Offensive maneuvers from both the first person and second person perspective may be broken down into two major types: major and minor. Major being defined as any maneuver that is, by intent, anticipated to potentially critically harm or disable the opponent with that maneuver. In layman's terms, it's supposed to be a knockout move. A minor, in contrast, is not intended to be as critical a threat, yet still has the potential to be such, until fully completed. Therefore, the term minor encompasses any maneuver that does not fall into the category of major. The most commonly used example of a minor maneuver is the push.
While this form of analysis covers the intent factor of aggressive maneuvers, there is still an obvious characteristic that is omitted from this limited perspective. This characteristic being whether the maneuver is in-flight or whether the maneuver has already made contact with its objective. And, if contact was already made, how long a period of time is the contact maintained. This last point is extremely critical to this analysis because a strike like a punch only maintains contact for a very short period of time, where a push maintains contact for a slightly longer period of time, and a grab's contact length is even longer and less defined. Not only is the contact time longer for a grab, the perspective then flips and is looked at from how the contact is intended to be used, rather than how long the contact will last. In other words, once the contact is maintained for a period of time, at some point the initial maneuver (such as a punch or push) is ended and a potential new maneuver is started (such as a grab, push, lock, or hold).
To quickly review the major points of this proposed analysis:
1) This analysis is intended to be used from both a first person and second person point of view (i.e. what I am doing, and what my opponent is doing)
2) Any maneuver may be described as its intent being either major or minor (i.e. destructive, or less to non-destructive)
3) All maneuvers of this type intend to make contact with a specific area on the opponent (i.e. there is a point of contact)
4) The amount of contact time on the maneuver is the deciding factor in determining when one maneuver is ended and another is transitioned into
Using this analysis, one can contrive an easy way to describe any aggressive maneuver from both a first person and second person perspective. While in-flight the maneuver can be described as being either major or minor. Once contact is made, either the contact is brief or is sustained. If the contact is maintained, the maneuver is referred to as being applied. And finally, the applied maneuver can again then be described either as major or minor.
Taking this analysis to its final conclusion, any maneuver can be described as either being in-flight or applied. And in either situation, can also be described as being either major or minor. And, for even shorter terminology, in most cases the terms applied or in-flight can be purposely omitted from the description. And from this, any aggressive maneuver from either a first person or second person perspective can be quickly and easily characterized.
To give some examples of this summation:
a) a punch is typically described as major
b) a push is typically described as minor
c) a grab is typically described as minor
d) a choke is typically described as major
e) a lock can be described either as minor or major depending upon pressure applied (and beyond a certain point of pressure, becomes a break)
Notice that even though the grab, choke, and lock are applied maneuvers, the applied portion of the description is omitted and implied; just as the in-flight portion of the punch and push is also omitted and implied.
Looked at only from the first-person perspective, any aggressive maneuver can quickly be described as either being major, minor, or applied. And, if needed, the applied maneuver can further be described as a major or minor applied maneuver. In this scenario, only the in-flight portion of the description is omitted, while the major / minor portion of the applied maneuver is omitted; and is only added if further clarification is required. The use of the nomenclature in this way allows for a quick and efficient way to describe any aggressive maneuver being enacted toward an opponent. And, if the point of view is switched from first-person, to second-person, or third-person; the exact same nomenclature many be applied without any alteration.
At this point, one other characteristic of an aggressive situational examination needs to be clarified. In the first-person perspective, minor and major are assumed based upon reading the aggressive maneuver of the opponent. Therefore, there exists a very real possibility that a maneuver interpreted by the first person (or third person) as minor is actually, from the second-person's perspective, intended to be a major - or vice-versa. And, although this does not affect this proposed analysis, this issue needs to at least be pointed out as a scenario of interest.
Using this analysis as a comparison to some other American Kenpo concepts, which may be used for the same purpose, can also be done. First, the minor / major concept of describing aggressive maneuvers is typically only limited to first person perspective. Next, the dead / semi-live / live concept is also used to describe aggressive maneuvers, but only from a second person perspective. The conflicting part about using these two concepts is that they employ completely different terms to describe the exact same maneuver, yet only from a shift in perspective. This can become confusing to the new student because they essentially have to learn multiple terms for the same thing; the only difference is if they are the one doing the maneuver, or the opponent is doing the maneuver to them. And, although these concepts are commonly taught, they are less efficient and do not adequately show proper use of the three points of view concept.
Instead, using this terminology as a replacement for the others is far more efficient and makes much more sense from both an objective and holistic standpoint.