50-50 vs. 60-40 weighting, and turning - a theory

[fa_jing]

How does the following sound to you all? Without getting into side topics (yet), during the training of the stance changes back and forth from "left sitting horse" to "right sitting horse," let me use as an example training of the vertical fist punch, where the non-punching hand comes back to chamber. As this is training, not fighting, one goal is that the center of gravity of the practicioner remain along the same vertical axis as the stance shifts from one side to the other, IMHO to train twisting force. Assume we are all on the same page in that the weight when stationary is concentrated through the K-1 "bubbling springs" point, about 2/3 of the way from the heel to the tip of the foot. If you stand in a 50-50 stance, then your center of gravity (COG) is along an axis midway between your K-1 points - or slightly closer to your front heel than your rear heel. Using the K-1 points as the axis to turn your feet would leave your COG stationary. While, if you stand in a 60-40 stance, then your COG is more towards the rear foot, approximately right between the heels. Thus, turning on you heels leaves your COG stationary. To summarize: In 50-50 stance, turning on your K-1 points in the feet leaves your COG stationary. In 60-40 stance, turning on your heels leaves your COG stationary. With either method, your left and right punches will line up - try it if you like. I hope I explained the geometry well. I have been exposed to both methods of turning, but I have never seen a geometrical explaination of the difference. Do you agree with my assessment?

[[Censored]]

then your COG is a few inches behind you? This is an oversimplification.

[Roy D. Anthony]

All are correct.Use what you need for when you need it.

[fa_jing]

If you are in a 90-10, then your COG is between your heels and very near to the rear heel, not behind you. And there would be no part of your foot that you could pivot on to keep your COG constant. Actually, I did neglect to mention that your COG in all these cases lies a few inches forward of the line in between your heels, as your weight is not on your heels, as mentioned before. ROY: The issue is not which is better, what I'm really trying to get at is: How have the weight distribution preferences of various practioners affected the point on the foot in which the pivot is made. If you just try both methods you will see that your punches line up.
When you need it is only when you are training. You can train to side-step forward or back from your sitting horse stance when you punch, to train footwork. The training exercise I am describing is to train linking/twisting power, and yes, there are probably more ways to do it than what I described. However, these 2 I mentioned seem to be popular, and my point is that both methods cause the center of gravity to remain in a constant position.

[TjD]

why do you want to keep your COG (center of gravity) in the same spot? in punching wouldnt you rather have your center of gravity moving fowards, hence hitting your opponent with the force of your body?

when your in contact with your opponent, and any force is transferred to you, you have a different center of gravity
- this could require a change in YOUR weight distribution but would allow for your COG and the overall weight distribution to stay the same

how you shift would have more to do with the circumstances and how to keep a proper root, and less on where your feet and own body weight is i would think

however mabye im wrong

peace
travis

Receive what comes, Escort what leaves, and if there is an opening, rush in

[[Censored]]

If I lift my front foot completely off the ground, does that force my COG over the rear heel?

Of course not. I can move MY COG to yongquan or even toe by shifting my body, and without putting my foot down. This is accomplished by repositioning hips, vertebrae, arms, head, etc.

So, as I said, you are oversimplifying. :rolleyes: Furthermore, the spine can maintain constant in a turn without a fixed point of rotation in the foot.

P.S. TjD, we are talking specifically about turns.

[Roy D. Anthony]

every move should be in balance. and can be done as suck regardles of the weight distribution. Hope you Find It. ;)

[Roy D. Anthony]

Every Move should be done in balance and can be done as such regardless of weight distribution. Hope you Find it!!! :)

[sunkuen]

"School is in and I am your professor"


NOT IN MY SCHOOL, SUNSHINE!!! :p

[fa_jing]

Censored - Yes, I was oversimplifying, I didn't want to be long-winded. TJD - I was talking about a specific training exercise where you don't move forward - maybe this was developed to accomodate the size of the training space. We do have something we train called the "embracing step" which is kind of like turning while moving forward - I've only gotten this to work well for me by turning on the heels, and sinking into my rear leg, BTW. When I am sparring (we use boxing gloves) I am usually too concerned with the punch coming at my face to ponder the finer points of weight distribution. Maybe when I start training wooden man I'll have the footwork more ingrained into my movements. For now, I am happy if just a few things I do in sparring come out "Wing Chun, " maybe you can feel this. I also have a penchant for theoretical discussions... :)

[[Censored]]

FAJINGK - I am all for theoretical discussions, but they lose all value when they become imprecise.

Roy - This is a WC board, not an Aikido board, so quit the "everyone is special" routine. ;) When everything is right, nobody learns.

sunkuen - Think twice, cupcake. :p

[sunkuen]

:D

[Roy D. Anthony]

if you see my answers being more for Aikido, then perhaps you should be on the Aikido board.
The problem with many Wing Chun practitoner's understanding of Yin Yang is that it is very limited.
If one understands that Yin & Yang exist's together, then one will understand Wing Chun more completely! I hope you understand.
:)

[[Censored]]

Roy,

The reason I am on here right now, and not generally on the Aikido board, is that people here have meaningful comments.

Statements such as "All are correct" (while technically true in the largest sense), belong to sophistry and do not serve discussion or learning. It is nearly impossible for someone to understand this kind of remark in its proper context, and without significant elaboration, it really does more harm than good to our practice of martial art.

We should talk about the things which can be talked about, and leave the rest to experience.

My experience with Aikido people is that they are good at talking about Yin and Yang, but they don't really understand what they are saying, and consequently they get knocked on their ass more often then not. ;) I have been learning from their mistakes for 3 years now, and I hate to see others repeat them.

[Sihing73]

Hello,

Just want to jump in for a moment here ;)

Censored,
I think that Roy makes a valid point in stating that all are correct. What I get from this is that each method of weight placement/distribution has its own place. Since all of us are individuals it is only natural for us to tend to do things which compliment our phsical structure. I have been taught how to shift using the heels, center of the feet and balls. Each one, IMHO, has its own place and application. Perhaps one can not use one method to meet all circumstances. On the other hand, if one trains exclusively in only one method one may be able to adopt that approach and make it work, for them, in various circumstances. A lot has to do with how hard one trains and with ones deeper understanding of the method being applied.

I think that striving to maitain a 50/50 weight distribution has the advantage of allowing one a more balanced stance. You are in the middle and can react without the need to shift your weight/body as much as if you are in a more 60/40 or 70/30 or even 0/100. Now each weight distribution has its place and again, some people can make any one of them work iregardless of the situation. Still, I think that when one considers the average person a more mid level type of approach will often have the best "overall" results.

As to your comment about Aikdo people not really understanding Yin and Yang; that could be said of many Kung Fu people as well. :) Aikido may take longer to grasp and be able to put into application but someone who really understands the art can be quite formidable. I don't know who you have been privilieged to see but a high ranking Aikido man, or even good Judoka or Ju Jitsu guy for that matter, is a pleasure to watch in action. I can assure you that they can be quite good and have an understanding of Yin and Yang, though perhaps from a different perspective than others. Like any good artists the seperation will come from the amount of effort put into training. Still, I feel it is a bit presumptious to dismiss all Aikdo people as having no real understanding of Yin and Yang.

I just want to caution everyone not to let their emotions get the better of them. Retain respect for each other. There is nothing wrong with a difference of opinion but all views haver merit.

Peace,

Dave

[dzu]

Hi Dave,

Could you please post some examples of how and when you would use shifting on the toes or heels instead of the K1 point? I shift on the K1 point and have found that it supports the body structure the best in application. I am open to new ideas, however, so if you or anyone else who uses all three methods of shifting could elaborate a bit more I would appreciate it.

Dzu

[Roy D. Anthony]

The Unfortunate part of Wing Chun, is that people are looking for the perfect technique. This happens in all Martial Arts.

Many do not comprehend that every technique has a counter. Therefore no technique is perfect, if your definition of a perfect technique is an uncounterable technique. Sorry it dors not exist.
what does exist is the understanding of where you are open with each of our techniques.

The Wing Chun you have trained has already taught you that what I said is correct. And I can prove it. Unless you don't have footwork in your system of Wing Chun?

[Sihing73]

Hi Dzu,

Forgive this short reply, I promise to post more later.

In essence I belive that Alan Lamb put out a very good article some time ago detailing the three methods of turning. He stressed that the balls would be used to take a more aggressive stance and go into the opponent. The Heels would move you slightly away from the opponent and would be used if you were not sure of your ability to deal with the opponents force. The turning on the center of the foot allowed one to maintain about the same relative position and was the middle line. Of ocurse these are oversimplifications ;)

I would tend to utilize turning on the heel in rough or uneven terrian. If there were objects on the ground such as rocks or broken glass etc, then I might wish to turn on the heels as I would be able to raise my foot slighlty and skim the surface. It would also allow me the greatest distance of my body from the opponent in case I screwed up and need to recover quickly, just a little more of a cushion. Its funny, but if you train on different surfaces you may find that the method you normally prefer may need to be modified slightly in order to work on various surfaces.

Short answer, I am sure we will get into this more deeply as time permits.

Peace,

Dave

[joy chaudhuri]

Dear fajing:
I dont understand your "geometry"- too many variables-weighting, accu points, c of g, etc-
an inelegant model IMO. There are differences in what you do step by step by for development and what you do in a real application.In the developed stage you can manipulate those things...so the exact weighting becomes less relevant and you cant and should not be dogmatic. But for development 50-50 swings you out the least when in motion IMO. Of course I could be wrong! What do I know! BTW do you really fajing?
How? I am curious and envious! :D

[[Censored]]

I don't think anyone is getting carried away by emotion here (unless you include a certain anxious moderator who is a little too eager to please.) ;)

My comment on Aikido people was directed at the group as a whole, it is generally correct and I do not need to apologize for it (nor do I need others to apologize on my behalf). There are, of course, noted exceptions. That is beside the point.

The point is, their use of quasi-philosophical nonsense is unusually high, and their ability to demonstrate is unusually low, i.e. there is a correlation. "All are correct" is the gateway to misunderstanding. What purpose does this serve?

I do agree completely with Roy's further elaboration.

In the world of martial arts, all views do not have equal merit. I know it, you know it. (In fact, some posts of unequal merit have been moderated right off this board.) So let's quit the newspeak and stop kidding ourselves. :rolleyes:

[fa_jing]

The Geometry - I stand by it. I am going to be described as both over-complicating and over simplifying the issue. I will take one last crack at it: When you turn on your heels, side-facing, your weight is rocking back through your heels during the turn. It comes more forward when you place your feet down, as the weight goes through K-1 points. For the sake of simplification, I will not emphasize the forward-backward direction when discussing COG. Stand in a 50-50 weighted side horse. Turn on your heels. You should feel that your COG is shifting slightly from left to right (and forward and back as well, as discussed previously). Now shift your weight more through the rear leg. Continue to shift on the heels. Your COG stays the same left-right wise, while continuing to move forward and back. You can design your own experiment with pivoting through the K-1 points.
BTW, Fa jing, "Releasing power," is just a handle. I understand it as causing the opponent to resist an action, then taking him in the same direction he was trying to go. Example: Lop sau performed, as opponent resists and pulls his hand and body back, you assist by releasing the hand and striking to the midsection. This could send the opponent flying. I thought it was a cool principle, so I made it my handle - this is not to indicate special expertise with this concept. -FJ

[fa_jing]

I am interested in your comment regarding the situation where your are turning on a rough surface. Regardless of the axis through the foot used for turning, do you agree that it is better to slightly lift the entire foot from the ground while turning, on a rough surface, thus creating less friction?
-FJ

[Sihing73]

Hello fa_jing,

I would only opt to lift the foot completely off the ground, no matter how slightly, while stepping. I feel that turning, I should maintain some contact with the ground. For example, should I turn on my heels, on rough terrain, I might raise the front of the foot but I would definitely keep the heel in contact with the ground. Now if I were to perform a side-step or step off on an angle then I would, ideally, glide across the ground. Depending on the surface would dictate how high I raise my foot off the ground.

Although I can understand the concept of having less friction, I think that one needs a certain degree of friction in order to maintain stability and root. When you lose all contact with the ground you have no point of reference to work with as regards stance etc. If you raise the foot while turning you run the risk of being off-balanced as you now only have one foot to root with. Even in WT, with all the weight 100% on one leg, the un-weighted leg still acts as a means of support to shore up your stance or turn.

Peace,

Dave

[dzu]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for your reply. I have not read the article that you refer to but I have met Alan Lamb Sifu. IMHO having the weight centered at the K1 is the most aggresive because one's root is maintained continuously. This allows for more drive when stepping and disrupting the opponent's center.

You make an interesting point about shifting depending upon your desired positioning. It is my experience that the shift must also be rooted and that body is best rooted when using the K1 pt. With the weight centered over the feet, there is a margin for error in either direction. If I am pressed, my heels act as a buffer to help absorb the force and send into the ground. If I am pulled, my toes and balls of the feet act as the buffer.

While the terrain may dictate shifting on the heels, I feel that any forward pressure into your structure cannot be rooted as well because the center of gravity is already moving backwards. The body's weight is essentially at the edge of its support posts (the feet) rather than centered.

On those occasions where I am on poor terrain for shifting (hardwood floors, thick carpet, uneven ground, wet grass, etc.), I put myself in more danger by placing the weight on my heels.

To summarize: If the terrain permits, I prefer to shift on the K1/Bubbling Well because I stay rooted. If the terrain doesn't permit shifting, I prefer to find another alternative rather than break my own structure by bringing the weight over my heels or toes. No sense in doing the opponent's work for him :).

Regards,

Dzu

[joy chaudhuri]

fajing
----------------------------
Thanks for your elaboration. Your model does not fit me.There is a lot to the heel issue...other aspects of structural coordination are also important. The weighting and turning are perennial issues in wing chun and I have a good sense of the diversities. I understand that in a real situation all sorts of adjustments will take place.
But good wing chun IMO carefully develops the structure
and the functional relationships, so that adjustments come from a core wing chun framework.
Per my wc framework-
I turn 50-50 in chum kiu on my heels and my cog does not go flying around.Turning on a dime when done right. The Ki point comes from an accupuncture model not a gravitational path model. I know there are different perspectives on this. I gave a short summary of mine without disrespecting others. Cheers.
Joyotpaul Sunil Dutta- Chaudhuri(Note:yuanfen for brevity not anonymity here)PS>Being new in posting on this forum I have not learned how to get to spell check from here to compensate for my wandering two fingers in usage.Sorry :D

[mun hung]

Maintain a constant root thru shifting on your heels.

[Roy D. Anthony]

The reason you are experiencing this weight shift to the back and onto your heels when you turn into the side horse, is perhaps because you are straightening your front leg as you are turning.
All of my students experience this problem when they first learn the Chum Kiu. You must make a conscious effort to maintain the leg position as you turn, therwise you will not be able to make quick turns as necessary in combat. Hope this helps.

[fa_jing]

Thanks for all the responses. I'm trying to keep an open mind, I mentioned two possibilities I had been exposed to but your responses indicate that there are more ways to turn.
Roy A. - I do extend one leg while shifting on my heels. This is to go from a 50-50 YGKYM to a 60-40 sitting horse. This is the style being taught by my sifu, so I am conforming.
Yuan Fen - actually I'm not putting down the idea of shifting your COG when turning, maybe it adds to the power? But as all have pointed out, there may be other factors. It's more a matter of feel, maybe the physics only applies to the way I stand.

My Sifu has 26 years of experience, has fought in ring-style competition, etc. - he once had this to say on weighting: (I'm paraphrasing)
"You are not striking a pose. You are constantly moving, sometimes it's 100-0, 90-10, 60-40, 50 - 50, etc. Learn to make the necessary adjustments"

-FJ

[Roy D. Anthony]

Well now that we Identified the problem, you may correct it. Don't forget that turning is still moving, and the best way is to not straighten your front leg,as the forward force in your arms is now moving backwards, which opposes the idea of chasing in the Chum Kiu.

By the way, I have been walking for approximately 38 years, that doesn't make me an expert on walking. :)

[fa_jing]

In Chum Kiu, I can see this. Thanks for the knowledge. And you are confirming my theory that turning in the 50-50 stance, on the heels, moves your COG slightly, towards the target in this case. But what about when training punches? Nevermind, I feel like I'm beating the topic to death.
I hadn't said my Sifu was the be-all end-all expert on turning, actually he has a very open mind, due to his JKD philosophy. He teaches us forms the way he was taught, so as to preserve the lineage. His comment speaks for itself.
-F

[Roy D. Anthony]

Of course turning is moving. In Punching either with Shifting or stepping the CoG goes forward too. Therefore adding power to your punches.That's actually straight forward.