In WC how do you compete with boxers hopping footwork?

[IronFist]

WC stances are flat and stable. They don't hop around like boxers. It seems that from a locomotion perspective, hopping better prepares you for sudden movement... look at how baseball players or soccer players or football players hop for a little bit in the moments before they know they'll have to spring into action.

1. How do you feel about this?

2. Do you stay flat when fighting, or do you hop?

3. If you stay flat, how do you deal with a boxer's footwork when fighting one.

I'm talking about a long fight, not ***** slap boxing, not one-step sparring, not "let's stop after one of us scores a point," etc.

[Savi]

Far: Mobility
Fast footwork and mobility maneuvers will reign from the long kick to long strike ranges of reach (1 1/2 to 2 step distance). I feel this is also most appropriate and I should be just as mobile in my own fashion so as not to give up any possible opportunities.

Near: Mobility & Stability
Once the range has closed, properly trained rooting, bridge control and bridge destruction will reign over the one who is not accustomed to rooting. In the close range distance, an optimal mix of stability and mobility are more important than either by themself.

These points are stressed and trained in the beginner levels at our kwoon...

[yuanfen]

Ironfist sez:

In WC how do you compete with boxers hopping footwork?
WC stances are flat and stable. They don't hop around like boxers. It seems that from a locomotion perspective, hopping better prepares you for sudden movement...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Flat and stable? Dont know what you are talking about.
WC is a very mobile system- if you understand all the footwork...
a rare mixture of both stability and mobility.

[datou]

yuanfen says -

Flat and stable? Dont know what you are talking about.
WC is a very mobile system- if you understand all the footwork...
a rare mixture of both stability and mobility.

right on yuanfen!
---------------------------

No matter how much the boxer hops around, he still need to come close enough if he wants to hit you. This gives you a chance to hit him too.

[hunt1]

Remember use stillness to overcome motion. No matter what if he wants to hit you he has to come into the range where you can hit him. If he never comes into range. Big deal. No fight. This of course leads to my favorite wing chun saying. My opponent moves but I move first. Become aware of your range. Move immedialtly when your range in entered. Pay zero attention to what he is doing. Savi covered some important points that not all wing chun teachers teach. Different ranges require different footwork for best results.
Also there are methods for getting a quick first step even if you are slow footed. So you can move very fast from a grounded flat foot . These methods focus on the use of your knees. Remember the knees are your shock absorbers. Knees should never be locked or fixed in position. Many times slow footwork is caused be improper stance, use of and understanding of the knee.
And last thing do not chase. If you attck when he enters your range and he moves back out of range. Dont chase him unless you are confident in your footwork and know without a doubt you can chase without overextending.

[Phenix]

Originally posted by hunt1
If you attck when he enters your range and he moves back out of range. Dont chase him unless you are confident in your footwork and know without a doubt you can chase without overextending.

Hunt1,

If I am attacking WCners, I will attack but not moves back out of range but move or switch to a side different angle. so if the WCners switch his facing positio --- he hehe now the Wcners is no longer "Remember use stillness to overcome motion." if not chasing me, then he stand still and become totally open. hahahhaa

and I will eat him alive there because I am waiting. hahahhahhaaa. and usualy, kick or sweep the heck out of the wcner's front legs since they are going to use the CJ turn..... just destroy the leg and let the center line rapid fire sun punch disable and that's it..... hahahaha :D

As a WCner, one knows that The BJJ guys, some WCK which adding BJJ into it is doing the same side step to lock the elbow.... hahahhaha. Pretend you don't know what they are doing and give them the side in practice until the real time come.... :D

WCK has no shape. I can use your method to defeat you and you don't know mine ---Inch Jing Join Power.

[old jong]

I will give the same answer I gave to the same question on the main forum.....

Just hop around like the boxer but offbeat to him....This will make him nauseus and he will have to run to his corner to throw up!...Easy eh?...;)

[Phil Redmond]

In TWC we don't stand there flatfooted. We are mobile without hopping.

[duende]

my .02....

1. all that hopping around is just inefficient use of energy.

2. unless he hops directly into my center, the momentery lack of forward energy can be used to uproot him and still his center.

3. I think there are many many good answers here for you...

Alex

[PaulH]

Hendrik,

Speaking from this grasshopper's buggy eyes, I love to hop after his yummy body and sink my teeth into his center's juicy and tender meat when he angles. Kicking my front leg? Fine, I love to do legs wrestling too. Hand grappling? Okay, a few minor arm adjustments while continue to blast him to bug's eyes come. But really, all of these are fictious and meaningless. Truth is stranger than fiction. The winner is often the better prepared guy. One can't prepare for every possibilities, just prepare to change when you have to.

Regards,

[Phenix]

Originally posted by PaulH
Hendrik,

Speaking from this grasshopper's buggy eyes, I love to hop after his yummy body and sink my teeth into his center's juicy and tender meat when he angles. Kicking my front leg? Fine, I love to do legs wrestling too. Hand grappling? Okay, a few minor arm adjustments while continue to blast him to bug's eyes come. But really, all of these are fictious and meaningless. Truth is stranger than fiction. The winner is often the better prepared guy. One can't prepare for every possibilities, just prepare to change when you have to.

Regards,



well, better prepared is a blur word. what to prepared?
get a big fat guy, he doesn't has to perpare much because he is big and heavy.
get a big and mucle guy, he prepare a little more.
get a small and skiny guy. then he has to prepare alots....

[PaulH]

Prepared for the unexpected! The hand that you don't see is the hand that hit you. Of course, being a tiny grasshopper, I can always increase my food comsumption. The next time you see me I'll be a sumo. Ha! Ha!

[KenWingJitsu]

In WC how do you compete with boxers hopping footwork?
Um...spar a lot?

1. all that hopping around is just inefficient use of energy./ Dont worry about him hopping around - he's just wasting his energy.
WTF!???? LMAO! Uh yeah...thats why boxers go 12 rounds easily....repeatedly.

just go in and destroy.
LMAO! Care to show us how? I mean I never knew how easy it was to go in & "destroy" a boxer.

And last thing do not chase. If you attck when he enters your range and he moves back out of range. Dont chase him unless you are confident in your footwork
hunt1 is correct.

[IronFist]

Yeah, boxers probably aren't too worried about "wasting energy."

How many of you have fought a boxer, and did you get schooled by his footwork or not?

Oh wait, I forgot, you all probably kicked his ass cuz on the internet everyone is a master of their art.

[anerlich]

As a WCner, one knows that The BJJ guys, some WCK which adding BJJ into it is doing the same side step to lock the elbow.... hahahhaha.

I'm laughing too! What rubbish you spew.

The tactic you describe has nothing to do with BJJ. Please restrict your pontification to subjects on which you have at least a little knowledge.

Personally, to learn to deal with boxers, I am taking boxing lessons.

[Amp]

Originally posted by IronFist


3. If you stay flat, how do you deal with a boxer's footwork when fighting one.


Kick the legs. Even the better boxers are practically blind from the waist down in terms of defense...they simply don't train it...and when it comes to straight boxing, don't need to.


Also, hopping around like a boxer can get you in big trouble against an opponent with very good timing. I think it's important to stay rooted. Naturally, hopping around prevents continuous rooting and leaves the fighter vulnerable to many different attacks.

[ZIM]

Kick the legs. Even the better boxers are practically blind from the waist down in terms of defense...they simply don't train it...and when it comes to straight boxing, don't need to. Don't you guys train a chi gerk/sticking legs thing? How would that work out in this kind of situation? This kind of way? (http://www.csthompson.net/ddWrestle2.gif) That's Scottish, but we all know that Wing Chun is actually Scottish... ;)

[hunt1]

Phenix - Why post if you are not going to stay on topic . I talked about not chasing if he moves back out of range. You said you would stay in range. Good for you but then that is a different situation that I did not address . If I am talking about a car and you respond by talking about a plane thats nice but whats the point? It can only confuse a thread. I know you like to pull ropes and have fun but everyone would be better served if posts stayed on the point.

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by hunt1
Remember use stillness to overcome motion. No matter what if he wants to hit you he has to come into the range where you can hit him. If he never comes into range. Big deal. No fight. This of course leads to my favorite wing chun saying. My opponent moves but I move first. Become aware of your range. Move immedialtly when your range in entered. Pay zero attention to what he is doing. Savi covered some important points that not all wing chun teachers teach. Different ranges require different footwork for best results.
Also there are methods for getting a quick first step even if you are slow footed. So you can move very fast from a grounded flat foot . These methods focus on the use of your knees. Remember the knees are your shock absorbers. Knees should never be locked or fixed in position. Many times slow footwork is caused be improper stance, use of and understanding of the knee.
And last thing do not chase. If you attck when he enters your range and he moves back out of range. Dont chase him unless you are confident in your footwork and know without a doubt you can chase without overextending.
Hi Hunt1,

While a boxer may tend to press you, don't count on it. Ali used to deliver devastating blows while apparently dancing backwards.

If your opponent fights outside your range, you must close with him if you can or risk being picked apart by his kicks and fists outside your range as he darts in and out.

You are correct in the first part of your answer, but wrong in your concluding paragraph. If you're fighting an outside fighter, including boxers and good karate/TKD or Muay Thai MAs, and you don't chase him on contact, you will lose as he picks you apart. You must try to maintain contact. Try to use the environment to your advantage and quickly corner him if you can. You are correct about not overextending.

The described opponent can be a tough customer to beat for any martial artist. IMO, Wing Chun has effective answers, but you must be confident enough to enter your opponent with good timing and superior position (on center).

Regards,

[hunt1]

John I know you were not trying to be insulting nor am I but I will be blunt. You either did not understand what I wrote or do not yet have the skill level to understand.
You can not be picked apart by someone moving in and out etc if you know how to fight with wing chun ( and few do). Why? Because if you are in range to kick me than I can kick you If you can punch me than I can punch you. the secret is to understand range and to understand my oppopent moves but i move first. You should be moving the moment he moves to get into range.
So many seem to think Wing Chun fighters just stand in a set stance waiting for something. There is no reason to move if you cant be kicked or hit etc however you must spring to the attack the instant before your range is entered. If you understand what I am trying to get across then you realize you cant get picked apart. Even reach and leg length doesnt matter. Wing Chun teaches limb attacks too. If my arm is 30 inch reach and yours is 40 big deal I attack your arm when it enters my range.

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by hunt1
John I know you were not trying to be insulting nor am I but I will be blunt. You either did not understand what I wrote or do not yet have the skill level to understand.

You're correct. Just being direct myself. This is a Wing Chun discussion forum. Let's discuss Wing Chun and the potential enemy not each other.


You can not be picked apart by someone moving in and out etc if you know how to fight with wing chun ( and few do).

I wish I could agree. In principle I sorta' do. How-some-ever, Wing Chun doesn't make you invincible. Did you ever watch Ali box? He had some first rate competition and he often backpedaled his way out of reach until he'd stop and lash out, then move away. Now that's whut I'm talkin' 'bout. :p


Why? Because if you are in range to kick me than I can kick you If you can punch me than I can punch you.

That's the theory. Ever fight a really good, not amateur, boxer or Muay Thai fighter? At their option, they may or may not bring the fight to you until they sense an advantage, and they're good at juking you out of position, as Phenix alluded to.


the secret is to understand range and to understand my oppopent moves but i move first. You should be moving the moment he moves to get into range.

And you can always tell when he's going to change gears or direction? No offense, but I doubt it. A good fighter of the described type will make you work hard to nail him.


So many seem to think Wing Chun fighters just stand in a set stance waiting for something.

I'm not one of those. I'm the one advocating sticking to him once he or you make the bridge. But the fighter I'm describing does not make it easy.


There is no reason to move if you cant be kicked or hit etc

How about if you need to deal before his buddies show up? What if he's trying to get away with your wife's purse or the keys to your car? :p

Have you learned to enter your defensive opponent?


however you must spring to the attack the instant before your range is entered.

You don't have to do that. It is better to let him think he's inside your range before you spring the trap. This opponent doesn't stay put, so be sure you have him before you scare him off (momentarily) by your overreaction.


If you understand what I am trying to get across then you realize you cant get picked apart.

I do not understand. My experience won't let it sink in, I guess. :rolleyes:


Even reach and leg length doesnt matter.

That's a relief. Are you sure? What if your opponent knows Wing Chun too? Or has fought against Wing Chun before?


Wing Chun teaches limb attacks too. If my arm is 30 inch reach and yours is 40 big deal I attack your arm when it enters my range.

That's fine. Good luck.

Regards,

[Train]

Hunt1,

So many seem to think Wing Chun fighters just stand in a set stance waiting for something. There is no reason to move if you cant be kicked or hit etc however you must spring to the attack the instant before your range is entered. If you understand what I am trying to get across then you realize you cant get picked apart. Even reach and leg length doesnt matter. Wing Chun teaches limb attacks too. If my arm is 30 inch reach and yours is 40 big deal I attack your arm when it enters my range.

Good posts!!!!! That's what i was thinking too.

That's a relief. Are you sure? What if your opponent knows Wing Chun too? Or has fought against Wing Chun before? John Weiland

So what if he knows WC, Muay thai, Karate, BBJ, ect. A punch is a punch and a kick is a kick. You don't play their game, make them play yours.

Peace outy

[Rolling_Hand]

<<Phenix - Why post if you are not going to stay on topic .>>Hunt1

Hunt1,

Oh....Is he Hendrik???

<<If I am talking about a car and you respond by talking about a plane thats nice but whats the point? It can only confuse a thread. I know you like to pull ropes and have fun but everyone would be better served if posts stayed on the point.>>Hunt1

Very well said, "The rational mind has its limitations."

[Merryprankster]

Boxers generally don't "hop." Not a good description.

[old jong]

They tip toe?...;)

[reneritchie]

Is the question "how can I not have to train as intensely as most boxers and still use my art to beat their art?" If so, then "magic little red pill" is the answer, if you can find one.

If the question is more, then the answer is by being better at what you do than they are at what they do. That's ever the only answer to questions like this.

(Unless you are an attribute machine, but that often involves other pills...)

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Boxers generally don't "hop." Not a good description.
Quite right. And good boxers are common and formidable.

Regards,

[method man]

Originally posted by duende
my .02....

1. all that hopping around is just inefficient use of energy.

2. unless he hops directly into my center, the momentery lack of forward energy can be used to uproot him and still his center.

3. I think there are many many good answers here for you...

Alex

boxer can 'hop' all day can u do it if u cannot then who inefficient now????????????

[Train]

Rabbits hop around all day, so rabbits must be efficient too hmmm...

Can a boxer chi sau all day?? hmmmmm......



I'm glad your trying to talk correctly Method



I'm out!

[old jong]

We are always comparing oranges to apples.
BTW ,kangaroos are the best hoppers...I think!...;) (Remembers the boxing kangaroos?...);)

[old jong]

That's it!...
Boxing kangaroos!!!!....Wrestling bears!!!...
MMA's are a blend of the kangaroo and bear styles!!!...Animal styles Kung Fu?...;) :D

[old jong]

Too bad this style exploits only the external side.This could explain the short time period (Prime) it can be really effective.(With some rare exceptions,I concede!...);)

[Train]

I think the Kangaroos are no match against the wabbits. :)

[yuanfen]

Amp sez:
Kick the legs. Even the better boxers are practically blind from the waist down in terms of defense...they simply don't train it...and when it comes to straight boxing, don't need to.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kick the legs? Maybe. If you know good wing chun- do wing chun...wing chun footwork and above all timing. Adjust to the situation. Not to be robotic.Not all boxers are made from the same cloth- they vary widely in skills and moves and experience.
Stereotyping them can be a mistake.
Generally boxers hands are better than muay thai hands.
Some know what to do against kicks and can can apply what they know in non sporting contexts.
The Klitchko brother who fought Lennox Lewis was also a kick
boxing champion.. Randy Cobb who fought Holmes wasa kick boxing champion out of El paso.
Working witha few good boxer can give youa senses of how fast hands can be and how quickly they can close- but deep knowledge of wing chun structure and footwork can work.

[old jong]

Originally posted by Train
I think the Kangaroos are no match against the wabbits. :)

Whoa!...
It depends on the Wabbit's lineage and you know how fast wabbit's lineage can go?...Hard to follow!...

BTW, a closed pouch kangaroo student can reserve some surprises!...;)

[Vyvial]

Use your Tsui Ma (push horse) giving constant forward energy every time they bounce out of their stance always using your chum kiu to keep your center line turned towards the boxer as they move and fall over. Stick to them more than you would most fighters and suppress every strike they do countering when you have the opportunity. Control their arms and stance. That's how I beat boxers everytime. Not just guys with some boxing experience in my school but at Lords Boxing Gym were I work out and spar here in Austin.

[dezhen2001]

Originally posted by ZIM
Don't you guys train a chi gerk/sticking legs thing? How would that work out in this kind of situation? This kind of way? (http://www.csthompson.net/ddWrestle2.gif) That's Scottish, but we all know that Wing Chun is actually Scottish... ;)
hly crap! That reminds me of some foot movements i learned in school for a traditonal scottish dance (im in scotland). No joke :eek:

dawood

[yuanfen]

Yes Zim-

Ip Man invented chi gerk after watching some scottish lads doing their thing at quayside in Canton.
And the char kuen after seeing some English sailors quarreling.
And the sam pai fut after seeing some warrior monks through a hole in the wall at a temple and praying to the Buddha and
practicing secretly.
Prove me wrong- its as good as history as any.!!

[anerlich]

I was at a KF retreat in the bush near Canberra one time when I and a couple of other early risers witnessed a match between two kangaroos.

Kangaroos don't really box. Nor do they groundfight or pack knives, etc.. Their major tactic is to clinch using their front paws (which are only small, though they have claws and could probably scratch reasonably well, balance on their large muscular tails and kick with one or both powerful back legs (which have some big nasty claws thereon).

Another time I was camping in the Royal National Park south of Sydney, and wandered away from the camsite into the brush to take a leak. I'd just finished my business when I heard a nasal growling type of noise and turned to see a grey kangaroo as tall as me about eight feet away. I freaked.

[ZIM]

hly crap! That reminds me of some foot movements i learned in school for a traditonal scottish dance (im in scotland). No joke Hey Dez! the article's here. (http://www.csthompson.net/comtech.html) And it IS dance. LOL They might be near you, who knows?


more articles, if you like (http://www.csthompson.net/catart.html)

[diego]

Originally posted by crimsonking
Dont worry about him hopping around - he's just wasting his energy. Good 'flat' wing chun footwork is both explosive and mobile - the key is not to worry about playing his game - just go in and destroy.

Question...how is a boxer wasting his energy...a pro can go 12 rounds full power...so i mean in a common streetfight i doubt a minute or two of bouncing will lead to his fatigue!!?!.:)

[dezhen2001]

This seems especially likely, in view of the fact that another old combat dance from Skye (now lost) was called Buailidh mi thu 's d' cheann, or, "I will strike you in the head." we scots are known for our originality :)

hmmm... shame im from the south so we have generally lost all of our old culture - we dont even speak gaelic here anymore so i couldnt understand any of the terms mentioned in the article :(

dawood

[yuanfen]

Commenting on empty hand's post- not on empty hand.

It is true that in theory if someone enters your zone to hit you you can also hit him. Yet in practice that is not the whole story. Wing Chun's stance prevents you from reaching your oppnents

((Stand- walk- run....good wing chun works at alldistannces. the limitations are in the individual and what he/she has learned))


Secondly, I don't see how elbow destructions or limb attacks work. Never had it done to me but I know ppl who tried to use them...maybe I'm too fast or they're too slow?

((Not necessarily. Could be someone doesnt know good footwork and distance control))



Thirdly, Wing Chun does have a pretty static stance.

((Mistakinga developmental stage for the full art))

It is very rigid as well. Put a strict pure wing chun stylist against a guy with boxer's hands, muay thai kicks and TKD footwork and stances and Ju Jitsu grappling, and I'll bet him him to win if they're both equally sized and have the same amount of time in training.

((Depends on the teacher and the taught))



You mentioned that WC should not "chase" which is true but then again WC has to be aggressive and plow forward to win.

((Different from chasing. Closing and chasing are two different concepts))

Against other long range styles like Choy Lee Fut he would lose.

((wing chunners whupped clf guys regularly in HK a lot))

Against pure TKD he would lose. He has to close the distance to win not keep his distance.


(so- why wouldnta wc guy close the distance?))

[anerlich]

wing chunners whupped clf guys regularly in HK a lot

Ever talked to a CLF guy? Their stories, suprrisingly enough, include regular easy victories over WC.


INfighting is the WC forte.

Unfortunately, it's also the grappler's forte.

[hunt1]

EmptyCup - The problem in discussing with both you and John is your WC and my WC are different. Your knowledge of your system vs mine is different so we are not looking at things through the same eyes. You cannot compare WC to other arts unless you know the full system including weapons etc. There are many fighting concepts that just arent taught or dont become evident until you have completed and played with the system. For example you said the WC stance is back leg weighted. That is only partially true . The WC Yip Man taught used 50/50 a great deal. Boxing and thai boxing are simpler methods of fighting thus it is easier to learn how to use them. Right or wrong many teachers dont show the full WC
system to their students for many years. Many Sifus dont even know it but of course their students dont know that.

Also because there are so many variables in combat it is possible we are not even looking at an example in the same way.

I will tell you that I have had substantial real exp using WC. All my opinions have been formed from using WC against fighters using other systems or styles. I have trained with pro boxers, those that have been in UFC, Pride and K1, I trained at the home of the shidokan. I used to run ads in newspapers looking for people to train with or fight. I have walked into boxing gyms , martial arts schools eetc looking for anyone willing to spar with me under any or no rules. And through all my experiences I have never been given a reason to leave WC for another art. I have always found my answers in the system.

I say these things so you and others will understand where I am coming from and maybe ask yourself the question. What has he found in WC or been taught that i havent. I assure you the key is understanding how to apply WC the way it was intened.

[yuanfen]

I dont compare wing chun to other arts either.

I know that views differ and each one of us brings their own perspective to bear.

In self defense- one has to be able to adapt given the limitations
ofthe situation. Wing chun is very adaptive when learned well
since it is based ona deep understanding of human structure- it's strengths and it's limitations.

One can talk about H2O and being like water...
wing chun is not talk--- its conquest of challenges after challenges of stance, motion, distance, timing- continue to amaze me anyway and continues to give me new and very practical insights every day.

Much of the dogmatic reactions to wing chun come from seeing parts of it and mistaking it for the whole.

Take just stancing-- after deep mother stance training(ygkym)
you move on to so many different ways of moving. New ideas in chum kiu, biu jee and then stancing has its radical versions in
bat jam do and kwan work. There is closing from distance in
do work.There is close quarters grappling in good lap sao work.
There are toe sin and toes out stances- different weighting variations-but above all flowing and adjusting. Thats not modification it is the real complete wing chun.
There is both horizontal and vertical adaptation in biu jee.
All from an integrated and flowing conception of human body shaping, strategy and tactics.
Individuals can fail or succeed but the depth of the system should not be underestimated.... but commonly is.
Wing chun is not a factory or mass production system. Individuals are turned out one by one.
Hunt 1's post on this is a pretty good one IMO.

[yuanfen]

Notes on Empty Cup's post:

I have learned all this. I am also very good at what I learned both in form, practice and theory.

((If you say so.....)))

However do not forget that the system was made with different goals in mind and a reason for it's stances being the way they are and the principles being the way they are.


(((Human bone joint structure has not changed much since Leung Jan's time))

Heck even the weapons were chosen and performed they way they are for different reasons that you and I may need currently.


((Even in Ip Man's time--- folks didnt walk around Hong Kong
with 8-9 feet poles. They are still useful for training wing chun motions and applications))

Yet ppl talk about wing chun having to be "unchanging".


((Depends on who and what they are saying. Applications and adaptations are not stationery. But a good core pardigm has some lasting qualities if it is good.


Good luck with your JKD!!))

[fa_jing]

If you are static, you are static. You are fighting, not "Wing Chun." There's nothing about the wing chun training that actually makes you static. If anything, you should be learning to move.

There are disadvantages to reaching, too, and advantages to staying compact. Just as there are advantages and disadvantages to higher and lower stances. But remember it is your personal fighting style that must be complete and correctly balanced. I believe that most traditional styles are complete, strategically, and tactically - every one of them has been well thought out and tested - but it doesn't necessarily mean that every move or concept will work for you the same way that it did for someone else. And that can leave you with an imbalance - a weakness or lack of proficiency. So you need to make adjustments, be they small or major. We should be using our traditional styles as resources, not try to become carbon copies when fighting. The advice to use what works, applies here. Sparring is a necessary lab for determining your training direction.

Still, I don't believe that long-standing traditional styles like Wing Chun should be significantly modified in terms of teaching- they will then lose their usefulness, their flavor, what they can impart to a variety of people. I say to do the traditional training, then turn it up a notch with pad work based on the traditional style, then, optionally, really mix it up with other moves from outside the base style - for instance basic throws, boxing or TKD drills, etc. When sparring, be yourself first and foremost, but concentrate on implementing what you are learning, as well as reinforcing what you are already good at.

Just my opinion.

[yuanfen]

If you say so"

Others do

"Human bone joint structure has not changed much since Leung Jan's time"

In that case all styles are the same and Wing Chun is the same as everything else.

((Some illogical leap !!! Your own inference))


"Even in Ip Man's time--- folks didnt walk around Hong Kong
with 8-9 feet poles. They are still useful for training wing chun motions and applications"

You just proved my point.

((Not really- has dvelopmental purposes))

They are not applicable today for fighting. Yet filipino weapons are.


((Sure people are likely to be walking around witha kris etc..))

"Good luck with your JKD!!"

What I do is different.

((ver obviously so. I mention JKD because in a different post in KFu you mentioned Bruce Lee asa hero of yours-he aint mine!!
Enough. Cheers and good luck in what you do))))

[yuanfen]

The thread has become pretty pointless.

[yuanfen]

Boxers vary-depending on individual, coaching and circumstances-
flat footed, on the ball of one foot. springy , some dance, some walk, some shuffle, some have falling steps, some have good side to side motions as well as front and back and circling...

Compared to good wing chun-they are generally more "top heavy"- which helps them with the "loading" for their punches-
the mechanics of which is/are different frim the wing chun basic punch.

Those boxers who have less rooting can sometimes fall because
boxing is a sport and the referee will step in and allow a falling person to get up. Boxing still is a sport though a very fighting sport. Rules and pre occupation with fists. Boxers with street savy are however different creatures... and not limited to fists..
The good ones are cool under fire.

Joe Luis the late great champion boxer also wrestled some -briefly. He once pointed out the simple fact... if he hit a wrestler coming the wrestler will go down... if he didnt hit the wrestler well when he is coming in he himself will probably go down.

In the Greek Olympics in the pankration- boxing and wresling was allowed. To qualify for the pankration you had to win in boxing or wrestling first. The pankration winners except for one wrestler who reapeated in two olympics were about evenly divided between
boxers and wrestlers. I checked the literature and counted. The individual does matter.

[Vyvial]

just a side note: the pole forms teaches one how to fight with a two handed weapon, the knife form teaches one how to fight with two one handed weapons. You can take the principles and apply them to many weapons including the kali and escrima weapons and even tactical folders. So there may be some applicable skills for modern fighting.

All the weaknesses that are perceived in the WC system are the individual's and the training method. WC training must allow for open endedness, any weakness found needs to be corrected. Good WC works at all levels! All ranges! It's only limit is what the practitioner puts on it.

What do i do against a boxer? WC
What do i do against a grappler? WC

Someone said this "don't box a boxer and don't wrestle a wrestler".

[old jong]

Nice to see someone who dare to trust his Wing Chun around here!...

[Tak]

Sorry this is so long after the original post.


Yet ppl talk about wing chun having to be "unchanging". Kind of odd. Would YOU use a walkman made 15 years ago when you can have one made now? If the cost wasn't a huge factor against it?

This analogy is not valid. A walkman has one purpose, to play music from a portable medium, which can be tested in about 4 seconds. A martial arts system has to apply (ideally) to any and every kind of situation. Thus, it can take hundreds and thousands of years for a system to prove itself adequate. This is why there is such vehement disparagement of systems that originated within the last 100 years or so.

Some evolution of a system will be necessary as the years pass, yet these changes must be made slowly and carefully, else the style may begin to fluctuate wildly between extremes, finally losing all coherence.

[Vash]

Indeed.

New stuff sucks! Oh, wait . . . Isshinryu's only 47 years old . . .

[Vyvial]

i drive a 400 year old Chinese car because I choose to

[saifa5k]

Hello, see inserts *


Originally posted by IronFist
WC stances are flat and stable. They don't hop around like boxers. It seems that from a locomotion perspective, hopping better prepares you for sudden movement... look at how baseball players or soccer players or football players hop for a little bit in the moments before they know they'll have to spring into action.

1. How do you feel about this?

**fighting not like baseball or soccer.

2. Do you stay flat when fighting, or do you hop?

**flat, hopping big waste of energy.

3. If you stay flat, how do you deal with a boxer's footwork when fighting one.

**worry about own footwork, not boxers.



I'm talking about a long fight, not ***** slap boxing, not one-step sparring, not "let's stop after one of us scores a point," etc.
**Me too.
Dave C

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by IronFist
Yeah, boxers probably aren't too worried about "wasting energy."

**Oh bull hockey! Why do you think they do all that running, silly! Thats ridiculous! boxer that usually win is the one that can go 10 or 12 rounds.

How many of you have fought a boxer, and did you get schooled by his footwork or not?

***fought one many times, when I fought his fight he won, when I used wing chun it was no contest.

Oh wait, I forgot, you all probably kicked his ass cuz on the internet everyone is a master of their art.

**Nope, just trust the art, apparently for some reason you dont, thats sad.
Dave c

[anerlich]

Someone said this "don't box a boxer and don't wrestle a wrestler".

So, "don't use Wing Chun against a Wing Chunner"? What do you do then if that's all you know?

[troy fuller]

So. "don't use Wing Chun against a Wing Chunner?" What do you do then if that's all you know?

Chi Sao--:D

[Vash]

Originally posted by EmptyCup
Practioners before tended to be less well rounded in the ranges.

You base this on what?


May also have been much smaller in stature.

Could've been. This'd've necessitated an art or ability allowing for survival against the bigger attacker, right?

[Tak]

> Honestly there is a reason why non martial artists laugh at traditional martial artists.

Sure, it's because they don't understand. Non martial artists also tend to laugh when they see two spandex-clad wrestlers going at it (and also wrestling).


> Well there are alot of world records in the 1989 world record
> books that have long since been surpassed in the 2003 ones.

OK, but sticking the most paperclips up your nose isn't really relevant to this conversation, is it?


> The newer martial arts and the practioners are getting better and better.
> Systems need to change to improve.
I agree. The traditional systems are evolving and improving as well. However, this doesn't mean that you revamp an entire system every time it has to be applied to a new situation. The first thing to do is to experiment and see how the existing system can be applied.



Those thousand of years old systems were created by ppl who never were exposed to all the arts that are out there for us to compare with today. Some were not much exposed to kicks. Others to grappling. Still others to boxing combinations.
Really. So, 1000 years ago, people didn't grab each other? They hadn't figured out that they could strike with the legs? They didn't string techniques together, they just performed one and stopped?

A complete chinese martial art (some would say any martial art) contains striking, kicking, throwing, and grappling.

Grappling is the oldest of the arts, not the newest. Shuai Chiao has been around longer than many (possibly all) traditional kung fu styles. Eagle claw methods also teach grappling, and how to use grappling in combination with striking. Finally, traditional martial arts are all about combinations! Forms are nothing but long sets of combinations. If you're referring to combination training in the sense of a boxer drilling a single, short combination (jab, jab, hook) for hours on end, this is more applicable to training methodology than system content. One could focus on drilling only the Tan Tui sets, for example, and thus become very proficient with a practical set of fighting combinations. (Tan Tui king?) You don't get any grappling that way, but neither does the boxer.


> Practioners before tended to be less well rounded in the ranges.
This applies to nearly everyone. Very few fighters are range-neutral, in the same way that very few of us are truly hand/side neutral.

> The practioners from newer arts attempt to speak with action.
"Newer arts" also include JKD, Shaolin-do, and modern wushu.


> Traditionalists talk alot.
Actually, some of the most vocal parties right now seem to tend to be members of the brazilian jiujitsu camp. No offense intended, just an observation from someone who's new to this particular forum.

> Can somebody please point me to a good WC fight clip?
Nope, sorry. What I would have liked to have seen was the supposed legendary hand-crossing between Dong Hai Chuan and "the Divine Crushing Fist."


Oh and as for the NHB debate yeah every single kung fu guy who ever competed just didn't know his stuff well enough, all the MMA/MuayThai/Grappling guys just happened to be the best, and the rules prevented the dreaded finger jab so wing chun couldnt' be used to it's full potential
My sifu often says, (paraphrase) "Someone with 3 months of training in shuai chiao can usually defeat someone who has trained kung fu for a year. However, this is not the case anymore at three years."

Additionally, every martial artist trains toward a target. If you train specifically to participate in a specific kind of tournament, then you will have an advantage in that tournament, and possibly a disadvantage in other kinds. For example, grapplers might have a rough time in a tournament that forbids throws or attacking the supporting leg - similarly, a tae kwon do practitioner would likely be in trouble in a (hands-only) boxing match.

Often, grapplers like to tout the applicability of their arts in "real world" situations. If "real world" means getting your opponent one-on-one in a steel cage, then they may be justified in making such statements. On the other hand, taking a fight to the ground in a crowded bar or public street can often result in the receipt of a barstool/pool cue/any handy impromptu weapon to the head.


I'm sorta a devil's advocate sometimes but everything I said above have been (quite persuasive) arguments against wing chunners and traditional martial artists for some time by others.
Intelligent discussion good, unsupported flames bad.

[Tak]

Satan withdraws.

[Vyvial]

If you guys learned "wing chun" that can't even deal with boxers or grapplers of similar skill level, then I'm sorry for you. Find a new school or try to forget what you think you know, because most of you just didn't get it. Train realistically, trust in the system, and test yourself every chance you get... take the wing chun and make it your own, then it will work at all levels, even in competition.

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by anerlich


So, "don't use Wing Chun against a Wing Chunner"? What do you do then if that's all you know?

Hi Andrew,

How about "better wing chun"?
Dave C

[old jong]

What is the use of practicing something if you don't trust it as good?...:confused:

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by old jong
What is the use of practicing something if you don't trust it as good?...:confused:

LOL, good point! I think that if something thinks boxing is superior as a means of self defense then perhaps thats what they should do. Personally I have a lot of respect for the sport of boxing but for the street I will place my faith in wing chun.
Dave C

[anerlich]

First this, which is fine:


WC training must allow for open endedness, any weakness found needs to be corrected.

Then this:


If you guys learned "wing chun" that can't even deal with boxers or grapplers of similar skill level, then I'm sorry for you. Find a new school or try to forget what you think you know, because most of you just didn't get it.

Not all of us feel we have to be standard bearers for a particular system as it goes into battle against all other styles. That IMO is best left for the plots of HK cinema.

Any exponent of WC can learn from exposure to other arts and their training methodologies. Looking at what you do from a different viewpoint can enhance your understanding thereof. That's my definition of "open endedness". It also helps greatly to find and correct weaknesses IMO.

I continue to train WC alongside boxing and BJJ. I like all these arts and don't see why I should give any of them up because they don't fit somebody else's idea of martial arts political correctness. I don't care for the implication that I'm some form of traitor to some sort of cause. If what I do makes you angry (as it apparently does judging from the second quote above), that's your problem, not mine.

Since we all seem to enjoy quotes, here's another: "Flexibility of mind and body is the hallmark of a good martial artist."

Dave, better WC is OK ... I just keep hearing that quote over and over and find it simplistic and, as pointed out, logically inconsistent.

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by anerlich
First this, which is fine:


Dave, better WC is OK ... I just keep hearing that quote over and over and find it simplistic and, as pointed out, logically inconsistent.

Hi Andrew,
I think cross training is great for a lot of reasons, one of them being its nice to know what your opponent is capable of doing. However I have mixed feelings about the idea that you cant defeat an opponent that is fighting the same style that you are. Not saying thats what you implied but I am hearing that thought from some. Personally I think there is all kinds of wing chun out there ranging from the mediocre to the very good and I just dont buy the argument that my wing chun wont work against anothers wing chun. Lastly at this stage of my life I simply prefer to polish my art of wing chun as I feel that for me its the most street effective art.
Dave c

[anerlich]

Dave,

Fine by me. One of my instructors often says, "there is an ultimate martial art for eveyone. But that art may be different, for you, for me, for him, for her".

The same goes with training methods and the like. Problems arise when someone starts demanding that theirs is the one true path and those who feel differently are fools (some may be, but not necessarily because they disagree). Fanaticism and fundamentalism are not the way I want to live.

[Temujinn]

I studied WC before training with a group of individuals in CQC and JKD, I got an oppertunity to spar with a Boxxer/wrestler.
First my WC is basic(rusty now) then at least it was fresh.
Our teacher enjoyed watching the boxxer become frustrated because he speed up the cadence of combat, and I would move slower and slower, and simply maintain my Center(basics) a snap to the throat everytime he neared to jab(a good wingchun jab is always faster then a boxxers jab, less ditance to travel) and he was driven back, I could neutralise my fellow student at will, because he had no center.
This is just my amertuerish experience though.

[old jong]

Originally posted by anerlich
Problems arise when someone starts demanding that theirs is the one true path and those who feel differently are fools (some may be, but not necessarily because they disagree). Fanaticism and fundamentalism are not the way I want to live.

I don't think I saw anybody posting about Wing Chun being the "only true way or path,bla bla bla" for a long time here.

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by anerlich
[
The same goes with training methods and the like. Problems arise when someone starts demanding that theirs is the one true path and those who feel differently are fools (some may be, but not necessarily because they disagree). Fanaticism and fundamentalism are not the way I want to live. [/B]

Andrew,
I agree completely. FWIW one area that I would like to incorporate into my wing chun is the study of authentic Chin-Na. I know a lot of folks that cross train in Ju Jitsu or Akido to learn lock flow drills and throwing and thats fine. However I think Chin-Na would be a better complement to wing chun. Which ever style of locking and throwing though, that a person chooses to use I think complements wing chun well, since it is such a close range art. I know some will say that locking and throwing are already in Chi-Sau and that may well be.
Take care,
Dave

[Tak]

FWIW one area that I would like to incorporate into my wing chun is the study of authentic Chin-Na. I know a lot of folks that cross train in Ju Jitsu or Akido to learn lock flow drills and throwing and thats fine. However I think Chin-Na would be a better complement to wing chun.

I study northern styles, but Qin Na makes a good complement in my case because it incorporates many of the techniques, stances, and principles with which I'm already familiar, whereas something like Aikido will begin from a relatively different perspective. This is why I also advocate Shuai Jiao for chinese martial artists rather than Judo, because it tends to integrate more seamlessly into existing skillsets.

[yuanfen]

FWIW- I havent had to leave the wing chun circle to learn
qinna applications.

[namron]

Originally posted by Tak


I study northern styles, but Qin Na makes a good complement in my case because it incorporates many of the techniques, stances, and principles with which I'm already familiar, whereas something like Aikido will begin from a relatively different perspective. This is why I also advocate Shuai Jiao for chinese martial artists rather than Judo, because it tends to integrate more seamlessly into existing skillsets.

I dont know if anybody else out there has experienced similar, but for me one of the large differences I have found from the basic wc armbars and wrist locks when compared to say aikido or JJ is the level of control does not end at the standing lock but continues to the ground until the opponent is fully submitted.

Early in my training it used to bother me that we would use say a straight arm bar, but no follow through, then what... Usually thats where the technique stopped and you'd stuck with the feeling of being in mid stream or temporary stalemate.

Aikido for me changed this, and is a good example of where cross training can help (for me at least). I took what I considered to be the best and most direct techniques and left the rest.

Although I have read and viewed a fair bit of Chi Na there are not many sifu's that I know of in my part of the woods. It would be interesting to check out though.:p

[Tak]

Hmm, I don't have much experience with wc bars/locks. In our qin na practice, though, and this depends on the technique, we generally don't force the submission all the way to the ground simply because of the fact that the victim is usually in excruciating pain long before that point, and forcing it past this point to the ground for hundreds of repetitions in practice is a good way to get an injured partner.

[Vyvial]

My thoughts...

1. Chin Na is in wing chun, as it is in most forms of Kung Fu, look for it in Chi Sau.
2. WC chin na is going to disrupt the opponent's stance and structure in order to open up the line of attack, it can be used to force the opponent to submit but doubtful.
3. Chin na that forces submission pretty much requires devoting two hands on one, not very WC-like

[anerlich]

The WC forms are full of grappling applications. If your Sifu and you ain't familiar with grappling though, they may slip under the radar.

Using two hands on one might not be WC-like ... though thn again it might, as we are taught to use two hands for simultaneous attack and defense.

If it isn't WC-like (by some definitions), but is effective, I'll still take it.

One of my instructors teaches Northern Sil Lum, which has a fullly integrated system of chi-na.

One of Murphy's laws of combat: "If it's stupid, but it works, then it isn't stupid."

[Vyvial]

Originally posted by anerlich

Using two hands on one might not be WC-like ... though thn again it might, as we are taught to use two hands for simultaneous attack and defense.

If it isn't WC-like (by some definitions), but is effective, I'll still take it.
[/B]

Agreed. The way that I understand my Ving Tsun is that it is used to take and control the line, once you achieve that purpose you can use what ever you want-- i.e. throws, takedowns, chin na, mortal kombat finishing moves, it doesn't matter. Ving Tsun can be used as a tool to gain control.

But when talking about WC theory, using two hands to deal with one hand is not WC, it may be good Kung Fu but it isn't WC.:rolleyes:

[anerlich]

Vyvial,

sounds good.

[saifa5k]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by anerlich
[B]The WC forms are full of grappling applications. If your Sifu and you ain't familiar with grappling though, they may slip under the radar.

Thats a good point. After watching a tape made by the late Jerry Mckinley(sp?) I spotted several take-downs in chum kui form that I had not seen before. I think some linages emphasize takedowns and locks more than others. Unfortunately for me, at least in my opinion, my lineage stressed unbalancing but considered "grapplling" as somehow 2nd class and distasteful. At first I thought this idea was very strange until I read in a history on white crane kung fu the same philosophy.
Dave c

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by Vyvial



But when talking about WC theory, using two hands to deal with one hand is not WC, it may be good Kung Fu but it isn't WC.:rolleyes:

Hello,
I agree with you in general principle but I think there are exceptions. For example we do a grab and pull technique out of the 3rd set and I think also in the dummy where both hands are pulling the opponents arm.
Dave c

[yuanfen]

Vyvial sez-

But when talking about WC theory, using two hands to deal with one hand is not WC, it may be good Kung Fu but it isn't WC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did you get that?
There are times.........

[Vyvial]

yes there are times and there are no rules ("The theory of Wing Chun has no limit in it's applications.") but when looking at correct wc theory handed down from the kuen kuit.....

anyway, the kuen kuit and the forms and the drills represent "perfect" WC, it is what we strive for. Our fighting ability is very different from what we practice as "perfect" kung fu. What we strive for is to bring our fighting abilty closer to our "perfect" kung fu... in this case forms. If I can survive an encounter or succeed in sparring using nothing but simple Siu nim Tao distance and holding and opening the line, then I am happy but that isn't always the case, we usually have to rely on emergeny techniques or other "tricks" that are not what I consider "correct" WC.

If one looks at Siu Nim Tao as "correct" WC and Biu Je as emergency corrections from mistakes made in distance, positioning, etc... then one could conclude that to purposely try to make use of a Biu Je technique is inproper WC. A dbl arm grab could be very useful if the distance is messed up and the centerline off but probably not the best option to start with since it can be dangerous to yourself.

There are very few basic truths about WC and there are no rules in application, and I only speak from my own small understanding (from a VT standpoint, and yes it is that different) and from my understanding of the Kuen Kuit as it has been passed down.

[yuanfen]

Curious.Please point to the kuen kuit which prohibits the use of both arms.

[Vyvial]

Nothing prohibits the use of two arms. Poi Pai Jeang = :cool:
My understanding is using two hands on one hand = :(

Looking for my Kuen Kuit book answer soon.... or maybe not you never know.

[old jong]

I think using a double lop sau to open a line for kicking is a good example of a appropriate usage of two hands on one. (If the circumstances demands for such a move)
But I think that "The less you need to win...The better is your Wing Chun" Good basic skills are better than complicated techniques.

[Vyvial]

Maybe I'm wrong, not the first time but it's my understanding of faan sau and replacing hands.

Here are three sayings to support (the Chinese translation has some different meaning but here are common English ones).

1. Continuous returning hand
2. Replace the hand
3. Hand against hand, foot against foot

My understanding of these three sayings:

1. Replace hand continuously never leaving two together to deal with one.

If you would like, I could translate this into traditional characters and we could call it a kuen kuit, wouldn't be the first time. ;)

My KK book in storage but hopefully I can find full KK online which I have not.

Old Jong: good point, it's a technique i use often, not as an opener though(more as a finisher if arms get tied up or an opponent uses a lot of strength against my positions), but I am debating perfect wing chun over applied wing chun. So wouldn't a lop dar gerk (pull punch and kick together) be a "better" WC-like attack.

I'm going to make another thread for this debate though...

[TjD]

theres also the kuit:

one hand controls two

however, this doesnt remove the possibility of two controlling one :) look at the pole form!

[Phil Redmond]

What is the origin of the phrase; "the fist initiated from the heart"
Phil

[Vyvial]

"one hand controls two" that's the one i couldn't find. thanks

[Phil Redmond]

I just noticed that the saying on your signature is on the Hung Suen logo.

[Vyvial]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
What is the origin of the phrase; "the fist initiated from the heart"
Phil

Does anyone know the true origin of any of the kuen kuit, some were borrowed from other arts and traditional writings?'[

[yuanfen]

One hand controls two is a fine saying- but sorry- it does not contradict two hands used for controlling the person. After all a hand is connected to the body!
Think of the details in chum kiu! Dummy- not just biu jee.
You can control a person (not just the hand) with two hands on one from the side and kick his leg out from under him.
Think of it- its in the dummy....or you can practice it on the dummy.

[Vyvial]

Different interpretations is great... creates a stronger WC over all.

In the system of Ving Tsun that I practice...

We do not look at Chum Kiu as a fighting form and do not look for fighting elements but rather all the elements of balance, coordination of body, movement, etc... basically a way to move Siu Nim Tao positions. Other WC systems look for bridges to an opponent in Chum Kiu instead we look at Chum Kiu as the short bridge between SNT and Biu Je. The movements from the first section of Chum Kiu that many see as "arm breaking" we simply call faan sau, one hand comes the other goes.

About half the dummy movements come from Biu Je and offer a safe way to train them, so those movements you speak of are still Biu Je and emergency in nature at least in my interpretation.


"You can control a person (not just the hand) with two hands on one from the side and kick his leg out from under him."

Just because it can be done, doesn't make it the best way, and in that respect are there any rules in WC? I'm not saying to limit one's kung fu I'm just saying that a very basic principal that I thought was shared by most lineages is one hand controls two and that two on one is very dangerous and a waste of energy and movement.

In a practical sense when doing dbl arm control, where is your Wu Sau, where is back up and guard hand? When applying dbl arm control against anyone with a good sense of energy they will use that over commitment against you. Why not get the "correct" position which will allow single arm control with a strike and a kick?

Look at "Wrong Bong Sau" (Bong Sau that crosses to opposite arm strike) it works and can stop the strike but it opens up your entire flank to an attack from the opponent's other hand. You can use it and Wing Chun allows for the option but that doesn't mean you want to.

Vertical elbow strikes, we all love them but if you step in a use them as an attack instead of a reaction to a collapse what happens? You must close into grappling range (Biu Je) and lose your proper position while turning your centerline away from the opponent. So if I try to get that elbow, look what i give up? My distance, my centerline, a good next attack and then I have to fight to regain all that again. Once I take the line, I'm sure not going to give it back so that I can do a technique that happens to be in the system.

And again I must state that I speak not for a system but from my own interpretation and I am trying gain a deeper understanding by posing these questions and maybe getting people to start questioning things for themselves.

[Phil Redmond]

We do not look at Chum Kiu as a fighting form and do not look for fighting elements but rather all the elements of balance, coordination of body, movement, etc... basically a way to move Siu Nim Tao positions. Other WC systems look for bridges to an opponent in Chum Kiu instead we look at Chum Kiu as the short bridge between SNT and Biu Je. The movements from the first section of Chum Kiu that many see as "arm breaking" we simply call faan sau, one hand comes the other goes.
I learned from Moy Yat at the "Ding Leg", (Ding Lihk) school in Brooklyn that the arm break section of Chum Kiu is an arm brake

[yuanfen]

Vyvial- I think that we are talking past each other. If you are comfortable with what you do-it's ok by me.

We apparently are even using terms differently such as fan sao.

In any case FWIW its possible with jong based footwork to flank some one-and control- not grab - someone from the side and kick them. With flank and control---you deny power to the other guys far arm. You have their center and they dont have yours. And with the right timing you can hurt the other fella's elbow or shoulder or even both. You can even walk them intoa wall- depending on balance and uprooting and footwork.

One hand trapping two is a good idea and is basic wing chun-
but wing chun is capable of very rch combinations from different angles.

Details depend on relative positions and energies.

[old jong]

The forms may teach the essential motions for fighting but they are more "developement" than fighting formulas.

SLT is the foundation and Chum Kiu is the way to put it in free motion. These two constitute the "Ideal" Wing Chun as we would like it to be.
Biu Gee should not be necessary in the "ideal" Wing Chun but the world is not always perfect.It is full of "ideal" Wing Chun derogations because these motions are there only to help us get out of some trouble.

The use of elbows is a mistake when you first have to get closer to your opponent to hit him.(How many times do we see that ?...)

[Vyvial]

Sifu Redmond, Your asking me about what Sigung Moy Yat taught well before my time, but since the statement is directed at me....

Maybe that is how a Sihing interpreted or maybe it was poor translation i couldn't say but...

Direct quote from Sigung, taken from his video done a little after the time you were training and reprinted in Voice Of The Ving Tsun:

(After demonstrating and explaining how to do the tan sau / elbow pak that we call faan sau)

Moy Yat: "Let me clarify the Chum Kiu movement described. This movement is not to train breaking someone's arm as practioners have suggested. It is to train our hands to do Fan Sau. This means, when one hand goes, the other takes its place (the principal of hand replacement). This movement trains our timing, so when one hand goes, the other automatically takes its place. If there is no hand in the centerline, this can be very dangerous. That is why we bring one hand back, the other must take its place immediately. This is another good way to train the timing of our hands."

I do not represent Moy Yat kung fu as a whole only my branch so I thought that it would be best to let my late sigung use his own words.

Nice to debate with you Sifu Redmond, I have enjoyed your site for some time and want to thank you for having such a wealth of information and video about you and your Sifu.

Yuanfen -- once again it comes down to Terminology:p


--Aaron

[yuanfen]

Vyvian- I think that there is more to it than terminology.
But there are lots of substantial diversities in the wing chun world apart from differences in terms- though the latter can be barriers
to understanding as well.

[saifa5k]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond

I learned from Moy Yat at the "Ding Leg", (Ding Lihk) school in Brooklyn that the arm break section of Chum Kiu is an arm brake

Hey Phil you old war dog!
I learned the same thing until I was privy to a private tape made at one of Ken Chungs seminars. According to Sifu Chung what we commonly interpret as an arm brake is instead a jum sau and strike. If you are really nice to this old bald headed grunt from I Corp I might make you a copy ;).
Dave
"Strikefroce"!

[saifa5k]

Hello Vyvial,

[. The movements from the first section of Chum Kiu that many see as "arm breaking" we simply call faan sau, one hand comes the other goes.

**see me post to my Nam buddy Phil. My linage also does not see this as an arm break.

In a practical sense when doing dbl arm control, where is your Wu Sau, where is back up and guard hand? When applying dbl arm control against anyone with a good sense of energy they will use that over commitment against you. Why not get the "correct" position which will allow single arm control with a strike and a kick?

**Hmmm, in my opinion its all relative and situational if you know what I mean. In other words if the shoe fits wear it. IMHO it would be a big mistake to limit oneself from using some thing that has value because it somehow conflicts with preconceived ideas. To answer you question though in the above mentioned circumstance the wu sau and guard hand are right there where they are supposed to be. If you look for them you will see them.

Look at "Wrong Bong Sau" (Bong Sau that crosses to opposite arm strike) it works and can stop the strike but it opens up your entire flank to an attack from the opponent's other hand. You can use it and Wing Chun allows for the option but that doesn't mean you want to.


***Again I have to respectfully differ. If its the correct time and place a "wrong bong sau" as you call it can not only stop the strike but can lead in to a devasting throw or take down. If done correctly there is no way your flank is opened up because your opponent is plowing the ground with his nose!


And again I must state that I speak not for a system but from my own interpretation and I am trying gain a deeper understanding by posing these questions and maybe getting people to start questioning things for themselves. [/B][/QUOTE]

***Fair enough, I think that is why we are all here.
Take care,
Dave c

[anerlich]

The movements from the first section of Chum Kiu that many see as "arm breaking" we simply call faan sau, one hand comes the other goes.

I'm from the same lineage as Phil, and while that application is the main one taught, it's a bit disingenuous to assume that it's the ONLY one taught, or that for some reason you calling it something else makes you, your art, teacher, or lineage, superior.

FWIW, it also has an application as an arm drag which can be done one handed and is a perfect application of the CONCEPT of, in this case one hand goes the other comes (difference from quote intentional).

IMO the kuen kuit, principles, whatever are guidelines, with some margin for multiple interpretations and error. They aren't immutable laws. There may be situations where they no longer apply (hopefully rare). For example, some of the standard bread and butter WC defenses against an unarmed attacker become a recipe for massive blood loss and shredded (not bodybuildingwise) forearms if you try them against a skilled knife fighter.

If your art relies on precision, hard and fast rules, and perfect accuracy, alignment, etc. it is not one I want to rely on, because the real world is not so well ordered. Learn to love chaos and imprecision, you ain't got much choice.


I am trying gain a deeper understanding by posing these questions and maybe getting people to start questioning things for themselves.

That's good, but recognise that others besides you have been questioning themselves and their arts just as long as you have, and that they also may have as much to contribute to the process as you do.

[Vyvial]

i'm not sure it's even worth answering you anerlich, maybe you should read my posts and get their meaning before you anger so easily and post nonsense.

I never claimed that I was "right". I never said that there is only one "way" and I never even said that my "way" represented the system I was taught. If I knew all the answers, I wouldn't need to be here asking these silly questions. Also, I have said many, many times that as I understand it, there are no rules in WC and that all techniques have many applications if you care to define them.

Opinions are stated, simple as that, if your kung fu is so fragile that you can't deal with some writing from someone you don't know then maybe you need to look at yourself.

saifa5k-- good advice and comments thank you. Another way I've seen the Chum Kiu movement played by my kung fu brothers is with a strike / Jut without slapping the inside of the elbow, similar to what you are describing, maybe?

[yuanfen]

Vyvial- I didnt see anger in Anerlich's post. He was just commenting on yours. He does take a questioning non dogmatic
approach to his art.

Ever onward through the fog!!

[saifa5k]

Vyvial


Originally posted by Vyvial
[

saifa5k-- good advice and comments thank you. Another way I've seen the Chum Kiu movement played by my kung fu brothers is with a strike / Jut without slapping the inside of the elbow, similar to what you are describing, maybe? [/B]


**yes that sounds like the same movement. Personally I find Chum Kiu to be the most enigimatic of all the hand forms. If we could actually go back and talk to the person or persons that devised the forms I think we might be in for a lot of surprises. I also think the only way to get even close to the original purpose of the forms is to put ourselves in the same cultural background as the folks who designed them.

[anerlich]

If anyone is worried about anyone getting angry, they maybe ought to start with the person who wrote:

"If you guys learned "wing chun" that can't even deal with boxers or grapplers of similar skill level, then I'm sorry for you. Find a new school or try to forget what you think you know, because most of you just didn't get it."

and this:

"Opinions are stated, simple as that, if your kung fu is so fragile that you can't deal with some writing from someone you don't know then maybe you need to look at yourself."

*Who* is that can't deal with "some writing from someone they don't know?" Not me.

And there's no need to insult my kung fu, which stands on its own, and the quality of which has no bearing on the discussion.

Looking at oneself is a good idea. Maybe you should read your quoted writings above and do just that.

[anerlich]

Joy,

thanks for your statemnt in my defence.

[Vyvial]

Anerlich, you are correct. i will take your advice and I'm sorry for seeming so rude.

[Vyvial]

Taken from Karateforums.com in a response to "shadowless kicks"


Quote:
Uhh, the fact that it moves faster than light distorts the RESULTS of the experiment, it doesn't distort time itself.
I don't see how this interacts with the experiemental data at all. Nothing was moving faster than light in the experiement.

Quote:
That's why it agrees with everything else despite not necessarily being true. It's an indistinguishable facsimile of time being warped, without it actually being warped.
So it's just a big coincidence that, for reasons you cannot even form an hypothesis over, that clocks moving in opposite directions fall out of sync and do so in the manner and degree that was predicted by relativity before the experiement was performed?

And you assert this with absolutely no evidence which offers even a reasonable cause to dispute relativity?

Holy smokes. I've explained it several times in this thread already, but maybe I can make it even simpler. Perhaps you've heard of the Doppler effect, whereby a sound may be percieved and in fact is transmitted at a frequency different than the object is actually oscillating. This doesn't mean that the frequency of the object has changed, but by any means of percieving that sound, it would suggest that the object is oscillating at a different frequency.

Like the doppler effect, a clock can read an inaccurate time after travelling at great speed, not because time itself has actually been changed, but because the perception of it has changed.

.................................................. ..............................


And what we have to offer is "Could Emin beat up Ip Man?"

[anerlich]

Anerlich, you are correct. i will take your advice and I'm sorry for seeming so rude.

No sweat. I'm not always a paragon of good manners or patience myself.