The K1 Pivot

[KPM]

Vankuen's question on another thread suggested that this may be a good topic because many doing Yip Man WCK may not have experienced it. As a general classification, most Yip Man WCK does the chor ma shifting motion using the heels as the pivot point. Most non-Yip Man WCK uses K1 (a spot just behind the ball of the foot and centered) as the pivot point. Again, this is a generalization only......some Yip Man WCK lineages also use the K1 spot to pivot on.

I practiced WCK from a Yip Man lineage that pivots on the heels for many years. Then when a discussion on the topic came up on the WCML I was convinced to give the K1 pivot a fair trial and really liked it. Not long after that I became part of a Pin Sun WCK lineage that teaches to pivot on the K1 point. So I thought I would provide what I have found to be advantages to pivoting on the K1 point. This is not to say that pivoting on the heels is wrong. Other's mileage may vary. :-)

IMHO, these are some of the good points about the K1 pivot:

1. Good balance. In just about any human motion involving using the feet the toes are used for balance. When pivoting on K1 you can still "grip" the ground with the toes providing excellent stability. The weight also stays forward near the center of the foot rather than rocking back to the heels even momentarily. This also increases balance and stability.

2. Good safety. The K1 pivot, even when using a 50/50 weight distribution, takes you off of the line of attack. Therefore your defensive motions become more deflective in nature and you are in a safer position. If one needs to pivot, the pivot itself should be part of the defensive response.

3. Good rooting/sinking. Since the weight stays centered near the middle of the foot rather than transferring back to the heels, this encourages the knees to converge more in the stance. This leads to better sinking. And again, since the weight does not transfer back to the heels even momentarily, one can stay rooted more easily.

Some additional points to keep in mind:

1. Just because the K1 spot is the pivot point, this does not mean you are up on the balls of your feet. Even though the heels are "swinging" during the pivot, they do not leave the ground but rather slide across the surface.

2. Likewise, when the heel is used as the pivot point, one does not "rock back" completely on the heels and let the front of the foot come off the ground. When the toes "swing", they too just slide across the surface.

3. However, given the above two points, biomechanically greater than 50% of the weight distribution has to be either at the K1 point for the heels to "swing", or at the heels for the toes to "swing." IMHO, keeping the weight forward near the center of the foot and pivoting off of the line of attack are the two major advantages to the K1 method of pivoting.

The above is just my opinion, and in no way should be seen as an attack on anyone else's way of doing things. Just wanted those that have never seen the K1 pivot to have the right info.

Keith

[t_niehoff]

It's fun to theorize why this is superior to that -- but it is just that: theory. But it's so simple: just get in there and fight and see what it is you *must* do to make things work. The demands of fighting will be your guide. For example, regardless of one's lineage and how they were taught to do things, when they actually get in and mix it up enough, they'll find that the demands of fighting force them to find the "proper" weighting (for them).

[reneritchie]

You need both theory and application. Why?

Some people are natural fighters who can make almost anything work. They could beat you down with ballet. It doesn't matter to them what they do, nor could they explain how to do it to anyone else (and would likely get frustrated trying).

Others could try different things, but not have the type of brain that easily figures out why one things works and the other does not. Out of a very complex set of variables, they cannot distinguish which elements made the difference.

Others might have very non-competitive, non-conflict oriented personalities, and for them having a check-list of possible elements to attempt would be useful to help them bridge the gap towards better application. Rather than just shying off or giving up, specific technical material can be invaluable towards making them just that much more confident and that much closer towards the next step.

IMHO, currently the best way to train is to engage in progressive resistance while under the watchful eye of an expert instructor who can make specific note of whatever errors you may be making (or areas you can improve), and then coach you into improving them. Stuff like, turn more on K1 and less on the heel can be part of that, but then, as you said it has to be put back into the progressive resistance model.

[Jim Roselando]

First one develops a structure.

Then one learns to send/recieve with the structure.

Then one applies the structure.

Then one makes it natural and part of them flowing freely so its adaptable and not a rigid method.

***

How long does it take for someone to cultivate the structure? Many do not want to spend the time to learn and train the body so that it represents the flavor/attributes/etc. versus doing what they want and calling it what they want?

Just being able to apply or fight with whatever they want does not mean its WCK.

Kieth is writing about the things "he" has felt from spending the time to "train" it a different way. He is experiencing different things and can write about those things. Certainly if he did not spend the time to "train" that, and was still heel shifting, and went out to fight I do not think his body would automatically start K1 shifting because of the pressure of the fight! For someone to do something in a fight they need to spend the time to train it and make it part of their natural ways.


Mr. "A" spends 3 years of intense training of the body/methods. Mr. "A" focuses on the Little Details and trains hard to make them the norm.
Mr. "A" then works very hard at applying his training in exchange with others.

Mr. "B" spends some time training the body/methods.
Mr. "B" wants to fight right away so he focuses on exchange with others and adjust his body so he roots easier etc..

In the short run Mr. "B" will get some fighting skill quick.

In the long run Mr. "A" (if he takes the time to apply his art) will end up being a better WCK exponent.

Are both WCK? To the outside eye yes but when the essence can no longer be produced then the answer is no. So, will fighting tell you what works or what does not work? To some extent it can but how does one know if what is working is WCK or not if they have no root to cultivate from?

WCK or WCK Concepts?

Just like JKD or JKD Concepts?


Conceptual "Art" or the Art Concepts being used anyway and still being called the art?


The idea is similar but the representation is just not the same IMO.


Regards,

[Jim Roselando]

RR wrote:


You need both theory and application. Why?

Some people are natural fighters who can make almost anything work.


Yes! Balance!


RR then wrote:

IMHO, currently the best way to train is to engage in progressive resistance while under the watchful eye of an expert instructor who can make specific note of whatever errors you may be making (or areas you can improve), and then coach you into improving them.


Yes!


Good post RR!

[yellowpikachu]

Thus I have heard,


Two points/area under the feet were needed while deliver power. single point will not do the job.


Agree with Rene and JIm on the Balance of the theory and the application.



A few questions for Terence is that,
if one has no idea and have never train in delivering inch punch. how is this person can find how to deliver an inch punch just doing fighting?

and what kind of power generation does this person use for his fighting? does he aware of how effective/ not is his power generation?

[KPM]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
It's fun to theorize why this is superior to that -- but it is just that: theory. But it's so simple: just get in there and fight and see what it is you *must* do to make things work. The demands of fighting will be your guide. For example, regardless of one's lineage and how they were taught to do things, when they actually get in and mix it up enough, they'll find that the demands of fighting force them to find the "proper" weighting (for them).


There you go again Terence...."fight, fight, fight!" As I've asked before...where's the balance? Everything I said previously was based upon my own practical experience with both methods and my own knowledge of biomechanics. My conclusions are based upon more than just theory. I've also found, and been told by others, that pivoting on the K1 point is more technically challenging than pivoting on the heels. There is a definite learning curve to getting it right. As stated already on this thread, it is very unlikely that someone will just start pivoting on the K1 point during a fight without having trained it. You have to build a foundation before you can have good application.

Keith

[yellowpikachu]

Since today is a great day to settle some great history even such as the pivoting...... I AM GOING TO MAKE DEC 10TH 200T4 A DAY TO BE REMEMBERED! :D ;D



Listen carefully!!!!!



THUS I HAVE HEARD.





THE REASON ABOUT ALL THE ARGUMENT AND UNSETTLE OF WHICH POINT IS THE---- IT.

IS BECAUSE ONE IS FALLING INTO THE MIND TRAP OF THE ASSUMPTION OF ONLY ONE POINT IS RIGHT.

IN FACT, IT NEEDS TWO POINTS.

YES! 2 POINTS.

ONE POINT PIVOT WITH AND ONE POINT ACTIVATE WHILE ACTION/ISSUE POWER.





OK NOW I HAVE RELEASED THE CAT OUT. :D :D :D :D

:D ;D
Does Terence Check one point or two points in the FIGTHING?
if only one point then one can keep fighiting but still dont have the effectiveness of the ANCESTORS. see I told you so, theory and technical history is one great thing to short cut experience! Hehehehehe :D :D
if it is two points then Which TWO points? Heheheheh:D:D


OK, you can call me nuts. I think I am but then what happen if I am right. and what happen if this two points release related to the ----KENG GENG? hehehehehehe Ok I must be drunk!

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
It's fun to theorize why this is superior to that -- but it is just that: theory. But it's so simple: just get in there and fight and see what it is you *must* do to make things work. The demands of fighting will be your guide. For example, regardless of one's lineage and how they were taught to do things, when they actually get in and mix it up enough, they'll find that the demands of fighting force them to find the "proper" weighting (for them).

I really don't think so. I can fight a lot of my students for years and years and for them to learn how to deal with that by trial and error will take a very long time. However if I teach them the advice I was given by my teachers who in turn were taughtthe advice they were given, then they progress much quicker. You need both the theory and the fighting.

Ray

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun
However if I teach them the advice I was given by my teachers who in turn were taughtthe advice they were given, then they progress much quicker. WC is supposed to be scientific, right? If so, then why are your theories based on something that someone came up with a hundred or more years ago. Wouldn't you think if WC really was scientific, it would base its pivoting techniques on modern scientific principles?

[reneritchie]

"WC is supposed to be scientific, right?"

No, it's supposed to be practical. The difference? The average high school basket ball player can score far more points than the average high school physics student (or even teacher ;)

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by reneritchie
No, it's supposed to be practical. OK, then why not start with looking at what other activities that include pivoting find most practical?
Ever see a basketball player pivot on his heel?
Does a discuss thrower pivot on the ball of his foot or his heel?
How about a baseball player when he throws or bats? Where is the pivot point?
Can you imagine a tight end running a play and making a turn on his heel?
There are many reasons for the practicality of pivoting on the ball of the foot and not all of them have to do with just the pivot.

[YongChun]

You only should look at the applications of the various Wing Chun practitioners and not all kinds of unrelated sports. If someone pivots on the heel then show them how that's a problem.

[Vajramusti]

WC is supposed to be scientific, right? If so, then why are your theories based on something that someone came up with a hundred or more years ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
((Another pseudoscience journey)))Joy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You only should look at the applications of the various Wing Chun practitioners and not all kinds of unrelated sports.
-----------------

((Good point Ray. BTW swimmers dont use the K1 point or the heel-do they))? Joy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If someone pivots on the heel then show them how that's a problem.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
((I am all ears<g>))Joy

[reneritchie]

Knifefighter - Valid points.

Ray - Falacious point. There is no reason to cross off non-related activities since a) they still involve humans who b) require stability in c) action. In set theoretics, that still a rather large union.

Joy - The problem is not with turning on the heel, per se, it's in that it's typically not taught or done properly. Turning on the heel happens when your weight is initially closer to k1/center foot and pressure is applied into you. This naturally moves the weight into the heel as a buffer while the pressure is neutralized (then the weight returns to the balance point). Even then, the turn is restricted to small degrees in application.

If weight is *initially* in the heel (bad habit developed by solo training turning on the heel, like in forms), then when pressure is added, the weight passes beyond the heel, there is no buffer, and stability is broken forcing recovery mode or failure.

(Note: this presupposes someone actually knows how to drive pressure into you, if people are just kickboxing with WCK, then it probably makes little difference).

[KPM]

Here's another point to consider. IMHO, two key principles in WCK are simplicity and efficiency. What is the simplist and most efficient way to avoid a punch?.....to not be at the end of it when it arrives! So what should one of your primary first line defenses in WCK be?......to get out of the way! What's the simplist and most efficient method to get out of the way?.....to pivot in such a way that your body is taken off the line of attack! If you are off the line of attack, then adding in defensive motions with the hands/arms is just "icing on the cake" and "extra insurance."

Keith

[sihing]

Originally posted by KPM
Here's another point to consider. IMHO, two key principles in WCK are simplicity and efficiency. What is the simplist and most efficient way to avoid a punch?.....to not be at the end of it when it arrives! So what should one of your primary first line defenses in WCK be?......to get out of the way! What's the simplist and most efficient method to get out of the way?.....to *pivot in such a way that your body is taken off the line of attack! If you are off the line of attack, then adding in defensive motions with the hands/arms is just "icing on the cake" and "extra insurance."

Keith

*pivot should read step.

James

[Vajramusti]

sihing sez:
*pivot should read step.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Not necessarily. Stepping is an additional dimension- sometimes you use it- sometimes you dont.

You can pivot and step or step and pivot depending on relative balance points.

I know that TWC folks and those influenced by TWC do things differently.

Lots of folks dont know how to pivot on the heels properly- because the rest of the structure can be out of whack. Kung fu takes time in learning well.
Repeating ad nauseam--- pivoting on the heels does not mean rocking back on the heels. The whole foot should mold itself to whatever ground there is. The weight is on the whole foot not just on the heel.

But folks should and will do what they are comfortable with.
Gotta get back to doing wing chun.

[Vajramusti]

Rene sez:
Joy - The problem is not with turning on the heel, per se, it's in that it's typically not taught or done properly.

((Rene- lots of things in wing chun are not taught, learned or done properly.Even from the same teacher- some get it, some think they got it and some never get it))

Turning on the heel happens when your weight is initially closer to k1/center foot and pressure is applied into you.

((What context? My reference point is chor ma in chum kiu. But the chor ma- weight on entire foot and pivoting on the whole foot teaches a lot. Then the conrol you learn from chum kiu can be adapted to circumstamces.
If pressure is applied to me by someone else- I will adjust -depending on the nature of the pressure and the circumstances--- stance testing? Real fight?? The devil in the details. Turn, balancing, stepping, footwork...endless possible permutations and combinations))

This naturally moves the weight into the heel as a buffer while the pressure is neutralized (then the weight returns to the balance point).

((My weight is on the entire foot except for the manipulation by my toes. Not on K1 and not on the heels))

Even then, the turn is restricted to small degrees in application.

If weight is *initially* in the heel (bad habit developed by solo training turning on the heel, like in forms), then when pressure is added, the weight passes beyond the heel, there is no buffer, and stability is broken forcing recovery mode or failure.

((A form of straw man modeling))

(Note: this presupposes someone actually knows how to drive pressure into you, if people are just kickboxing with WCK, then it probably makes little difference).

((See above- one learns fundamentals and adapts to context.
The full repertoire of moving chi sao with different folks develops a good sense of where the balance of the otther fella is at all times))))

[old jong]

My old boxer "Popeye" was turning on his K9 point...;)

[reneritchie]

KPM - Better to not even let them punch.

Joy - No worries, if it weren't for people turning on their heels, the rest of us would have to work much harder ;)

[KPM]

Originally posted by sihing
*pivot should read step.

James

Stepping is one way. But what is the simplest and therefore most efficient motion? I think a pivot is even simpler than a step.

Keith

[sihing]

Originally posted by KPM
Stepping is one way. But what is the simplest and therefore most efficient motion? I think a pivot is even simpler than a step.

Keith

When someone punches you for example, and you pivot and defend yourself with what ever hand movement, yes it may be more efficient, but is it the most effective. One of the thngs I do not like about most WC out there is the lack of movement or active footwork. When you step out of the way you are also out of range of the other arm or leg (a combination attack). And when this technique is absorbed it is also very efficient, but is very effective also. For example, in some of the video footage I have of Emin, regardless of what arm the person punches with, he will simultaneously attack/defend with either arm but will move down the center of the opponent which means he has to deal with both arms, and should the opponent use a combination movement then you have to be damm fast to pick up the other one coming at you. On straight line movements I move to the outside of the punching arm and lead foot, on round movements I'm on the inside of the arm and outside of lead foot but in either case away from the other arm. Therefore I do not have to deal with it, plus at the sametime simultaneously attacking/defending. To me this is a more effective tactic to use. Obviously I can also do the same as the example I used with Emin if I chose to.

James

[Vajramusti]

Comments on James post in brackets:

When someone punches you for example, and you pivot and defend yourself with what ever hand movement, yes it may be more efficient, but is it the most effective.

((As we have discussed there are sevral different ways of pivoting. I speak only for mine. Pivoting is basically learned in chum kiu- the chor ma-for development purposes. In some circumstances- at zero inch or near- it could be the most efficient.
In other occasions various kinds of stepping and footwork can fit each occasion))

One of the thngs I do not like about most WC out there is the lack of movement or active footwork.
((I am glad you said most. The two most visible wing chun ways are WT and TWC. I dont do either and there are many who also dont do either. The wing chun that I do is very full of footwork. Without extensive leg work- one can limit the hands- and the legs))

When you step out of the way you are also out of range of the other arm or leg (a combination attack).

((When you pivot the way I have tried to discuss before- you are not necessarily out of range for attacking even when takinga small step- you can actually increase forward energy for striking because of chor ma and other ma))

[KPM]

Originally posted by sihing
When someone punches you for example, and you pivot and defend yourself with what ever hand movement, yes it may be more efficient, but is it the most effective. One of the thngs I do not like about most WC out there is the lack of movement or active footwork. When you step out of the way you are also out of range of the other arm or leg (a combination attack).
James

"Out of range of the other arm or leg" tends to often mean that your counterattack response is also out of range. One of the things I do not like about some WC out there is that it tends to be somewhat indirect.....taking 2 or 3 counts to accomplish what should have been done in 1 count. Like I said, IMHO the basic pivot is probably the simplest and most efficient defensive response. I didn't say it was the only simple and efficient response.

Keith

[Matrix]

Originally posted by KPM
One of the things I do not like about some WC out there is that it tends to be somewhat indirect.....taking 2 or 3 counts to accomplish what should have been done in 1 count. th Keith,
As in all good things, it depends on the situation. However I agree with the sentiment. Less is more. Just like footwork. Sure it should be active, but it can also be too active. The critical point, as far as I'm concerned, is that there is body unity.

[sihing]

Originally posted by KPM
"Out of range of the other arm or leg" tends to often mean that your counterattack response is also out of range. One of the things I do not like about some WC out there is that it tends to be somewhat indirect.....taking 2 or 3 counts to accomplish what should have been done in 1 count. Like I said, IMHO the basic pivot is probably the simplest and most efficient defensive response. I didn't say it was the only simple and efficient response.

Keith

Things like the strategy and movement I wrote about in my last post are hard at times to explain, but to put it simply if I'm facing the point of contact with my centerline then my counter strike with the hands will be in range to hit the opponent. Basically this is blindside strategy again, to which we have discussed to death here already. In the WC I practice ideally one wants to always be able to touch the attacker with both hands at all times, Central Line Theory, when this is in place my attacks will always be in range of my opponent. When surprised by an attack and one is able to defend it with the hands then the side ways movement may not be possible but a instantaneous counter will, after that I would still try to end up on the blindside of my opponent while striking him also.

I found that beginners either step too much, sometimes sideways with the wrong foot 1st (they step left with the right foot first, instead of left with left foot first), or they step to little. Either way will work, with one putting you out of range of the combo attack, but not able to attack simultaneously, while the other will keep you in range for an attack of you own but also in range of the opponents combo. Again, practice makes improvement, and positioning in relationship to your opponent is paramount importance to success with this footwork.

James

[KPM]

Originally posted by sihing
Things like the strategy and movement I wrote about in my last post are hard at times to explain, but to put it simply if I'm facing the point of contact with my centerline then my counter strike with the hands will be in range to hit the opponent. Basically this is blindside strategy again, to which we have discussed to death here already. In the WC I practice ideally one wants to always be able to touch the attacker with both hands at all times, Central Line Theory, when this is in place my attacks will always be in range of my opponent. When surprised by an attack and one is able to defend it with the hands then the side ways movement may not be possible but a instantaneous counter will, after that I would still try to end up on the blindside of my opponent while striking him also.

I found that beginners either step too much, sometimes sideways with the wrong foot 1st (they step left with the right foot first, instead of left with left foot first), or they step to little. Either way will work, with one putting you out of range of the combo attack, but not able to attack simultaneously, while the other will keep you in range for an attack of you own but also in range of the opponents combo. Again, practice makes improvement, and positioning in relationship to your opponent is paramount importance to success with this footwork.

James

OK James. I'll give you that, and I know what you are saying. But that still doesn't convince me that it is simpler than a basic pivot off of the line of attack. I'll still posit that the K1 pivot is the simplest and most efficient first-line defense. Again, not the only first-line defense, depending upon the situation. But the point remains, that even though many in the Yip Man WCK system do not use the K1 pivot, it is a very basic expression of a core principle in Wing Chun.

Keith

[Vajramusti]

Suqare bodied non TWC Ip Man wing chun is double handed and square bodied. You can go wherever you need to go....without blind side language with both hands available.

[Stevo]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
WC is supposed to be scientific, right? If so, then why are your theories based on something that someone came up with a hundred or more years ago. Wouldn't you think if WC really was scientific, it would base its pivoting techniques on modern scientific principles?

Scientific principles don't change with time - only our understanding of them does.

Basic human anatomy hasn't changed - if a pivot worked 100 or 200 years ago, why wouldn't it work now?

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Stevo
Scientific principles don't change with time - only our understanding of them does.

Basic human anatomy hasn't changed - if a pivot worked 100 or 200 years ago, why wouldn't it work now? Exactly...I'm betting it didn't work very well 200 years ago, just as pivoting on the heel when you hit a tennis ball wouldn't have worked very well 200 years ago.

[Stevo]

Tennis vs Wing Chun? Totally different activities with different mechanics.

Maybe some people's understanding of the heel pivot is flawed. The body weight isn't actually ON the heel...the heel is the pivot point. If you pivot using your heels as pivot points, your core pivots on its own central axis. This has distinct advantages. However, if you pivot using your toes as pivot points, your core swings out to each side away from the centre. This has some advantages, too, but they're outweighed by the disadvantages in my opinion.

[KPM]

Stevo wrote:
Maybe some people's understanding of the heel pivot is flawed. The body weight isn't actually ON the heel...the heel is the pivot point.

---To pivot on the heel (or on the K1 point) greater than 50% of the weight has to be at that point, even if only momentarily. Its simple biomechanics. KPM

If you pivot using your heels as pivot points, your core pivots on its own central axis. This has distinct advantages. However, if you pivot using your toes as pivot points, your core swings out to each side away from the centre. This has some advantages, too, but they're outweighed by the disadvantages in my opinion.

---I see it that other way around. But we are all equally entitled to our own opinions. Both ways work. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. While some will likely disagree with me, I think there is evidence to say that the K1 pivot is the older, original method (whether or not that even matters).

Keith

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Stevo
Tennis vs Wing Chun? Totally different activities with different mechanics. Tennis; shot put; baseball/football throw; racquetball; handball; batting; boxing; Muay Thai = different activities that share many of the same biomechanics for pivoting and creating power.

Wing Chun = different activity with its own specific mechanics. Maybe that's one of the reasons you don't see WC people fighting with their WC techniques.

[Stevo]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


Wing Chun = different activity with its own specific mechanics. Maybe that's one of the reasons you don't see WC people fighting with their WC techniques.

Depends where you're looking when you don't see.

[Stevo]

Originally posted by KPM
Stevo wrote:
Maybe some people's understanding of the heel pivot is flawed. The body weight isn't actually ON the heel...the heel is the pivot point.

---To pivot on the heel (or on the K1 point) greater than 50% of the weight has to be at that point, even if only momentarily. Its simple biomechanics. KPM

If you pivot using your heels as pivot points, your core pivots on its own central axis. This has distinct advantages. However, if you pivot using your toes as pivot points, your core swings out to each side away from the centre. This has some advantages, too, but they're outweighed by the disadvantages in my opinion.

---I see it that other way around. But we are all equally entitled to our own opinions. Both ways work. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. While some will likely disagree with me, I think there is evidence to say that the K1 pivot is the older, original method (whether or not that even matters).

Keith

All that matters is that it works for you and you have faith in it.

[Merryprankster]

Does a discuss thrower pivot on the ball of his foot or his heel?

No, but a hammer thrower does ;)

Of course, KF's point is simple and should be well taken - all of the things he is talking about are NOT that different. Shotput, Discus, Javelin, Tennis, Baseball swing, Boxing...even Hammer. They all use the same core movement.

If I took a picture, from the neck down, and edited out the arms of people doing each of these things properly, at the point of release/impact you would be hard pressed to figure out who was doing what.

There is a reason for this. That "same core movement," is the most biomechanically efficient way to deliver power. It therefore has commonality across these extremely (on the surface), different activities.

Of course, the devil is in the details. But when you get down to it, that's where the differences are too....not in the core fundamental movements.

The latter is a myth, existing for any number of reasons. Most usually:

1. Non-familiarity with activities outside a narrow experience range. (unable to draw analogies because you can't identify the similarities - only the differences)

2. Psychological need to differentiate (What I do is special and unique!)

3. Total misunderstanding of the material at hand, regardless of exposure (the subject is a tad slow, or may have been shown improperly)


faith in it.

Faith in yourself is the best thing to have. Faith in something that you should have empirical knowledge of is the very worst thing to have. I don't want faith in technical skills....I want knowledge.

[Stevo]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
No, but a hammer thrower does ;)

Of course, KF's point is simple and should be well taken - all of the things he is talking about are NOT that different. Shotput, Discus, Javelin, Tennis, Baseball swing, Boxing...even Hammer. They all use the same core movement.

If I took a picture, from the neck down, and edited out the arms of people doing each of these things properly, at the point of release/impact you would be hard pressed to figure out who was doing what.

There is a reason for this. That "same core movement," is the most biomechanically efficient way to deliver power. It therefore has commonality across these extremely (on the surface), different activities.

Of course, the devil is in the details. But when you get down to it, that's where the differences are too....not in the core fundamental movements.

The latter is a myth, existing for any number of reasons. Most usually:

1. Non-familiarity with activities outside a narrow experience range. (unable to draw analogies because you can't identify the similarities - only the differences)

2. Psychological need to differentiate (What I do is special and unique!)

3. Total misunderstanding of the material at hand, regardless of exposure (the subject is a tad slow, or may have been shown improperly)

Yes, I can appreciate that they have commonality: both actions are performed by humans possessing arms and legs and a head that are attached to a central core from which power is generated that assists movements of the arms and legs and head.

True, the devil is in the details, but look at the variation in some of those examples. Compare swinging a baseball bat and launching a javelin, for example. One is a diagonally rising horizontal circular swing using both hands and the other uses one hand moving in a diagonally rising vertical linear trajectory. One delivers power while stationary and the other one while on the run. One focusses on launching an object held in the hand, while the other involves holding onto an object to hit another object with.


Originally posted by Merryprankster
No, but a hammer thrower does ;)

Faith in yourself is the best thing to have. Faith in something that you should have empirical knowledge of is the very worst thing to have. I don't want faith in technical skills....I want knowledge.

Agreed. My meaning was having faith, i.e. trust, in something as a result of empirically testing it, not blind faith.

[Merryprankster]

True, the devil is in the details, but look at the variation in some of those examples. Compare swinging a baseball bat and launching a javelin, for example. One is a diagonally rising horizontal circular swing using both hands and the other uses one hand moving in a diagonally rising vertical linear trajectory. One delivers power while stationary and the other one while on the run. One focusses on launching an object held in the hand, while the other involves holding onto an object to hit another object with.

I used to play baseball and throw javelin. As an anlogy to prove your point, this is a bad one. As I noted, the core movement is almost identical across these several events. The "block" with the hips that is required to get full power out of the body in each of these things is the same, accounting for personal variations and correctness in execution.

The fact that each activity uses a different sequence of events to reach almost exactly the same endpoint with respect to power generation is what's really amazing.

They are MUCH more alike than they are different with respect to how the body is used to generate and maximize power delivery. The things you are focused on as differences are the details I was talking about.

Why focus on the path of the baseball bat, vs. the path of the javelin, vs the path of golf club, when the majority of the muscle movement and the body structure at release/impact is nearly the same? Certainly your arms are important to transfer that power in the appropriate way, but it seems that focusing on that is somehow missing the point when discussing the biomechanics of power. They affect the delivery, but are certainly not the root of power generation, which bears striking (read as: nearly the same) similarities across a large selection of activities.

So, are they different? Yup. But at the core, they are far more similar than different.

[reneritchie]

Hey MP, nice posts. Hope all is well with you and yours.

[Stevo]

Merryprankster, I'm not disagreeing with you - I agree that power comes from the core. I'm just pointing out that there are large differences in the details. Knifefighter was implying that Wing Chun power is weak and doesn't come from the core. Much Wing Chun power comes from the core too, like the other activities mentioned. The differences are in the details.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Stevo
Knifefighter was implying that Wing Chun power is weak and doesn't come from the core. Much Wing Chun power comes from the core too, like the other activities mentioned. The differences are in the details. Not what I was saying at all. My point was you will be significantly off-balanced, not effectively ready for follow-ups, and have less power when you pivot on the heel...nothing to do with the core.

[t_niehoff]

MP, good posts. What an idea -- talking about universal body mechanics!

Stevo -- there is no such thing as "wing chun power". There is only power. And more often than not, the "details" only get in the way. They are incidental. If one has the base (core) mechanics, the "details" will fall into line.

[Merryprankster]

I'm sorry Stevo, I must have misunderstood. Your comment that tennis and WC are totally different activities made me think you somehow thought there was something fundamentally different about their power generation.

However, the available evidence suggests that the differences in the details are not as large as one might expect. Note the pictures below. Javelin, Discus, Golf, Baseball, boxing and a couple of guys doing WC in the upper right hand corner of a webpage. It's very easy to "get there from here," in each of the photographs. A turn of the foot, slightly squaring the shoulders, un arch the back, etc. This tells me that the "differences" are really in what you're intending to do with the power, not "how you get it." This means that the body movements required to generate the power must be similar, regardless of how momentum (different concept) is or isn't generated. Put simply, if you're doing something drastically different as opposed to 'adaptively' different from the fellows below, you aren't maximizing power or structure.


Javelin (http://www3.baylor.edu/~Jeffrey_Dacunha/DaCunhaJavelinThrow.jpg)

Discus (http://www.throw1deep.com/Adam%20discus%20release.jpg)

Golf (http://www.karljaeger.com/tiger.jpg)

Boxing (http://www.starstore.com/acatalog/Muhammad_Ali_training-01.jpg)

Baseball (http://colemanfamilycamps.com/highcountry/images/baseball-swing.jpg)

Wing Chun (upper right hand corner of page) (http://students.bugs.bham.ac.uk/wckungfu/)

[Vajramusti]

Of course many of the same body parts are used in different sporting and martial activities.

Wing chun has its own chain of motions for different kinds of power development. And coordinated whole body structure and dynamics are involved in wing chun power development... not just the heel. The heel emphasis in chor ma- is for development purposes- among other things for understanding the gravitational path through the human body. If you look at a good chart of the skeletal structure from the side- the graviational line runs from the top of the head to the center of the heel. Once learned one can adjust in many ways that is necessary in a real situation icluding contact relationships with an opponent. Chor ma gives a framework for adjustment.Later one can even do bench jumping, pole work. single leg- moving and kicking can involve the heel being off the floor for brief moments

Wing chun is not javelin throwing, not putting the shot, not western boxing, not free style wrestling, not judo or jj- though
wing chun folks can benefit from stable mates or comparisons with people from other activities and styles.. Functions can define form...
and the functions of different arts are different. Diverse activities if they are good- have to take the basic force of gravity into account. IMO opinion good wing chun does.

Selected web sites or videos can mislead non wing chun people re what wing chun is. The Birmingham web site is not my kind of wing chun.Nowadays any one can put up a website.
There is a lot of diversity in wing chun. No one can really speak for all of wing chun. Many heel pivoters dont do it right either- allowing some parts of their their structure go to pot.

[Merryprankster]

Joy, after reading your post carefully, I can only say....

You're right. Wing Chun is special and unique. Even though every other endeavor on the planet, done right and well, uses very similar mechanics, Wing Chun has grasped higher principles and transcended them all.

[PaulH]

MP,

You're truly the finest enlightened being that I ever know! =)