Author:
Corey Minatani
[Edit]
|
Date Posted: 07:56:59 02/11/03 Tue
Zero-Perception:
The term, as I understand it, comes from an instructor by the name of John LaTourrette, and in short describes a perceptible "blind-side" in human vision insofar as motion coming straight at you, aimed right between the eyes.
Simply put, objects (punches, kicks, or knives) that are thrust at you straightaway toward your eyes, tend to get get more blurred, rather than clear, when it gets in closer proximity to the target or face. Thus, the coined name of "zero-perception." In contrast, seeing an object thrown to your left or right sides would be easy to detect and track, enabling one to acertain the distance and proximity. So, what is the point?
The point is that like concepts of defang the snake, zero perception definately has its place in the paradigm of modern weaponry that we learn from some of these old texts. If zero-perception is so great, why haven't you heard of it earlier? One, the concept derives from sword arts. So unless your arnis or kali system distinctly works sword lines (here I'm not talking bolos or machetes, but full-length swords), two, if you don't have the practice weaponry (i.e. real swords) its hard to see how one would apply such concepts. People who study fencing may be able to absorb some of these concepts in their normal routines, and some (might) have this capacity through espada e daga routines but at a much shorter range.
An argument against zero-perception might drive something to this effect, "If zero-perception (ZP) uses a long range weapon, and we modern day practitioners use only short to medium ranged weapons, what is the purpose?" Lessons learned from longer ranges enhances our understanding and practice of shorter ones. Artillery round held infantry clear the path, kicks make it easier to land a punch, and so on.
In my next insert, I will try to explain how to use ZP with the long range weapons and discuss some strategies of the masters of old....
|
Historical Weaponry--Just for Fun!