked with Mr. Planas on these, my least favorite techniques, had quite a bit of value. I still don't love 'em. But . . .

You have these reversed. Charging is arms extended forward, Broken is arms back shoulder leading according to my instructor from the Planas line.

[parkerkarate]

You have these reversed. Charging is arms extended forward, Broken is arms back shoulder leading according to my instructor form the Planas line.

I have to agree on the attack with michael, broken is the the ones with the hands out. Don't kill me lol. Ok so after looking at how Rob put it up, James should be correct. But I remember that when I was taught these two techniques, charging was the ones without the arms while broken was trying to go for the tackle. Oy my head hurts lol.

[KenpoJuJitsu3]

I have to agree on the attack with michael, broken is the the ones with the hands out. Don't kill me lol. Ok so after looking at how Rob put it up, James should be correct. But I remember that when I was taught these two techniques, charging was the ones without the arms while broken was trying to go for the tackle. Oy my head hurts lol.

In charging the arms are extended forward which is what allows for the hooking parry which puts the attackers body to our inside with no arm left to wrap tackle with. In Broken he leads with the shoulder and he can't hooking parry his arm as it is out of range. So we blast the back of the neck to redirect his momentum downward and then over hook his arm to break it and commit his right hand to the ground just as we do his left hand with the same lock in locked wing. If he doesn't commit the hands to us until late and we do charging ram his arm is still on the outside which puts us out of position to kick him. If he presents his arms for broken there is no need to let his arm wrap around us when there is a better option available...such as the hooking parry which puts us on the outside which is the ideal place to work from.

As a further point of reference information besides one of my current instructors being Parker/Planas lineage...the guys that run KenpoNet are Parker/Planas lineage. Check the attacks listed.

http://www.kenponet.com/curriculum/t...4/ptech.html#h
http://www.kenponet.com/curriculum/t...luetech.html#w

As another point of info from a different line check Mr. Hale's Kenpo Journal.

But if you guys can get Charging Ram to work against a arms-wide tackle you have to teach me that one, seriously. I must be missing some detail that could be very useful.

[parkerkarate]

I have learned charging rams about two or three different ways so far. I have seen other systems do it as well.

[KenpoJuJitsu3]

I have learned charging rams about two or three different ways so far. I have seen other systems do it as well.

When we hook up after the 24th you can show me all of them A different kind of "you show me yours and I'll show you mine."

[parkerkarate]

When we hook up after the 24th you can show me all of them A different kind of "you show me yours and I'll show you mine."

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I am not sure how to respond to that one lol. We will come up with a place in time in the next few days.

[Doc]

One of the primary items we worked on was the attacks. As Mr. Planas describes the written attacks, they do seem a bit strange. My instructor, Mr. Hogan, had many times said that the Charging Ram and Broken Ram do not have any forward momentum, and Mr. Planas stressed this point.

Body Momentum is often not addressed in commercial techniques because it is difficult without specific knowledge and mechanisms. This doesn't mean some teachers do not have the knowledge, but may indicate this is how they choose to begin the process of teaching. This also is the reason why most techniques are addressed as "attempts" in the motion system. Addressing Body Momentum is one of the many mechanisms never inserted in the abbreviated commercial system for various reasons. I was always taught to address the actual attack under most circumstances, and teach the same from the beginning. It is more difficult for students, but in my opinion if effectiveness is key, than it cannot be ignored under any circumstances. In my own teaching, I instruct these techniques from a downed three-point stance to force students to utilize, and compensate for Body Momentum in the learning process

The attack on both of these techniques is that the attacker "takes one diving step in, and then stops himself". In Charging Ram, the attacker has his hands extended back behind himself, such that his shoulder makes contact with our bodies before wrapping his arms for the tackle. In Broken Ram, by contrast, the attacker is extending his hands either a) forward toward us, or b) outward, to wrap around us.

Of course 'stopping yourself,' would negate, and in fact, would not be an attack at all, in a "RAM" technique that implies the use of body momentum in the assault. That is exactly why it is termed a "RAM Technique" as I understand it.

As far as leading without the arms, I found this idea intriguing, and it too was addressed by Ed Parker. In my lessons, we always made a distinction between a 'grappling tackle' versus what he called a 'football tackle.' The distinction in purposes being one designed to take you off your feet for the physically expressed purpose of engagement, while the other is designed to simply 'knock you off your feet.' This distinction is important because a football-like tackle may come at any angle. However, in a street fight scenario, grappling tackles typically come from the front.

To understand 'why,' we must begin with the scenario-designed intent of the attacker. In street fights, grappling usually occurs because striking assaults and/or defense have broken down. In street fights, it would be unusual for an attacker to initiate an assault that would intentionally take both parties to the ground. No one wants to be engaged on the ground in a street scenario, although these secondary skills need to be addressed.

The Gracie’s sold this nonsense to the masses, but the street is not a match or contest, but possible life or death. A person with the intent to attack you on the street would more likely strike you from behind or the flank with hands, feet, or weapon, as other techniques address. Front tackles usually lead with a strike, or occur because of a breakdown of other defenses from the front. Therefore, football-like tackles without the utilization of the arms as part of the "RAM" tackle scenarios, would not be likely, and are omitted from this scenario training.

Of course if you subscribe to the progressive scenarios of the commercial system, (which I do in most cases) in its technique sequence teaching order, one must consider that "Broken Ram" is most likely a "what-if" (or different scenario) for "Charging Ram." That is, what do you do when the defense for Charging Ram, (which we must now presume addresses the arms), breakdown as I stated earlier. Something to consider I hope.

The arm break in 'Broken Ram' is, of course, the opposite of the arm break in 'Locked Wing', now, isn't it?

In my opinion, they are completely different for a variety of reasons. On a simplistic level, one engages as a component of the primary assault, while the other IS the assault.

And the right leg scoop and inside buckle combined with the reverse motion on the right hammer fist is so much more incredibly complicated to actually execute than words can describe. That steps 4 and 5 are barely two sentences does not begin to describe the complexity of moving your body in that manner.

Wait, let me get this straight. You mean the manual doesn't tell you exactly HOW to do a technique? Well I'll be dammed. Seems I've heard that somewhere before.

[Doc]

As far as a tackle with no forward momentum? EMPHATIC NO. Anyone with grappling experience knows better than that and if they are tackling they probably have experience. A tackle is for the purpose of clinching or taking down. Both work far better when the victim is being off balanced which is what the momentum is for. If they take only one lunge step and stop their own momentum they are beyond inexperienced and you don't need Kenpo to beat that. I know it's not a "fight" but watch any MMA event and observe the tackles. Keep track of how many you see with no momentum. It it's without momentum in the Kenpo system it's just for the purpose of putting the person in the position. But it's by far not real unless we are assuming that the guy knows next to nothing about the attack he is choosing to use.

I agree completely, but I would think that you wouldn't need to be 'trained' to know that.

As far as tackle with the shoulder leading instead of the arms... This is common for non-grappler wrap tackles usually used by football players and the like. Violates several principles of grappling but is common enough none the less due to the large number (in America) or either play or watch football. This type of tackle also RELIES on momentum as that is the only thing it has going for it as the hands are out of position to proceed to phase two of a clinch or takedown.

OK James. Stop stealing my material.