Stepping 'back'. [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Mr Punch

10-01-2006, 04:59 PM

Hmmmm

I try not to step back if I can avoid it during chi sau...this forces you to develop your structure and your turning more....and I never step back unless my opponent steps inSure, I liie to practice without moving quite a lot. Then we up the intensity and start putting in more footwork.

I should have specified though., I was talking more about general fighting principles.

I only put the 'Never step back' thing in the poll as a gag, but somebody actually clicked it! :rolleyes: :D

Let me open it up a bit.

IME some Leung Ting guys (and others) say 'never step back'. I always figure it's a joke or they've never been in a fight.

Most Leung Ting guys I've trained with step back straight.

William Cheung: at 90 ish, certainly wider than I'm used to.

Most WSL (and others) at 45 ish, which is where I'm comfortable.

Straight back seems to lead your square WC stance being very open to being steamrollered by big people or taken down by grapplers.

90 ish I'm not sure about... I can see its merits in som situations but I haven't tried it enough... I tend to think it takes you too far out of range and has your energy going off to the side. If you always practice this way I can see how it could really make you good at sending power into your punches from any angle, not the rather slavish centre-to-centre centreline style of attacking from square on.

45 seems to me to be a good, natural extension of just turning to 'accept what comes' it also gives you a good chance to establish/maintain contact with your lead arm and have a good power punch from off your back foot.

These are just my observations. Discussion welcome.

BTW, I'm not having a dig at Leung Ting's lot, just a couple of observations from people I've trained with. I am having a dig at people who generally say 'Never step back'. You're on crack! :D

Liddel

10-01-2006, 05:32 PM

I am having a dig at people who generally say 'Never step back'. You're on crack! :D

I totally agree - i use all of the above angles with regard to stepping back.
Although stepping back to me, is seperate from a retreat.

A retreat to me is to evade/avoid and envolves dis engaging from the action - say to let a kick or punch pass.

Stepping back however is in my mind all about 'range management' and is generally only a half step at most in any direction at any angle to suit the situation.

IMO a half step gives the advantage of gaining space and position without loosing the range to retaliate/follow up.

Never say Never in fighting its just narrow minded....:D

Ravenshaw

10-01-2006, 09:35 PM

Ideally, I try not to step back, but in sparring these things aren't always ideal. I guess now that I think about it, I usually go straight back or on a diagonal. What would be the advantage of 90 degrees over 45 degrees?

As far as "never stepping back," Sigung LT and his students say some things as if they are universal truths when they probably aren't. They say things as if to sound confident and authoratative, but really it just invites criticism. I find that it can also close the minds of some WT students, because they hear these claims and take them at face value. Isn't it good to also know what to do in a less-than-ideal situation? I love WT, but I have to take these things with a grain of salt...

IRONMONK

10-02-2006, 03:13 AM

in the WT chi sao sections there is "stepping back " footwork

AmanuJRY

10-02-2006, 07:04 AM

You might want to re-phrase the question.:o

When forced to step back, I would step back...in all other instances, I will turn, step or move off line.;)

The question then, is what would force you to step back vs. turning offline???:cool:

Mr Punch

10-02-2006, 08:38 AM

Good point.

In a very quick off the top of my head answer before I hit the sack, I'd say centreline attacks or attacks that pressurize both sides of your body at once, rendering it impossible to turn off on an axis running through you centre of balance. Like a double handed bar-fight opening shove to your chest.

With a half step (depending on how strong and how far through the attack is coming) it should be possible to turn/step off-line even if you start going directly back. This is desirable because you can spring-load your counter. I reckon.

Good night!

wingchuntaiji

10-02-2006, 09:52 AM

Hi! All,

I am new to this forum, but I think that the stepping back question needs to include "All of the above and Other". There are also more alternatives than just stepping back to deal with incoming force that can't be dissipated. There are in fact more stepping backs than what are listed. It depends on the level of the practitioner and whether he or she can fully absorb, neutralize, or redirect the opponet's force. To some high-level practitioners, not the agressors, they never need to step back. Most people would use straight line. But, the less you need to step back the better in a Chi-Sao situation. Some fighters use stepping back to deliver powerful release of an attack and/or to cause a bigger impact in sparrings.

God Bless,

wingchuntaiji

Ultimatewingchun

10-02-2006, 10:03 AM

"Most Leung Ting guys I've trained with step back straight.
William Cheung: at 90 ish, certainly wider than I'm used to.
Most WSL (and others) at 45 ish, which is where I'm comfortable.

Straight back seems to lead your square WC stance being very open to being steamrollered by big people or taken down by grapplers.

90 ish I'm not sure about... I can see its merits in some situations but I haven't tried it enough... I tend to think it takes you too far out of range and has your energy going off to the side. If you always practice this way I can see how it could really make you good at sending power into your punches from any angle, not the rather slavish centre-to-centre centreline style of attacking from square on.

45 seems to me to be a good, natural extension of just turning to 'accept what comes' it also gives you a good chance to establish/maintain contact with your lead arm and have a good power punch from off your back foot.

These are just my observations. Discussion welcome.

BTW, I'm not having a dig at Leung Ting's lot, just a couple of observations from people I've trained with. I am having a dig at people who generally say 'Never step back'. You're on crack! :D " (Mr. Punch)

***WANT TO NOT ONLY talk about William Cheung's 90 degree full side step...the name of which should tell you that it's not so much meant to be a step back (and certainly not a step done in a straight line)...but rather as means of letting the opponent's attack pass you by...

and would also like to talk about the 45 degree turn, and all other related moves - including simply going straight back.

Let's start with this part of your post: "Straight back seems to lead your square WC stance being very open to being steamrollered by big people or taken down by grapplers."

***I AGREE that this can happen but I also see times when using a step straight back (or a step back and forth) is helpful as a means of working distance, mobility, and deception issues to your advantage from longer ranges than actual limb-to-limb contact range...and sometimes even within a very short range if such a step allows you to readjust your hand(s) and arm(s) to a more favorable position...

But the 45 and the 90 degree turns are very helpful in allowing the opponent's attack to bypass you - and ANY degree between 45 and 90 may come into play depending upon the commitment and speed of your opponent's attack (you won't be out of range with a 90 degree move if he really tried to penetrate your space very quickly and very hard...ie.- the bull and the matador).

You also wrote this about the 90: "I can see how it could really make you good at sending power into your punches from any angle, not the rather slavish centre-to-centre centreline style of attacking from square on."

***THAT'S RIGHT.

As I've said numeorus times - ONLY using the centre-to-centre in attack and defense really limits your weaponry, your mobility, and your power - while showing too much target to the opponent.

But oftentimes it's excellent from a very close standup striking range. ;)

Assuming that's where we are in the fight at any given moment. :)

But like the 90 degree footwork move - which allows more angles to strike upon...it's still just one piece in the game. As are the 45, the straight back, and simply holding your ground.

Edmund

10-03-2006, 01:09 AM

Shaolin

10-03-2006, 01:35 AM

Forced to do anything in confrontation means you were not in control from the begining.

sihing

10-03-2006, 04:03 AM

Forced to do anything in confrontation means you were not in control from the begining.

Control is an illusion my friend. If you do have control, it is only for a moment, so there will always be times when the other guy has the upper hand, and a sort of retreat is needed to gather your bearings and set the other guy up. To say that you will always be on top and have the advantage is naive thinking when it comes to combat IMO. One of the reasons why I love WC so much is that it teaches you many ways to go from bad position (losing) to winning positions and success in combat.

If you retreat in a straight line, you are still in the line of fire. If you retreat on a 90deg angle you avoid the line of fire but limit your target area, so that method is good and not good. The 45 deg angle (or something similar, anywhere offline is preferred), is the optimum to hopefully achieve as this puts you offline from the opponents force and allows ample target area to attack simultaneously. Of course, in the reality of things you have to do what you can and what your body reacts to, nothing is in stone and just getting out of the way, in any direction is sufficient when it's life and death.

James

AmanuJRY

10-03-2006, 05:58 AM

Forced to do anything in confrontation means you were not in control from the begining.

Maybe not in control of the centerline at that moment...it happens, in a dynamic environment control can change hands several times in a moment.;)

And if I wasn't in control from the beginning I should just give up?:confused:

being 'forced' to do something different than your original strategy is very
common, otherwise few would know what 'plan B' means.;)

Ultimatewingchun

10-03-2006, 07:46 AM

"Maybe not in control of the centerline at that moment...it happens, in a dynamic environment control can change hands several times in a moment."

***SOMETIMES occupying the centerline doesn't mean you're in control. You can still be hit with round (hook) punches, uppercuts, or overhands precisely because you're right in the middle (the center)...in between his two arms/fists - but without sufficient control.

In other words, there are several factors involved in order to achieve this control. For one, you must be very close to your opponent for exclusive occupation (and complete control) of the centerline to mean anything.

AND YOU MUST NOT ONLY BE VERY CLOSE - BUT ALSO HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL OF HIS ARMS/HANDS/ELBOWS/BODY to get the upperhand - because having the "position" (controlling/occupying the centerline) by itself doesn't necessarily mean a thing - even if you're very close. You can still get hit.

And having enough control (the way I just described it) doesn't necessarily mean always locking down/pinning/trapping/deflecting/redirecting one or both of his limbs...unbalancing his body, etc. - but rather, it means having enough control of this environment so that you can deliver a strike (or strikes) that will go unanswered.

(Not that you'll never get hit. Nobody can block, deflect, or avoid everything. But cutting that down to the barest minimum is the goal here, obviously).

Furthermore, one of the factors in gaining the kind of control I'm talking about (even if only for a moment or two - which could still be enough time to change the course or outcome of the fight)...is the proper footwork and distancing...whether it's going forward, going back in some way...moving to the side...etc.

Sihing73

10-03-2006, 11:15 AM

I only put the 'Never step back' thing in the poll as a gag, but somebody actually clicked it! :rolleyes: :D

Hello,

Actually I voted to never step back. I never give an inch and I have the scars to prove it :D

Seriously though, to clarify I do not think you should step back unless you are doing so as a result of the energy being given to you by the opponent. In other words while you may need to step back it should not be of your own choice but because the opponents force\energy etc, force you to do so. IMHO, too many people will do what I call fade, they step away from their opponent and open distance between them. This is not good, IMO, irregardless of whether you step back off to 45' or 90' etc.

Also, I would opt to step off the line at 45' if possible rather than to step striaght back. If at all possible I would try to step off the line and forward rather than back.

Shaolin

10-03-2006, 12:08 PM

Control is an illusion my friend.
James

Control is only an illusion to those who cannot yet apply this concept. Think outside the box, there is more then just controling your opponents physical movements.

Mr Punch

10-03-2006, 04:51 PM

Seriously though, to clarify I do not think you should step back unless you are doing so as a result of the energy being given to you by the opponent. In other words while you may need to step back it should not be of your own choice but because the opponents force\energy etc, force you to do so. Shock! Never expected it of you Dave!

But yeah, I think you're making the same point as a lot of people. Of course it's usually not desirable, but I like to think I let my feet take me where they will to enforce my structure and my striking. In an ideal confrontation (a myth of course) this would result in minimum of backwards movement to achieve my goal. But psychologocially I don't want to obsess about not stepping back in the middle of an altercation... and then if I am forced to I've already lost to some degree.

Plus you're forgetting that tactically, sometimes it may be desirable to force your opponent to come forward on your terms, in which case stepping back (and I'm not necessarily saying breaking contact altogether) is one way to do so.

IMHO, too many people will do what I call fade, they step away from their opponent and open distance between them. This is not good, IMO, irregardless of whether you step back off to 45' or 90' etc. Yep, this is dangerous, especially as when you practice too much chi sao and your opponent is a good little chunner, they'll stick anf follow you, but in most other arts they'll break contact and if all you do is wing chun with no sparring, you'll be at a disadvantage in having to reestablish contact, in the heat of the moment.

Mr Punch

10-03-2006, 04:58 PM

"Maybe not in control of the centerline at that moment...it happens, in a dynamic environment control can change hands several times in a moment."

***SOMETIMES occupying the centerline doesn't mean you're in control. You can still be hit with round (hook) punches, uppercuts, or overhands precisely because you're right in the middle (the center)...in between his two arms/fists - but without sufficient control.

In other words, there are several factors involved in order to achieve this control. For one, you must be very close to your opponent for exclusive occupation (and complete control) of the centerline to mean anything.

AND YOU MUST NOT ONLY BE VERY CLOSE - BUT ALSO HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL OF HIS ARMS/HANDS/ELBOWS/BODY to get the upperhand - because having the "position" (controlling/occupying the centerline) by itself doesn't necessarily mean a thing - even if you're very close. You can still get hit.
...Vic, I agree with the bulk of your post, and I know this is a bit of a semantic argument, but in my way of thinking you can control the centre without 'occupying' it in a visible centre of one square-on body to another kind of way that many people mistake as centreline control. As you pointed out with your post above about controlling from 90, centreline control is from anywhere to anywhere! If you don't have good close control of his arms/hands etc but can still fire in blows that disrupt his centre and minimize his replies, you still have control.

Your argument is assuming that most people here use the centreline idea which holds you slavishly to the middle, and thus between your opponent's arms... I would fondly hope this is not so!

For example, I don't mind doing what looks like chasing arms or windscreen wiper movements if it keeps control of his arms, and/or creates an opening for my elbow to feed into centre, or my shoulder for a slam, or my head... or whatever.

By the same token, I don't mind stepping back (voluntarily but obviously in as some reaction to his pressure/movements) if I can get the advantage and access to centreline from it.

Mr Punch

10-03-2006, 05:05 PM

Forced to do anything in confrontation means you were not in control from the begining.

Control is only an illusion to those who cannot yet apply this concept. Think outside the box, there is more then just controling your opponents physical movements.Thanks for joining us. :)

Perhaps you could explain your principles in relation to your fight with Count Dooku?

Sihing73

10-03-2006, 05:16 PM

Hello Mr Punch,

I like to shock people from time to time ;) I have even been known to play Devils advocate and post things not consistent with what I believe.

I guess what I am getting at is to not step back on your own. I like the idea that our opponent tells us how to defeat them. We respond to the energy given to us and that leads the way to victory. I know kind of sappy :o but hey it impressed my first wife: for a short while anyhow :rolleyes:

I would tend to try to step off at 90' or as I said forward at a 45' angle if needed. However, as I also practice Pekiti Tirsia I can tell you that I do indeed step backwards from time to time. Most often when using a weapon or facing a weapon you will need to step and remove a limb, particularily a leg from danger. Often this will require you to step back. However, this is still as a result of what the opponent is giving you. IMO you do not want to get into the habit of just stepping back because it may be easier. Better to work on the turning and shifting movements in order to deal with incoming force.

In training we practice as close to perfection as possible. In a real fight we hope that this training will allow us to survive the mistakes we make under pressure. Foor example, those that train with low stances will often not use the lowest trained stance in combat but will take advantage of the extra strength developed as a result of such practice.

If we stress shifting and turning and are forced to step back during a fight then, hopefully, such a step will not be a total route but will take advantage of attributes developed from our training. Consider the opponent stepping in deeply, you go to shift but they are too much for you and you have to move one leg back, maybe not a full step but enough to compensate for the energy being give and to maintain structure. You could argue that you stepped back and I could argue that you really did not step back but simply shifted weight and position. Of course the leg would be behind you now so technically you did step back. The same scenerio could have you shifting one leg to the side so you would "step" out to 90'.

Bottom line is that you must maintain structure no matter how you step\shift etc.

Ultimatewingchun

10-03-2006, 05:40 PM

"Vic, I agree with the bulk of your post, and I know this is a bit of a semantic argument, but in my way of thinking you can control the centre without 'occupying' it in a visible centre of one square-on body to another kind of way that many people mistake as centreline control. As you pointed out with your post above about controlling from 90, centreline control is from anywhere to anywhere! If you don't have good close control of his arms/hands etc but can still fire in blows that disrupt his centre and minimize his replies, you still have control." (Mr. Punch)

***AGREED.

"Your argument is assuming that most people here use the centreline idea which holds you slavishly to the middle, and thus between your opponent's arms... I would fondly hope this is not so!" (Mr. Punch)

***I'M NOT ASSUMING THAT,...but at times it will be the case that you're fighting right square in the middle - because your opponent is not allowing you to outflank him.

"For example, I don't mind doing what looks like chasing arms or windscreen wiper movements if it keeps control of his arms, and/or creates an opening for my elbow to feed into centre, or my shoulder for a slam, or my head... or whatever." (Mr. Punch)

***OKAY.

"By the same token, I don't mind stepping back (voluntarily but obviously as some reaction to his pressure/movements) if I can get the advantage and access to centreline from it." (Mr. Punch)

***AGREED AGAIN...and by "access to the centerline" I assume you mean having your centerline directly facing his center of mass.

The whole issue of only stepping back when he "makes me" is valid - as long as it's understood that trying to get an angle is just as important as going forward - otherwise - one is violating the principle of not directly fighting force against force when it can be avoided.

For example - I believe that the best way to deal with a straight line punch coming at you is to return the fire with a strike of your own - either on a different line completely while avoiding, blocking, or redirecting his strike with your other hand...or...

you cut punch into the line he's firing on from a slightly different angle - thereby contacting/redirecting his attacking arm (or shoulder) with your attacking arm - in effect meeting him on the same battlefield with your forward force (attack)...but yet just slightly offline - thereby redirecting his force while penetrating with your own.

sihing

10-03-2006, 05:50 PM

Control is still an illusion, even to those that have the concept engrained with in them, as time changes everything. One minute/second/nano second you have control the next you don't in the environment of combat (we are talking about two people of equal skills and abilities right? Not one guy so much better than the other, to which is a unscientific way of comparing individuals in combat). That's why it is important to do something while the control is yours, maybe hit, subdue, lock, throw, push, pull, whatever it takes to get the job done. There are no absolutes, just doing what's right at the right time with the tools you have available to you in the situation at hand.

Sihing73/Mr Punch,

Good posts. Only when you are forced should you give space, as eating space is the basic tactic. The question/poll asked "When Forced Back, I would step back...?" so therefore the preposition is that you are forced to go backward, so therefore what is the text book response? 45 is my text book response, but since fighting is never by the book, you have to use whatever works in the moment it is needed. Remember it is never about how good your Wing Chun was during the fight, but how successful your attack and/or defense was to get you out alive with minimal injury to yourself and others.

James

Sihing73

10-03-2006, 06:21 PM

The question/poll asked "When Forced Back, I would step back...?" so therefore the preposition is that you are forced to go backward,James

I actually misread the question, I mised the "Forced" part, my bad. Therefore I woud change my answer from Never Step back to stepping back at 45'.

I should have read the poll fully but alas I am a victim of our Public School system :( No wait I went to private school my last 3 years so maybe I am just slow :confused:

sihing

10-03-2006, 06:27 PM

I actually misread the question, I mised the "Forced" part, my bad. Therefore I woud change my answer from Never Step back to stepping back at 45'.

I should have read the poll fully but alas I am a victim of our Public School system :( No wait I went to private school my last 3 years so maybe I am just slow :confused:

Well I don't know now if I want a publicly schooled slow person running our sacred forum here Dave.:p

No probs man, I think your doin a great job as moderator, fair and equally experienced in the art (at least it looks that way when I read your posts, lol):D

James

Sihing73

10-03-2006, 06:42 PM

Hello Sihing,

Well thank you for the complimentary comments. The check is in the mail ;)

This is a good topic though as it points out that there really should be no absolutes. One must be able to learn and adapt to different situations. I have seen some well trained masters tell you that you can not fight from a low stance and then kick butt using a low stance :D

I think this topic is good because it can open our eyes and force us to look outside the box. We can examine our perspective and maybe find something of value from another point of view.

I once had a guy visit my class who stepped very deeply to my right side and almost immediately drove directly into me. I shifted to meet him and actually dropped one leg back so I was in a Bow and Arrow stance with the majority of my weight on my front leg, not something I normally do. Anyhow, the move totally surprised him and effectively stopped him cold. Not exactly a Wing Chun response but one that worked in that situation and was totally ad hoc. However, this was a transitory stance and I returned to a more Wing Chun like structure very quickly. In this case since I moved one leg back I could say I stepped directly back ;) Now the problem may have been if I insisted in remaining in this "stance\position". Of course this showed that I needed to practice my shifting more :p

Ultimatewingchun

10-03-2006, 06:58 PM

"I once had a guy visit my class who stepped very deeply to my right side and almost immediately drove directly into me. I shifted to meet him and actually dropped one leg back so I was in a Bow and Arrow stance with the majority of my weight on my front leg, not something I normally do. Anyhow, the move totally surprised him and effectively stopped him cold. Not exactly a Wing Chun response but one that worked in that situation and was totally ad hoc. However, this was a transitory stance and I returned to a more Wing Chun like structure very quickly. In this case since I moved one leg back I could say I stepped directly back Now the problem may have been if I insisted in remaining in this "stance\position". Of course this showed that I needed to practice my shifting more ."

***WILLIAM CHEUNG once taught almost the same exact move that you describe at a seminar against someone shooting in on one side and taking hold of your leg in an attempt to take you down - the bow and arrow placement of all the weight on the front leg making it very hard for him to pick up the leg, unbalance and drop you - and of course it also meant using your ams to tie up and hold onto his body (kind of like a reverse bearhug) while leaning over him and pressuring down on him - similar to a sprawl but without getting your leg out...in fact...I came to regard it as a sort of fallback move if it's too late to sprawl.

Yeah...even some old timers in Wing Chun (Gm. Cheung) sometimes think outside the box. I was shocked (and pleasantly surprised) to see the move that day.

It basically led to a stalemated position that imo would require some good grappling/wrestling skill to follow up with - but at least the takedown had been stopped.

tjwingchun

10-04-2006, 02:32 AM

I teach the 'stepping back' concept to cover you when you have no distance or time to 'fall' forward into a 'driving' stance.

Because we cannot rush gravity and the time it takes for your bodyweight to drop into a strong structure is too long, but you can quickly place a leg behind you without moving your body, into a position similar to the 'bow and arrow' stance that Ultimatewingchun was referring to I believe.

This allows you to immediately fire energy through a strong structural stance, whether the foot is placed directly behind you, or at whetever angle is suitable in the instance that you are faced with.

To define and give this concept a reference point in the forms I use the turn in the middle of the last section of Chum Kiu to 'fix' what I consider an important knowledge in a students mind. Not as a 'technique' just as an 'understanding'.

couch

10-04-2006, 06:25 AM

"I once had a guy visit my class who stepped very deeply to my right side and almost immediately drove directly into me. I shifted to meet him and actually dropped one leg back so I was in a Bow and Arrow stance with the majority of my weight on my front leg, not something I normally do. Anyhow, the move totally surprised him and effectively stopped him cold. Not exactly a Wing Chun response but one that worked in that situation and was totally ad hoc. However, this was a transitory stance and I returned to a more Wing Chun like structure very quickly. In this case since I moved one leg back I could say I stepped directly back Now the problem may have been if I insisted in remaining in this "stance\position". Of course this showed that I needed to practice my shifting more ."

***WILLIAM CHEUNG once taught almost the same exact move that you describe at a seminar against someone shooting in on one side and taking hold of your leg in an attempt to take you down - the bow and arrow placement of all the weight on the front leg making it very hard for him to pick up the leg, unbalance and drop you - and of course it also meant using your ams to tie up and hold onto his body (kind of like a reverse bearhug) while leaning over him and pressuring down on him - similar to a sprawl but without getting your leg out...in fact...I came to regard it as a sort of fallback move if it's too late to sprawl.

Yeah...even some old timers in Wing Chun (Gm. Cheung) sometimes think outside of the box. I was shocked (and pleasantly surprised) to see the move that day.

It basically led to a stalemated position that imo would require some good grappling/wrestling skill to follow up with - but at least the takedown had been stopped.

The shifting of weight in the stance is taught by Frank Shamrock in that avoiding the takedown vid (among other interesting ideas). He also shows jamming your hip (with a low stance) into the guys neck/head when he's shooting for the legs. Kind of reminds me of a Kwai Saat.

Also, a good friend of mine is performing acupuncture on his MMA instructor who said that the worst concussion(sp?) that he ever had was from someone negating his takedown with their hip to his head!

Just wanted to add that!

Best,
Kenton

AmanuJRY

10-04-2006, 06:26 AM

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 06:57 AM

Interesting. With all the talk about 'control' - centerline control, hand/arm control, etc. - I haven't seen anyone mention control of balance.

Controlling your own balance - i.e. good footwork, body control, coordination, etc.

Controlling your opponent's balance - everything from destroying your opponent's base (low kicking, knees), to uprooting someone (like in chi sau) and grappling...all techniques that attack the balance of your opponent.

:o

That’s because their busy stepping backwards, you can’t control anything going backwards. You can’t keep your balance while someone has a good bridge when stepping backwards, if he is smart, he will crowd your space if you step backwards, keeping you fighting defensively therefore chasing hands.

It’s the matter of two large blocks, that has boundary line that protect their space, but with a neutral zone like hockey (only one foot moves backwards or forward within the neutral zone more like pivoting on one foot, like in basketball). It’s only two people in this situation. In battle the swords and shields will clash in the heat of combat, if you don’t hold the line, then the army will brake through. If you are there to fight then fight or lose your line (forward momentum). And be prepared to be on the defensive most of the time, which is a bad place to be.

Stepping back shows lack of confidence or unwillingness within the decision to make combat. Save your time or even your life and just run away.

Mr Punch

10-04-2006, 07:44 AM

Interesting. With all the talk about 'control' - centerline control, hand/arm control, etc. - I haven't seen anyone mention control of balance.How exactly would you like to relate this to the question about stepping back. Was I rash in assuming that in any and every aspect of footwork control of balance is a must?

That’s because their busy stepping backwards, you can’t control anything going backwards. Nonsense sir. Train harder. I've controlled boxers coming forward stepping back with wing chun hands, and thai boxers too, in my MMA school. Of course, if you don't practice stepping back, you won't have any control.
You can’t keep your balance while someone has a good bridge when stepping backwards, if he is smart, he will crowd your space if you step backwards, keeping you fighting defensively therefore chasing hands. Of course, if he has a good bridge, but then if he is better than you... you're in trouble anyway! And who's to say you can't keep hitting centre mass off the back foot when stepping back? Why would you have to be chasing hands? Because you haven't trained for this simple situation of being forced back maybe?
Stepping back shows lack of confidence or unwillingness within the decision to make combat. Save your time or even your life and just run away.You haven't read any of the previous posts detailing why it might be a good idea to step back have you?! Plus you haven't been in any real fights have you, esp one that has required running away...? Of course, running away is very often the best bet, but if you're already engaged how are you just going to run away without presenting your back...? Oh, that's right, you first need to step back and disengage with control!

Sihing73

10-04-2006, 08:03 AM

That’s because their busy stepping backwards, you can’t control anything going backwards. You can’t keep your balance while someone has a good bridge when stepping backwards, if he is smart, he will crowd your space if you step backwards, keeping you fighting defensively therefore chasing hands.

Stepping back shows lack of confidence or unwillingness within the decision to make combat. Save your time or even your life and just run away.

Hello,

I love those who believe in absolutes as they can be so much fun to play with :p
Balance is an important issue and should be trained and understood. If one has proper structure then one should have balance. Going backwards is perhaps not the most desirible however depending on the situation it may be the most prudent action. Naturally one would not want to get into the habit of going backwards if it can be helped. It is very true that once you are forced to start retreating it is that much harder to regain control and go forward again. Perhaps this is why many would consider it better to step off the line and then resume forward pressure from an angel rather than go straight back.

I dissagree that stepping back alwyas shows a lack of confidence. In some cases it may be a ploy to get the opponent to commit themselves.

As to the idea of absolutes I am reminded of a story concerning a Civil War Calvary Officer who divided his force in the face of superior odds and was able to achieve victory despite ignoring the accepted rules of combat. Perhaps if he had done as "experts" suggested we would have a different USA today.

As the third form teaches there will be times when we get into trouble and make mistakes and need to regroup. Stepping back can be useful for such a situation, to allude that those who step back lack confidence is an unfair assumption as it fails to take all things into consideration. I would be curious to see whether the poster would step back if I were armed with two bolos and coming towards them using a basic sinawali pattern. I am sure I would not mind if they decided to stand their ground and not move back ;)

One of the beauties of forums like this is that it allows the exchange of different views. Not all will be relavent however once must be willing to look beyond their own views in order to possibly glean the jewels of anothers viewpoint.

Shaolin

10-04-2006, 08:39 AM

One minute/second/nano second you have control the next you don't in the environment of combat (we are talking about two people of equal skills and abilities right? Not one guy so much better than the other, to which is a unscientific way of comparing individuals in combat). That's why it is important to do something while the control is yours, maybe hit, subdue, lock, throw, push, pull, whatever it takes to get the job done. There are no absolutes, just doing what's right at the right time with the tools you have available to you in the situation at hand.

James

Agreed. Think not of control in an absolute, but in general term. I (in general, not me specificly) control putting myself in situations where confrontation is likely to occur. ie. bars, clubs, concerts, high crime sections of a city, etc. I control whether I am oblivious to the world around me or pay attention to my surroundings. I control my emotions and the words I use in a situation to de-escalate it and avoid a physical confrontation. This is just a start. If you wish, substitute the word control for choose or any form of, the concept applies the same. I understand the idea of control being an illusion. We did not choose to be born but we do choose/ control paths to preserve the life given to us. This statement seems to the blind as a hypocrisy but it's not. To use an analogy think of chess, the board is set, it's your choice to play or not. Each piece you move dictates the outcome, but it is still I that controls the pieces. :)

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 08:47 AM

Nonsense sir. Train harder. I've controlled boxers coming forward stepping back with wing chun hands, and thai boxers too, in my MMA school.

That’s because they didn’t have a clue. If they did, meaning the understanding of bridge contact; if they knew how to establish bridge contact successfully they would have countered your every move, because you had no balance when stepping backwards to stop their forward momentum successfully or to control to anything.

if you don't practice stepping back, you won't have any control.

Control of what: yourself? Most defiantly: not your opponent. Now that’s nonsense sir. If you step back and turn, trying to get out of the way from the on-coming assault left or right, when bridge contact is made,"all he has to do is switch hands accordingly (mon sao).

Why would you have to be chasing hands? Because you haven't trained for this simple situation of being forced back maybe?

And yes, I have been trained in that situation, if you choose to go to a defensive position first by stepping backwards, just as we agreed about the elbows if they go back “crowding space” same thing with the feet. Stay with what comes and follow what goes, keeping your opponent thinking defensively when bridge contact is made, the feet must follow the hands, not the other way around, and that will happen if your first step is backwards.

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 09:49 AM

Hello,

Going backwards is perhaps not the most desirible however depending on the situation it may be the most prudent action. Naturally one would not want to get into the habit of going backwards if it can be helped. It is very true that once you are forced to start retreating it is that much harder to regain control and go forward again.

If you don’t want to make something a habit by all means, stay away from it.
I want tell you to stay away from drugs, while blowing smoke in your face :p .

Then why bother doing something that will create habits based on the most prudent action; a waste of time, simply when you know it’s wrong, help me understand.;) :)

Wouldn’t that be counterproductive slowing down progress?

Wonderful post.

Sihing73

10-04-2006, 11:14 AM

Hello Metal Dragon,

What do you need me to explain to you :confused: The simple fact is that there will be times when you will need to do something that you may not want to do. In this case we are talking about stepping back, which you seem to think indicates some type of failure on ones part. Tell me, if you and I were to meet and you were say 5'9 and 175lbs and I were 6'8 and 350 lbs and I were to step into you very deeply to your center, would you not step back or away?

Please read my posts carefully and hopefully you will understand me better. As to why train to develope habits based on the most prudent actions; I would say one should never train to develope habits. When one developes habits then one has already locked themselves into a singular course of action. Rather I would rather spend my time developing attributes, specifically as to dealing with the energy being presented by the opponent. In this way I can adjust according to what is given and I can remain fluid. Whereas if I developed habits then I would become static and predictable.

All of us are human and can and will make mistakes. Simply put this means that no matter what we train to do there will be times when we are unable to achieve the desired result. The Bui Tze form is full of answers to unfavorable situations, if the possibility of messing up were not important why such a form. Of course, there are other aspects to the form as well.

While stepping back may not be what one wants to do, to state that one would never step back shows a lack of real life experience, IMHO. How ofter do you drive a car in reverse, but it is still something you must learn to do in order to be a well rounded driver.

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 11:42 AM

Hello Metal Dragon,
What do you need me to explain to you The simple fact is that there will be times when you will need to do something that you may not want to do. In this case we are talking about stepping back, which you seem to think indicates some type of failure on ones part.

How so true; but however when one knows that something is wrong as well as the other person does, and it’s not corrected or nothing is done about it. Then there is a failure on ones part, due to the fact that the problem was not erased or removed from the warriors mind, then he will carry that same mistake with him to the battle field. When the warrior knows it not correct, he will be shamed in combat. So why bother. I don’t get it; why pacify a bad situation?

Tell me, if you and I were to meet and you were say 5'9 and 175lbs and I were 6'8and 350 lbs and I were to step into you very deeply to your center, would you not step back or away

No! Because a good wing chun practitioner would jam or wedge your forward intent, and not step away, if he does; he will not get a jump on your offensive our defensive line, and will never controls anyone’s balance. Wing chun should work the same, for everyone, big or small.
Good wing chun is based on positioning, sensitivity, not height or weight.

But you are right, everyone makes mistakes and never would I say other wise.

Sihing73

10-04-2006, 11:55 AM

How so true; but however when one knows that something is wrong as well as the other person does, and it’s not corrected or nothing is done about it. Then there is a failure on ones part, due to the fact that the problem was not erased or removed from the warriors mind, then he will carry that same mistake with him to the battle field. When the warrior knows it not correct, he will be shamed in combat. So why bother.

I think where we will have to agree to disagree is that the something in question is indeed "wrong". I believe that there are few things which fall so nicely in place as to be "wrong" all of the time. If such were the case then everyone would be doing essentially the same Wing Chun as the "right" method would easily handle all others. However, this does not seem to be the case. Rather than say something is "wrong", usually because one can not make that method work, it might be better to examine how another can make it work. Perhaps in doing so ones own understanding of their own approach will be enhanced even further. Even Sun Tzu advocated knowing ones enemy; I am sure he could have ignored what he thought was wrong and forged ahead.

No! Because a good wing chun practitioner would jam or wedge your forward intent, and not step away, if he does; he will not get a jump on your offensive our defensive line, and will never controls anyone’s balance. Wing chun should work the same, for everyone, big or small.

A nice thought but a little on the fantasy side. No matter what one wants to believe when two people using essentially the same methods meet, the bigger stronger one will have an advantage, all things being equal or close to equal. FWIW I have trained several much larger people than myself and done okay with them. However, I would never make a blanket statement that a Good WC person would jam or wedge someones forward intent who was much larger than them. As a matter of fact such a response would seem to be more akin to meeting force with force, definitely not a Wing Chun principle. Despite what you may like to believe everyone will have their limits. Don't believe me? Go stand in front of a ford escort on a sharp incline. Stand about 10 feet away and have someone release, not drive just let gravity do the work, the car and let it roll towards you. Now, without losing structure or stepping back I would invite you to Jam or Wedge the car and stop its momentum using Wing Chun techniques. I would invite you to post a video showing this on the forum for the rest of us to see. Or better yet, go find someone who is bigger than you by at least 6" and outweighs you by at least 125 lbs and have them step deeply into you using full force and post the clip of the result here on the board. Againl, you must deal with the opponent without stepping back or away.

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 12:13 PM

I think where we will have to agree to disagree........
A nice thought but a little on the fantasy side.

Direct and clean nothing fancy. This is the first thing you learn, far as contact is concerned. The “mon sao” drill, jamming and wedging the upper triangle.

Or better yet, go find someone who is bigger than you by at least 6" and outweighs you by at least 125 lbs and have them step deeply into you using full force and post the clip of the result here on the board. Againl, you must deal with the opponent without stepping back or away.

Good wing chun is based on positioning, sensitivity, not height or weight.

I think where we will have to agree to disagree......

You are right.

Sihing73

10-04-2006, 12:44 PM

Good wing chun is based on positioning, sensitivity, not height or weight.

While this may be true those that can apply Wing Chun irregardless of the size of their opponent are rare. You allude to the ability to use your structure to jam the opponent irregardless of their size. I would be interested in seeing a clip showing you doing just that to a larger stronger opponent, or with the car as I mentioned. Until then I will remain a skeptic but hey maybe I'm the only one :rolleyes:

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 01:21 PM

While this may be true those that can apply Wing Chun irregardless of the size of their opponent are rare. You allude to the ability to use your structure to jam the opponent irregardless of their size. I would be interested in seeing a clip showing you doing just that to a larger stronger opponent, or with the car as I mentioned. Until then I will remain a skeptic but hey maybe I'm the only one :rolleyes:

This is only hypothetical; I cannot supply real footage. I know that’s not what you want (real footage), you and I know better than that. This is how you drill that understanding into play. It can be done. My teacher showed me footage of his teacher doing the same thing to him, but for real.

This concept works also with hooks upper cuts and so on, as long if you attack the attack by crowding space, this way you can control the offensive and defensive line when bridge contact is made, and automatically take your opponent’s balance away. And will not be on the end of your opponent’s punches, (for those who do understand) where their true power lies

From my understanding you have to have a strong understanding of “mon sao” drills to even get this far as seen on this clip.

Thanks for your interest, take care. :p :) :) :cool:

“You can’t always get what you want, but you’ll find sometimes, you get what you need”.

The Stones.
(http://www.detroitwingchun.com/proof.htm)

Phil Redmond

10-04-2006, 01:46 PM

One of the Wing Chun Kuen Kuits states: go with what comes, follow what goes.
PR

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 01:52 PM

One of the Wing Chun Kuen Kuits states: go with what comes, follow what goes.
PR

I was taught to stay with what comes, and follow what goes. If I go with what comes, I could never follow again, unless my opponent allows me too.

AmanuJRY

10-04-2006, 02:35 PM

How exactly would you like to relate this to the question about stepping back. Was I rash in assuming that in any and every aspect of footwork control of balance is a must?

Not at all. Footwork, IMHO, is the foundation of balance (when standing, at least).

Stepping back might occur as a means to recover ones balance or to avoid losing it in the first place. Likewise, stepping back can aid in taking your opponents balance.

stricker

10-04-2006, 03:10 PM

stricker

10-04-2006, 03:18 PM

back on topic :

ive been taught retreating under pressure at a 45 degree angle.

i kinda see it like relativity, you can still have forward pressure (so still always going forward) while actually moving backwards.

Edmund

10-04-2006, 05:24 PM

I was taught to stay with what comes, and follow what goes. If I go with what comes, I could never follow again, unless my opponent allows me too.

IMHO, "stay with what comes" is a more accurate translation of the Kuen Kuit.

"Follow what goes" isn't that great a translation though. It's more like "If they are going, send them off".

This is the nature of the WC strategy.

HOWEVER the wording of the poll question is outside of that concept. If you are *FORCED* to step back, which direction do you go? You'd like to STAY but you are forced to step back.

I think Shaolin and AmanuJRY alluded to the problem with the wording of it. If someone is forcing you to go a particular direction, it's pretty difficult NOT to go in that direction somewhat.

If you could prevent it via jamming, deflecting etc, then they aren't FORCING you.

I think just about everyone has said ideally they would prefer not to go back at all.

Mr Punch

10-04-2006, 05:26 PM

Metal, I'm going to keep this short and frank because

a) you've been taught dan chi sao and you're just starting on phoon sao, and it may be that as a beginner you have a pair of rose-coloured glasses and certainly think you know all the answers. In another martial art I've done for over fifteen years we call it 'orange belt syndrome'! In the ten ox-herding pictures, you've only just spotted the ox, don't think you can ride it yet!

b) you need a reality check

c) your posts are getting so far into fantasy I don't know where to start!

Please note, I'm not doing this to be a smartass, and if my words seem dogmatic or harsh it's because I'm in a hurry, not because I think I have all the answers or my view is intractable as yours is!

Briefly

That’s because they didn’t have a clue. If they did, meaning the understanding of bridge contact; if they knew how to establish bridge contact successfully they would have countered your every move, because you had no balance when stepping backwards to stop their forward momentum successfully or to control to anything.1) You've never sparred with boxers have you?

2) Boxers have much better centre control, crowding and sticking than most wing chunners I've met unfortunately. They also have good short power and their footwork and directional change is much faster than chunners. A boxers jab close in is like bridge contact to us: it's their antenna... except that it's very difficult to bridge a jab in a CMA manner.

3) As I told you, I could control them. Thus you should be able to surmise that I did in fact have balance. Stepping back does not mean you lose balance... I've seen two-year-olds manage this quite well. Watch them, practice, and maybe you'll learn something! :D

4) Stepping straight back would indeed leave you in trouble with a boxer in terms of forward momentum. Stepping back at 45ish angles (which at speed and at that close range is just the same as turning the corner as the boxer is always crowding your centre so it makes your central axes much closer) prevents him finding your centre so quickly.

And yes, I have been trained in that situation,I was talking about the situation of being forced backwards which you've already said is not done in your school, so no, you haven't. You don't believe it is possible to be forced backwards, right? That shows a fundamental lack of real fighting experience.
if you choose to go to a defensive position first by stepping backwardsThat again is your misunderstanding. Stepping back does not equal a defensive position. I can half-step back, root and shoot out a nice back-foot fight-finisher: it's common in many martial arts, and in wing chun.
just as we agreed about the elbows if they go back “crowding space” same thing with the feet.Feet and hands are different! If I have taken your centreline with my feet you are already off-balance... I am occupying your space. BTW feet do not follow hands any more than hands follow feet: the body should move as a unit.

How so true; but however when one knows that something is wrong as well as the other person does, and it’s not corrected or nothing is done about it. Then there is a failure on ones part, due to the fact that the problem was not erased or removed from the warriors mind, then he will carry that same mistake with him to the battle field. When the warrior knows it not correct, he will be shamed in combat. So why bother. I don’t get it; why pacify a bad situation?English isn't your first language right? I'm sorry, I have no idea what you wanted to say here, but I did understand you are talking about battlefields and warriors and being 'shamed in combat'... which means you want to wake up and smell the coffee. What on earth is 'being shamed in combat'? You mean losing? You mean getting your head kicked across the street? There's no shame in losing, there's no shame in running, and nor is there any shame in standing your ground and fighting for something dear to you, win or lose! The fact that you've even brought this concept into a discussion on a practical aspect of fighting suggests you are living in some fantasy world.

No! Because a good wing chun practitioner would jam or wedge your forward intent, and not step away, if he does; he will not get a jump on your offensive our defensive line, and will never controls anyone’s balance. Wing chun should work the same, for everyone, big or small.
Good wing chun is based on positioning, sensitivity, not height or weight...

But you are right, everyone makes mistakes and never would I say other wise.The mistakes part is the salient part here. Big people have a distinct disadvantage over smaller people. If you think wing chun can level this fine, that's your prerogative. But even within wing chun you need differetn strategies to fight different people. If you use one cookie-cutter principle you're gonna get your ass kicked.

Good wing chun is based on positioning, sensitivity, not height or weight. You don't think your positioning needs to change for a bigger or heavier person, or that person is going to feel different thus leading to you needing to modify how you use your 'sensitivity'?

One final thing, you're talking about choosing to step back being a bad thing. The thread originally was addressing what you do in response to being forced back and then people started answering that sometimes it was desirable to choose to step back and outlined the situations where this may be so. You have not responded to any of these or other people's suggestions on this thread, which suggests your new-found dogma has clouded your logical/cognitive judgment.

The fact is, if you train a basic fighting concept you can do it. If you just say you can't do it and refuse to train it, you're restricting yourself. You seem to think you can't possibly be forced back: this is pure fantasy. If this is the case I hope you never need your wing chun in a fight.

Mr Punch

10-04-2006, 05:30 PM

IMHO, "stay with what comes" is a more accurate translation of the Kuen Kuit.

"Follow what goes" isn't that great a translation though. It's more like "If they are going, send them off".

This is the nature of the WC strategy.

HOWEVER the wording of the poll question is outside of that concept. If you are *FORCED* to step back, which direction do you go? You'd like to STAY but you are forced to step back.

I think Shaolin and AmanuJRY alluded to the problem with the wording of it. If someone is forcing you to go a particular direction, it's pretty difficult NOT to go in that direction somewhat.

If you could prevent it via jamming, deflecting etc, then they aren't FORCING you.

I think just about everyone has said ideally they would prefer not to go back at all.
Quick note on being forced to do something.

if i want to retain my structure and that structure is under too much pressure, and i can't flow round it or step in, i have to go back offline. this does not mean that being forced is the same as being off balance, it means that i dont want to go back but if i feel i have to it's better to do so on my own terms. right? amanujry and i are on the same page.

Edmund

10-04-2006, 05:43 PM

The fact is, if you train a basic fighting concept you can do it. If you just say you can't do it and refuse to train it, you're restricting yourself. You seem to think you can't possibly be forced back: this is pure fantasy. If this is the case I hope you never need your wing chun in a fight.

Ease up, Mr Punch.

For a beginner like Metal Dragon, it is good advice for him to not step back. He's going to learn the WC skills and reflexes a lot faster that way.

A beginner who gets in the bad habit of backing up whenever he gets in trouble is going to pick up defensive things slower because they're afraid of getting hurt or knocked down.

Edmund

10-04-2006, 05:59 PM

Quick note on being forced to do something.

if i want to retain my structure and that structure is under too much pressure, and i can't flow round it or step in, i have to go back offline. this does not mean that being forced is the same as being off balance, it means that i dont want to go back but if i feel i have to it's better to do so on my own terms. right? amanujry and i are on the same page.

I also agree. I think I'm on the same page too.

What I think is missing from the discussion is the nature of the pressure. A push against your structure is different from a strike. While strikes have a lot of power, it's brief. They are difficult to roll with and easier to jam.

The "stay with what comes" saying is more related to an opponent attacking with strikes IMHO.

Metal Dragon

10-04-2006, 07:40 PM

Metal, I'm going to keep this short and frank because

a) you've been taught dan chi sao and you're just starting on phoon sao, and it may be that as a beginner you have a pair of rose-coloured glasses and certainly think you know all the answers. In another martial art I've done for over fifteen years we call it 'orange belt syndrome'! In the ten ox-herding pictures, you've only just spotted the ox, don't think you can ride it yet!

b) you need a reality check

c) your posts are getting so far into fantasy I don't know where to start!

Please note, I'm not doing this to be a smartass, and if my words seem dogmatic or harsh it's because I'm in a hurry, not because I think I have all the answers or my view is intractable as yours is!

Briefly
1) You've never sparred with boxers have you?

2) Boxers have much better centre control, crowding and sticking than most wing chunners I've met unfortunately. They also have good short power and their footwork and directional change is much faster than chunners. A boxers jab close in is like bridge contact to us: it's their antenna... except that it's very difficult to bridge a jab in a CMA manner.

3) As I told you, I could control them. Thus you should be able to surmise that I did in fact have balance. Stepping back does not mean you lose balance... I've seen two-year-olds manage this quite well. Watch them, practice, and maybe you'll learn something! :D

4) Stepping straight back would indeed leave you in trouble with a boxer in terms of forward momentum. Stepping back at 45ish angles (which at speed and at that close range is just the same as turning the corner as the boxer is always crowding your centre so it makes your central axes much closer) prevents him finding your centre so quickly.

I was talking about the situation of being forced backwards which you've already said is not done in your school, so no, you haven't. You don't believe it is possible to be forced backwards, right? That shows a fundamental lack of real fighting experience. That again is your misunderstanding. Stepping back does not equal a defensive position. I can half-step back, root and shoot out a nice back-foot fight-finisher: it's common in many martial arts, and in wing chun.Feet and hands are different! If I have taken your centreline with my feet you are already off-balance... I am occupying your space. BTW feet do not follow hands any more than hands follow feet: the body should move as a unit.
English isn't your first language right? I'm sorry, I have no idea what you wanted to say here, but I did understand you are talking about battlefields and warriors and being 'shamed in combat'... which means you want to wake up and smell the coffee. What on earth is 'being shamed in combat'? You mean losing? You mean getting your head kicked across the street? There's no shame in losing, there's no shame in running, and nor is there any shame in standing your ground and fighting for something dear to you, win or lose! The fact that you've even brought this concept into a discussion on a practical aspect of fighting suggests you are living in some fantasy world.

The mistakes part is the salient part here. Big people have a distinct disadvantage over smaller people. If you think wing chun can level this fine, that's your prerogative. But even within wing chun you need differetn strategies to fight different people. If you use one cookie-cutter principle you're gonna get your ass kicked.

You don't think your positioning needs to change for a bigger or heavier person, or that person is going to feel different thus leading to you needing to modify how you use your 'sensitivity'?

One final thing, you're talking about choosing to step back being a bad thing. The thread originally was addressing what you do in response to being forced back and then people started answering that sometimes it was desirable to choose to step back and outlined the situations where this may be so. You have not responded to any of these or other people's suggestions on this thread, which suggests your new-found dogma has clouded your logical/cognitive judgment.

The fact is, if you train a basic fighting concept you can do it. If you just say you can't do it and refuse to train it, you're restricting yourself. You seem to think you can't possibly be forced back: this is pure fantasy. If this is the case I hope you never need your wing chun in a fight.

Oh my God, forgive me I’m sorry. I’m not going to even read all that, I can tell you’re ****ed, you are attacking ever then put the subject, I’m taking a brake. It’s not looking good dude, you better ask somebody….

I’m a 4th degree black belt in kenpo, I spar all the time with anyone, and have three national championships, how many do you have?

Liddel

10-04-2006, 08:37 PM

You either are way to good for the other competitors in your class or your full of it :rolleyes: If thats what your saying ???

Any experienced fighter that says they never step back would make me question the depth of thier experience.

Although this is just MY opinion.

Sihing73

10-04-2006, 09:02 PM

I’m a 4th degree black belt in kenpo, I spar all the time with anyone, and have three national championships, how many do you have?

Hello,

Now I am curious, since you have more than one national championships as you claim this should be easy to verify. Could you or would you be willing to provide the dates and actual competitions won. Also it would be nice to see a link to your Martial Arts Club, might be nce to check it out.

Ultimatewingchun

10-04-2006, 09:07 PM

"Quote:
Originally Posted by Sihing73
Tell me, if you and I were to meet and you were say 5'9 and 175lbs and I were 6'8and 350 lbs and I were to step into you very deeply to your center, would you not step back or away?"

"No! Because a good wing chun practitioner would jam or wedge your forward intent, and not step away, if he does; he will not get a jump on your offensive our defensive line, and will never control anyone’s balance. Wing chun should work the same, for everyone, big or small. Good wing chun is based on positioning, sensitivity, not height or weight." (metal dragon)

***YOU'RE DREAMING... metal dragon. You're dreaming. Probably due to excessive amounts of Kool Aid consumption. Jamming or wedging someone so much bigger and stronger HEAD ON is an illusion. You might make some contact or bridge against his attack - but if someone his size is really coming (and is not making some ridiculous mistake with his energy/arm/elbow/foot placement) - you're going back. Like it or not. You might be going back and to the side in some way - but make no mistake - part of what you'll be doing is moving back.

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

***WILLIAM CHEUNG once taught almost the same exact move that you describe at a seminar against someone shooting in on one side and taking hold of your leg in an attempt to take you down - the bow and arrow placement of all the weight on the front leg making it very hard for him to pick up the leg, unbalance and drop you - and of course it also meant using your ams to tie up and hold onto his body (kind of like a reverse bearhug) while leaning over him and pressuring down on him - similar to a sprawl but without getting your leg out...in fact...I came to regard it as a sort of fallback move if it's too late to sprawl.

Yeah...even some old timers in Wing Chun (Gm. Cheung) sometimes think outside the box. I was shocked (and pleasantly surprised) to see the move that day.

It basically led to a stalemated position that imo would require some good grappling/wrestling skill to follow up with - but at least the takedown had been stopped. (UWC)

"i cant see that being a long lasting takedown defence. the shooters second action would be to switch direction and drive in sideways on the front leg." (stricker)

***AS I SAID...it's a stalemated position that will require some real wrestling/grappling knowledge as your next move - to prevent the very thing you describe. But the initial move can stop his shoot in it's tracks - and you won't have your lead leg picked up - followed by you hitting the ground and onto your back. At which point his attempt to switch directions can be countered. Hint: the reverse bear hug while pancaking him is tying him up and severely slowing down and limiting his range of motion. He won't be making any quick turns - and you should be able to feel his intentions and counter.

Mr Punch

10-05-2006, 12:17 AM

Oh my God, forgive me I’m sorry. I’m not going to even read all that, I can tell you’re ****ed, you are attacking ever then put the subject, I’m taking a brake. It’s not looking good dude, you better ask somebody….Your not reading what other poeple wrote was half the problem in the first place. BTW I'm not at all angry, as I said I wrote the short version (!) to try and help you with your misconceptions.

There's a smiley in there and it's peppered with apologies for harsh language... dunno how you misunderstood me to be angry.

I’m a 4th degree black belt in kenpo, I spar all the time with anyone, and have three national championships, how many do you have?And you never back up? Bwuhahaha!

Edmund, good points, except for the ease up... he's a beginner but he likes to lecture :rolleyes: !

But yes, to take this conversation further I suppose we could go on with under what circumstances is the pressure going to necessitate evasive footwork...

IRONMONK

10-05-2006, 03:26 AM

how about stepping back on purpose to make your opponent walk into an attack when he tries to follow?

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 05:12 AM

Hello,

Now I am curious, since you have more than one national championships as you claim this should be easy to verify. Could you or would you be willing to provide the dates and actual competitions won. Also it would be nice to see a link to your Martial Arts Club, might be nce to check it out.

Wow!!! I guess you didn’t like the video clip, I offered too much information already; and now you want more, what’s next, my girlfriend. No matter how much I give you, which will never validate myself with you or others on this forum. You are not that friendly or kind enough for me to do so. One thing I’ve seen on this forum, from the past years I’ve been reading it.

If you have any bad feeling about someone; not just you, but your comrades also, you all would never give it up to those that have true skills (Acknowledgment) , so why bother. You are to eager to find something wrong within me (YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER) it’s becoming almost troll like, slow down dude, this is not about me, and so I will not give you the satisfaction. Try chewing on the video clip for a while and see if you can swallow that first.

If you would have PMed me with that info: you wanted, I may have given it to you, but instead you want the world to see something wrong in me, that’s no dice.

Key words are: as you claim.

Jeff Bussey

10-05-2006, 05:44 AM

Hey Metal Dragon,

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're looking at this way too theoretical. It's one of the main problems with forums. I haven't read the whole thread so I'm not sure if I'm repeating what someone else has said, but you need to break free a little. If you stick too rigidly (not even sure that's a word) to what you've been taught you're going to get stuck.
Now if you're just starting out and a beginner, then I understand where you're coming from. The punch, kick, stance or whatever should be done the way your Sifu says until you have an understanding of what's going on. Then you can play with it.
You can still have forward intent when you step backwards.

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 06:08 AM

Hey Metal Dragon,

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're looking at this way too theoretical. It's one of the main problems with forums. I haven't read the whole thread so I'm not sure if I'm repeating what someone else has said, but you need to break free a little. If you stick too rigidly (not even sure that's a word) to what you've been taught you're going to get stuck. Now if you're just starting out and a beginner, then I understand where you're coming from. The punch, kick, stance or whatever should be done the way your Sifu says until you have an understanding of what's going on. Then you can play with it. You can still have forward intent when you step backwards.

Now that's a good post this is how I like to talk.

You can still have forward intent when you step backwards

That is true; but I was taught to move only one foot, not two, if so my mother line will be uprooted.

Mr Punch

10-05-2006, 06:26 AM

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 06:32 AM

Good post Jeff, wish I could have been so succinct! :D

BTW, Metal, I meant to ask, what was the vid demonstrating (I can see what it was demonstrating but how do you see that relating to this thread?)? Thanks.

That conversation was between Sihing73 and myself. If you really want to know, just read the thread.

Sihing73

10-05-2006, 07:04 AM

Wow!!! I guess you didn’t like the video clip, I offered too much information already; and now you want more, what’s next, my girlfriend. No matter how much I give you, which will never validate myself with you or others on this forum. You are not that friendly or kind enough for me to do so. One thing I’ve seen on this forum, from the past years I’ve been reading it.

If you have any bad feeling about someone; not just you, but your comrades also, you all would never give it up to those that have true skills (Acknowledgment) , so why bother. You are to eager to find something wrong within me (YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER) it’s becoming almost troll like, slow down dude, this is not about me, and so I will not give you the satisfaction. Try chewing on the video clip for a while and see if you can swallow that first.

If you would have PMed me with that info: you wanted, I may have given it to you, but instead you want the world to see something wrong in me, that’s no dice.

Key words are: as you claim.

Metal Dragon,

First of all I have no bad feelings towards you and I am not looking for something wrong. I am responding to your posts and your alluding that anyone who steps back is wrong. Your posts indicate that YOU feel that stepping back is WRONG then you claim to be hold several championship titles. Seems to me it would be a simple matter to provide the information to validate those claims. What would it hurt :confused: ? I can assure you that if I am wrong I am more than willing to admit it, I have been known to be wrong before ;)

As to PMing you why not post the requested info, you certainly had not problem posting your opinion regarding stepping back :D

There are plenty of keyboard warriors who make all sorts of basis claims, not saying you are one of them, but if you ask me something I would be glad to provide an answer if I were able. I am just confused by why you seem to get so upset when I requested validation of your claims.

Mr Punch

10-05-2006, 07:09 AM

That conversation was between Sihing73 and myself. If you really want to know, just read the thread.I've been reading the thread and I'm sorry but I didn't catch what it was all about.

That's why I asked for clarification.

See, discussion can be easy! :)

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 09:18 AM

There are plenty of keyboard warriors who make all sorts of basis claims, not saying you are one of them, but if you ask me something I would be glad to provide an answer if I were able.

So it's your job to find all the answers, about someone’s character, when you and I know you could care less about me or anyone else that I’m affiliated with. Which proves my point even more, now everyone can see it.; PLEASE, and no thank you. Seems much like trolling to me.

First of all I have no bad feelings towards you and I am not looking for something wrong. I am responding to your posts and your alluding that anyone who steps back is wrong.

That’s an out right lie. You were not responding to my post about stepping back, you where responding to this post.

I’m a 4th degree black belt in kenpo, I spar all the time with anyone, and have three national championships, how many do you have?.

And here is your responds to that post:

Now I am curious, since you have more than one national championships as you claim this should be easy to verify. Could you or would you be willing to provide the dates and actual competitions won. Also it would be nice to see a link to your Martial Arts Club, might be nce to check it out.

And neither posts speaks about stepping back!!!
You guys just change the subject in mid-fight, based on how you my feel. This is getting old.

Mr Punch

10-05-2006, 09:34 AM

You guys just change the subject in mid-fight, based on how you my feel.Nah, I was asking you questions about the subject which you chose not to answer!
This is getting old.Aren't we all! :eek: If answering is tiring you out too much you could always retire!

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 09:42 AM

Nah, I was asking you questions about the subject which you chose not to answer!Aren't we all! :eek: If answering is tiring you out too much you could always retire!

Don’t you see I’m talking to someone else? Would you please be quite when grown folks are talking. Do you have something else to do, rather then being a troll?

Mr Punch

10-05-2006, 09:53 AM

Don’t you see I’m talking to someone else? Would you pleases be quite when grown folks are talking. Do you have something else to do, rather then being a troll?This is a public forum, and this is a thread on which most people were having a reasonable discussion about wing chun. You're the one with the aggression and dogma, making an arse of yourself and your school, and you call me a troll for wanting you to respond to my points.

So, no, I won't pleases be quite! :)

Sihing73

10-05-2006, 10:06 AM

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 10:19 AM

This is a public forum, and this is a thread on which most people were having a reasonable discussion about wing chun. You're the one with the aggression and dogma, making an arse of yourself and your school, and you call me a troll for wanting you to respond to my points.

So, no, I won't pleases be quite! :)

You took something that had nothing to do with you, conversationally; and made it your own. Nothing was addressed to you or about you, WTF is wrong!!!! But yet your response was personal,and you say I'm the one with the aggression and dogma.:mad: :confused: :mad:

And by the way; I’ve never mention the school I go to, not one time. So I guess you will lie about something else now.

That’s it,,,, you get the official "stamp" (www.detroitwingchun.com/troll.htm).

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 10:29 AM

Hello Metal Dragon,

The topic was stepping back, the posts to which I replied and asked you to validate your claims of being a champion were presented on that topic. While I did not specifically mention stepping back when I asked you to validate your claim of being a champion, the allusion is there as part of the ongoing subject matter.

You don't have to bother replying to my inquiring, I think you have already provided the answer by showing your unwillingness to validate your claims.

You seem to be rather upset and accuse me of lying and apparently having something agaist you and those you may be affiliated with, why? Because I called you on some statement you made? Your response is very enlightening and says a lot more than if you had actually responded to the question, for which you opened the door.

Why are you going way back on something else? When you know that the last few post that you made was based on championships. And it’s clear for everyone to see. I’m not dumb and I’m sure that most of the people that’s reading this, are not also. You clearly changed the subject with a lie.

All of a sudden these new issue out side of the original issue of this thread, is presented which is truly out of place. Like I said, this is not about me.

Sihing73

10-05-2006, 10:44 AM

Why are you going way back on something else? When you know that the last few post that you made was based on championships. And it’s clear for everyone to see. I’m not dumb and I’m sure that most of the people that’s reading this, are not also. You clearly changed the subject with a lie.

All of a sudden these new issue out side of the original issue of this thread, is presented which is truly out of place. Like I said, this is not about me.

Dude,

You were the one who brought it up :confused: :D You could say you changed the subject if such were the case.

Simply put though:

1) You stated stepping back is wrong.
2) You mentioned your national championships so you brought it up not me.
3) You started accusing myself and other(s) of lying when we did not agree and actually had the nerve to call you on your claims.

Frankly, I do not care if you are a 20 time international champion. What interests me is how anyone, that actually fought and obtained even one championship title, could honestly make a statement like. "Stepping back is wrong and doing so shows a lack of confidence" (A paraphrase in case you missed the irony :p ), and not only make such a statement but believe it :confused: :confused: :confused:

Like I said previously, I love those who believe in absolutes so in that regard I would not hate you but feel the opposite.

Listen, in order to return to the topic at hand; I will conceed defeat You win, I know nothing and stand, well since I am at a computer I actually sit, in awe of you and your superior knowledge. Based on your posts and your beginning to rant a bit I recognize the extent of your martial arts training in general and your Wing Chun skill in particular.

Oh, I do not think you are DUMB I think you're SPECIAL ;)

Good luck in your training.

Metal Dragon

10-05-2006, 10:52 AM

sihing

10-05-2006, 05:28 PM

It’s not working dude, but that’s ok. I can see now that there is a lot more to this that goes way pass this forum. I can see the whole picture: just as I was told. I really didn’t want to believe it, but there it is.

Take care, Metal Dragon

Another shining example from the Silent Warrior Association... :confused:

Boy, if I were Ali Raham I would ban all his students from the internet and Martial Arts forums as it sure isn't helping the image of his organization..:cool:

J

Ultimatewingchun

10-05-2006, 05:35 PM

I think it's fair to say that this thread is starting to reach the point of the ridiculous.

So one guy is trying to make the case that moving back is always a mistake. (The erroneous assumption being that a "good" wing chun fighter would never have to do that).

So the guy is clueless. So what? :confused:

Lots of other productive stuff on this issue has already been raised and discussed - and if there's more - then let's hear about it.

Liddel

10-05-2006, 05:57 PM

This is all par for the course for me - a little while ago i was discussing a topic with others, and a member of your School Metal Dragon - Nelson M - said that stepping back was quote "Bad Kung Fu" so its obvious to me thats its an ideal your school holds. This is absolutly fine IMO, everyones entitled to thier opinion.....

But lets remove the style from this equation - Ving Tsun, Kenpo, Tai Bo :eek:

Regardless of style, would you not admit that if you can take all the actions your 'style' has and apply them under preasure, in as many situations as possible - it increases the worth and ultimately the effectivness of said style.

If your style is good going foward - then would it not be more versatile if you could use it while moving backward, while going backward would not be ideal it would be more versatile IMHO :rolleyes:

For the intrest of this discussion id be keen for people to post any videos of street fights they can find, that have one or more participants of the fight that DO NOT step back - proffessional or otherwise ???

Im curious to see the outcome :rolleyes:

Mr Punch

10-05-2006, 06:48 PM

So the guy is clueless. So what? :confused: Good point!

He suckered me into his range there for a minute! :D

Lots of other productive stuff on this issue has already been raised and discussed - and if there's more - then let's hear about it.I'll pick through later for a summary of everybody's observations on when to step back and the things to watch out for when doing so... see where it goes from there. I think there're a few more things to be gained.

Another shining example from the Silent Warrior Association... :confused:

Boy, if I were Ali Raham I would ban all his students from the internet and Martial Arts forums as it sure isn't helping the image of his organization..:cool:

J

This is all par for the course for me - a little while ago i was discussing a topic with others, and a member of your School Metal Dragon - Nelson M - said that stepping back was quote "Bad Kung Fu" so its obvious to me thats its an ideal your school holds. This is absolutly fine IMO, everyones entitled to thier opinion...Well I was reluctant to bring it up, but every time we get someone from Silent Warrior they are aggressive, pompous and dogmatic to the point of insulting everyone else on the forum and saying how everyone else is wrong and lying over a point of maybe one inch positional difference or something. Nelson was also forceful but at least he was polite and made some good points. Shame he buggered off really.

The rest of them certainly don't step back! The fact that they even have gone to the trouble of having a link on their site that spells out the world 'TROLL' shows how many arguments they get into and how they believe that anyone who disagrees with them is trolling as opposed to having a different opinion: a fundamental problem of communication.

If anyone can tell me where I've trolled on this thread, or where I've lied, I'd appreciate it so I can look out for it in future! :D

Strange group, very cultish.

AmanuJRY

10-05-2006, 10:11 PM

Strange group, very cultish.

................;)

sihing

10-06-2006, 04:43 AM

Hello Mr. wingchun;

I have video of you stepping backwards and boy are you taking a lot of hits when you do so, but when my sifu pointed out that was your student that landed more blows then you, I was really shock. It looked so one sided, as if he was not the student but the other way around, EVERYONE in class look at it Tuesday. We all counted the strikes, you was out number 3-1.

And I also have footage of you fighting a woman, doing the same thing as Grand Master Cheung watches. I have all the clips at my fingertips; all a have to do is make an htm. Page, would you like me to?

I have the same video, of the Denver Seminar with Cheung on his 50th BDay. Whatever people may think of the video and the content of it relating to Wing Chun is up to us to decide as individuals, but to make comments on it like the above (with all the insinuations) is just a low class thing to do dude...:(

Metal Dragon, your really not helping the image of your Sifu and his organization. I for one think you all are a bunch of cult loving, Ali worshippers that hate the TWC clan, plain and simple. Is that what Wing Chun is all about? If you don't like their methods, then quit watching their video's? To keep on doing so, like you all did last Tuesday, shows obsessive dissorder behaviours from you, your fellow students and your Sifu/Master/All knowing leader.:eek:

Just some advice, take it or leave it...:D

James

sihing

10-06-2006, 05:11 AM

It’s not lowdown to ask for permission, is it? I didn’t post it yet, so what make me low down. Unless you think the video sucks. I’m not saying nothing, you are doing all the talking. And a matter of fact I think I was talking to Mr. Wing chun. I did nothing wrong by asking. I will only take to victor now, and will not reply to any other post until I’m done.

I will not hurt his image telling the truth, he only wants me to tell the truth, even you couldn’t hurt him in this state or Detroit. He’s one of a kind in Kentucky, and is one of us now.

Wow, okay man whatever you say (you know when you use the word truth more than once in a sentence you become classified as a cultist;) )... I think the hole is getting deeper, have you ever considered a career in mining?:o .

Man, there are just way too many characters on this board...

J

Mr Punch

10-06-2006, 06:34 AM

This strange sad little man has started resorting to the old troll staple of deleting his own posts. Better quote them if you really think it's worth talking to him.

That's absolutely all I have to say about this obnoxious specimen.

:)

Ultimatewingchun

10-06-2006, 06:42 AM

Post what you want, metal dragon.

But as for the rest of you guys...Like I said: It's gotten to the point of the ridiculous.

Ali and his gang never learn.

Best thing to do: Rebutt them once or twice (when they pop up)...and then go back to the conversation as it existed without them. Otherwise their nonsense just takes over.

Who needs that? :rolleyes:

Mr. Punch's idea for the continuation of this thread makes the most sense.

Mr Punch

10-06-2006, 08:06 AM

Summary of reasons to step back:

let a strong attack dissipate and turn the corner
gain space, retain structure and keep position for counter
retain structure against strong centreline attacks or double handed pushes
a stiff breeze
a broken arm
to remove a limb from line of attack with a weapon
get into a bow and arrow to momentarily jam a shot
give yourself time/distance to get into stance
recover balance, avoid losing balance
take your opponent's balance
nullify pushes
entice your opponent into a strong set-up power punch

Summary of points to watch out for:

half-steps are usually more effective for keeping range
keep forward intent/pressure
should be response to your opponent's energy (maybe not physical, eg weapon swinging)
step back to your advantage!
relying on one angle is dangerous: angle should be determined by situation
don't step out of range for you to be able to counter
use the step to connect/load up your counter

Was going to do a list of opponent's forces... ie what kind of pressure could force you back, but all we have so far is pushes and any strong (crushing/balance disrupting) centreline/double handed attack. I'd also like to add walking/stepping kicks like Thai teeps and wing chun stamping kicks, but really that's a part of cnentreline disruptive strikes... more about kicks in a minute.

Got everything? Any more to add?

Couple of things nobody's mentioned yet:

1) Most people are agreeing that the step back should be a response to the opponent's force. This seems sensible, so you don't gain a habit of stepping back willy-nilly. However, personally I like my wing chun sparring and chi sao to be proactive. Although there is the kuen kuit that you start second and arrive first, I find this to be a bit too last minute in many real situations and you always end up half a step behind. This is especially apparent in kicks which come in fast and strong and timing is paramount. Similarly sometimes stepping back should be your decision.

Of course if we look at chi sao as a game of chess, so when you do this move you can entice your opponent, or at least predict what he will do, and when you become good at it you can predict several moves in advance... we can then say that you are reacting to his predicted action (in zen this is the nen of nen - the germ of action preceding his germ of action, there must be a kuen kuit for it!) but that's getting a bit off the wall. In real terms, especially in sparring and non-close quarters it becomes more difficult to set him up a long time in advance, if not impossible, so you are always waiting on his action to respond.

I think a good pro-active step back can be part of a proactive strategy to get your opponent to do what you want. In effect, you are shrinking his target and his available direction to get to (thus preventing him from outflanking you and limiting the number of his available attacks).

2) Another point, linked somewhat to the above: kicks are very fast and always strong. Stepping in and jamming is all very nice, but I'm no slouch and I get nailed at least half the time against my (Thai) MMA opponents. And yet you still have time to change to retracting one target leg even if you find you are too slow to step in and jam. As Sihing73 suggested earlier, you may not even consider that to be stepping back, but it's in the same ball park.

This would come under Liddel's definition of evasion rather than stepping back.

3) For me getting pressure/energy moving in two directions (such as stepping back and projecting forward) is a fundamental part of chum kiu.

4) We trained stepping back a lot in my kwoon. We would do drills as soon as we started doing any stepping drills.

Basic: stepping back (45 or straightish, didn't matter) and springing straight back in. We would do this as a solo drill and then with someone pushing us. For me, this is a vital part of wing chun footwork. That spring is an essential part of floating yet rooting, and is rather difficult to get correctly, retaining a strong structure at all times.

Then: stepping back at 45 under extreme pressure (a series of unchoreographed, non-chain punch strikes), whilst striking (we do this as a pad drill too). If necessary you step back again, zigzagging, or step out some more. But of course the aim is to step back in asap.

Later we incorporate drills from biu jee. Eg, huen bo forwards and straight step back. This is good practice for sweeps too! Also the last section of biu where you do that bending over move: in prelude to that move you splay your arms, which our sifu told us was a direct reaction to someone shoving/striking/kicking you a direct hit in the solar plexus. Your reaction is to fall backwards with your arms outsplayed and that part of biu jee is based on quick recovery from that. The bending part is the foot catch if they have overstretched themselves trying to follow up with a kick because you're now out of range. That was one of his explantations for those energies in biu anyway.

Anybody any other good drills?

Ultimatewingchun

10-06-2006, 01:59 PM

Good post, Mr. Punch.

I'd like to comment on some of what you said, particularly this:

"Although there is the kuen kuit that you start second and arrive first, I find this to be a bit too last minute in many real situations and you always end up half a step behind. This is especially apparent in kicks which come in fast and strong and timing is paramount. Similarly sometimes stepping back should be your decision...

Of course if we look at chi sao as a game of chess, so when you do this move you can entice your opponent, or at least predict what he will do... In real terms, especially in sparring and non-close quarters it becomes more difficult to set him up a long time in advance, if not impossible, so you are always waiting on his action to respond."

***COULD START A WHOLE THREAD on theses remarks alone. A lot to talk about there. Firstly, I agree that the "conventional" idea in most wing chun circles about waiting for his attack to come so as to move into it in some way - and hopefully you "arrive" first...is overrated and over used because it assumes that his attack is very committed (ie.- it's too late for him to react to my wing chun move because he's already in the middle of his).

Not necessarily true at all. Perhaps it was true 200-300 years ago when this concept was formulated, but in today's fighting/martial arts world there's too much interruptability, deceptive footwork, and sophisticated punching attacks and combinations to make this (wing chun) concept the centerpiece of your strategy.

It's almost always better to attack first, imo. Because the best defense IS offense.
As long as your attacks are covering/accounting for lines that he may try to counter on.

Applies to strikes as well as kicks - but is particularly apparent when dealing with your opponent's kicking attacks...I agree.

It's always preferable imo to jam or stop-kick his kicking attacks (rather than sidestepping them or stepping back against them in some way) - if not to just OUTRIGHT beat him to the kick by eating up space before he can even launch - because you've attacked first....And beating him to the punch can also include jamming/stop-kicking his leg even when in fact it's a punching attack that he's launching.

But if he's launched his kick in such a way that it's no longer possible to stop kick or jam - then it's time to consider a sidestep or move back at an angle in some fashion. Assuming there's even time for that; otherwise, it's time to just hold your ground and block, bridge, or deflect.

leejunfan

10-06-2006, 03:55 PM

I haven't even looked at this thread until today and after looking at it felt the words I posted on another thread was well suited for this one. So I copied it to here.

I stay away from responding to pretty much all of your (Metal Dragons) threads.... but this comment makes you sound like an angry little kids who is ****ed off that the one you idolize is not being put on a throne by the rest of us.

I don't come on this or ANY forum and spout out "My sifu this.... my sifu that". I do not speak for my sifu and NIETHER DO YOU!

Does your sifu know you are coming here and dropping his name left and right? Does he condone it?

There is an old saying "Judge a sifu by the actions of his students". I don't want to judge your sifu...and I wont....... but your actions?....... speak volumes.

BTW..... don't get into a ****ing conest here my friend. There are plenty of us who have NO PROBLEM with full contact sparring. Stop hiding behind your sifu's accomplishments...... what matters in here is what YOU do.

Another old saying I personally like (being from NYC) "Your mouth is writing checks your body can't cash".

Amitabha!

Ultimatewingchun

10-06-2006, 06:55 PM

Here's how oblivious I've become to the antics of the Ali gang:

I didn't even realize until about one minute ago that he was talking about me in some recent posts about "Mr. wing chun getting more than he gave from one of his students, yadda, yadda.."

Probably because:

1) The guy was not my student

2) The guy in question was hit by me at about a rate of about 3-1...not the reverse.

Kinda reminds me of the Republican Karl Rove dirty tricks campaign tactics: accuse your opponent of falsehoods that would cast him in a bad light if they were true - and then watch him go off his gameplan trying to refute the bullsh_t. :rolleyes: :eek: :cool:

So the best way to deal with the Ali gang is to spend about a minute and a half refuting the bull by telling the truth - but NOW ALSO INCLUDE EXPOSING THEM AS BEING LIARS...since their credibility is now an issue. And while you're at it also expose their real motivations for telling lies in the first place: they're friggin' jealous. (Or as in the case of Rove and the gang: they're power hungry thieves).

And then go right back to your original message/conversation. So that their nonsense doesn't take over the dialogue - putting them in control.

IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTROL.

Whoever controls the battleground (ie.- the centerline)......wins! :D

And I can't think of even one thread (and there were countless) started by Ali and his clowns that were meant to bring down other people that didn't turn out bringing them down (even to the point of banishment from the forum for some of them).

So now...back to our regularly scheduled program: the STEPPING BACK THREAD...:)

Edmund

10-06-2006, 07:40 PM

...
Later we incorporate drills from biu jee. Eg, huen bo forwards and straight step back. This is good practice for sweeps too! Also the last section of biu where you do that bending over move: in prelude to that move you splay your arms, which our sifu told us was a direct reaction to someone shoving/striking/kicking you a direct hit in the solar plexus. Your reaction is to fall backwards with your arms outsplayed and that part of biu jee is based on quick recovery from that. The bending part is the foot catch if they have overstretched themselves trying to follow up with a kick because you're now out of range. That was one of his explantations for those energies in biu anyway.

Anybody any other good drills?

Good summary, Mr Punch.

Concerning sweeps: Stepping back is a good setup movement for sweeps with the inner part of the leg, kosoto gari and kouchi gari. The backwards step while holding your partner causes then to step forward, exposing their leg for the sweep. Kouchi if they mirror your backwards step and kosoto if they do the opposite step.

Another one could be setting up a knee from a clinched position. e.g. You are in close, square on with partner, and tying up the arms and/or head and neck. Stepping back with one leg creates space, chambers the knee and pulls your partner off balance. Then knee to the lower torso.

Both of these examples could be done first without any force given by the partner, so it's an active technique, not in reaction to the partner's force.

They could also be done in reaction to a push from the partner. This would be a more advanced drill requiring more sensitivity.

Edmund

10-06-2006, 08:02 PM

G
***COULD START A WHOLE THREAD on theses remarks alone. A lot to talk about there. Firstly, I agree that the "conventional" idea in most wing chun circles about waiting for his attack to come so as to move into it in some way - and hopefully you "arrive" first...is overrated and over used because it assumes that his attack is very committed (ie.- it's too late for him to react to my wing chun move because he's already in the middle of his).

I think that's mis-representing the idea somewhat, Victor. IMHO it's not related to how committed his attack is.

The idea is to defend the attack/s and use that moment to get closer and counter. Much like the catch and counter techniques used in MT. The opponent attacks with a kick or punch and you defend and grab them to set up a knee or sweep. By grabbing and tying up you stop any combinations and setup your short range attacks.

Ultimatewingchun

10-06-2006, 08:24 PM

"I think that's mis-representing the idea somewhat, Victor. IMHO it's not related to how committed his attack is.

The idea is to defend the attack/s and use that moment to get closer and counter. Much like the catch and counter techniques used in MT. The opponent attacks with a kick or punch and you defend and grab them to set up a knee or sweep. By grabbing and tying up you stop any combinations and setup your short range attacks." (Edmund)

***ACTUALLY...I love this approach. Use/Teach catch and counter techniques all the time - and consider them to be an extremely important part of what fighting is all about.

I guess what I was trying to say is that you can't rely on this as you're only fight strategy - because it gives the opponent too much dictation as to how the fight will go - since we are now exclusively reactive and not proactive.

And by committed moves - what I meant was that it's easier to catch and counter (or block, deflect and counter) when he's totally committed to his attack. But against a bunch of fast jabs/stiff leads or jab/hook...jab/cross combos - along with broken rhythm footwork and broken rhythm kicking technique, etc...

It's really difficult to catch and counter. Better to attack first then to wait and react.

Edmund

10-08-2006, 04:56 PM

I guess what I was trying to say is that you can't rely on this as you're only fight strategy - because it gives the opponent too much dictation as to how the fight will go - since we are now exclusively reactive and not proactive.

I agree. Relying on any single strategy regardless of the opponent's strengths or the situation at hand is difficult.

k gledhill

10-14-2006, 07:51 AM

In response to the initial poll , the VT system teaches us that we should try to attack with superior forces [note 'forces' not force ] and overwhlem from the weak flanks, good sound war tactics .
Which one is up to the line of force/s / attacking limb presented. The footwork we train should be capable of moving on a clock face at any given moment starting from the center and moving according the line of force we are presented with.
The direction we move is relative to the fight at the moment.example, I had a fight / scuffle with a guy who insulted a managaress of a bar I was doing security for. He was sitting down next to her and [ drugged/drinking ?] was being obnoxious, she held her ground until he started swearing at her, so I, standing infront of him said to stop, upon which without warning he quickly stood up, while grabbing my wrists and rushing me ... to keep balanced I went with it moving back , the back foot first [ training] and shuffling for a couple of steps until I 'felt' his energy pulse [ unlike the continous line of attacking force we train to deliver for this reason...] and did toi-ma with a double lansao [ wrist grab escape taught by v kan] and stayed in contact seamlesly [as you do] driving him hard into the wall I was headed for a 1/2 second earlier ....more bouncers showed up , I was 'off duty' :D so let them take over .... point being I did what I felt from hours and hours of training not a set piece response or robot move.
The main lesson I learned from a lot of these altercations [30-40 fights] over a 10 year period was that the VT system is devoted to developing specific fighting 'attributes' balance, footwork,short range power in our structured strikes .....etc [ we read each others posts enough to know them all lol]
JKD is the same attribute system but from the thinking of a bigger individual process from Bruce Lee who took our VT seed and grew his own tree , that of Mixed MA's.
The strategy [footwork] of of our fighting sytsem is from the knives [ but not the same 'knife footwork', we use a tighter cutting foot/step angle for empty hands and a wider movement with 2 large knives that make up the extra distance , some vt systems use this wider movement] and the thinking to avoid fighting a person/s on equal terms with 2 knives and flanking constantly to always be attacking his 1 with our 2. Whatever the footwork has to be to achieve these goals is up to each students fight 'reality' ...."stepping back" is just 1 way to avoid the initial stab of the other knife ,'so to speak' or in the case above avoiding a line of force....in another 'security infraction' I was moving back to recieve 2 guys who wanted blood :rolleyes: , so as they came either side of 'my' flanks in an uncoordinated attack [ good for me as a trained hi-lo attack would have been bad... ] I was in a position to strike each of them on their flanks instead by just using the simple 'facing ' concept of slt/chum kiu and striking [ thats another thread in itself] ....and the 1st come 1st served theory .

on another note... Feinting can encompass any kind of movement/footwork you feel needed for the given point in time , one can 'draw' an attack by moving back intentionaly forced or not....the saying "the best laid plans go to waste" is a good way to see fighting ... train your troops/body to have fitness , fighting attributes , no thinking ability under extreme stress situations, and be able to calmly move and fire close quarters under incoming with focused pinpoint return fire , granted there are times when just 'unloading' everything you have randomly can have its benefite too :D ...
Example: statistics show police officers who go to the gun range and train by just shooting standing up in front of a target as it theoreticaly shoots back will have a harder time than a guy who is taught to instinctively 'seek cover' or move out of the line of fire/ force.
If I missed anything in this caffeine charged rant i apologise :D

Ultimatewingchun

10-14-2006, 08:08 AM

Good post.

Mr Punch

10-14-2006, 08:17 AM

It is... but like you said kg, decaf may help with paragraphs and all that bollocks!:D

k gledhill

10-14-2006, 08:22 AM

lol yeah ! plus you should have put a button for " all of the above except never " :D

nelsonmarcelino

10-15-2006, 05:11 PM

Er, made it into a poll but any chat about it welcome too!

Of course it varies with the situation (I would hope) which is why I put 'generally' in the question!

Cheers.
When forced to step 'back' do you generally...

step forward to attack the attack. pivot to receive and redirect. if bad situation, half step back and then attack the attack. step back = no forward energy. step back to much and you welcome the bulldoze.

Liddel

10-15-2006, 06:21 PM

step back = no forward energy.

Ive heard one or two others mention the above quote and i think its not quite right....

Dont you think it would be better to say MUCH LESS foward energy.

I say this because some people reading this may think your opinion is 'you cant apply a foward force, while stepping back'.... while people like myself who believe in body unity think you can certainly put force/energy out in front of you while stepping backwards...

If i step back and you follow me (maintaining range) i can certainly punch you with enough force to hurt you... :rolleyes:

And on the other side of the coin - if foward energy is the only force one relies on in fighting then you have a limited bag of tricks IMHO.:D

sihing

10-15-2006, 06:52 PM

Ive heard one or two others mention the above quote and i think its not quite right....

Dont you think it would be better to say MUCH LESS foward energy.

I say this because some people reading this may think your opinion is 'you cant apply a foward force, while stepping back'.... while people like myself who believe in body unity think you can certainly put force/energy out in front of you while stepping backwards...

If i step back and you follow me (maintaining range) i can certainly punch you with enough force to hurt you... :rolleyes:

And on the other side of the coin - if foward energy is the only force one relies on in fighting then you have a limited bag of tricks IMHO.:D

Good post Liddel, and I agree.

The forward force may not be as strong as normal but you still can apply it moving backwards, with proper hip position(facing) and action. But on the contrary, forward force may not be what is need for that situation. Some of the questions Nelson asks, require on the spot answers, and not text book answers. YOU DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE WHEN IT IS NEEDED, not what is told to you by your Sifu or what you saw on a DVD once. All you can really do is hope your training was good enough for your body to respond appropiately. If not, then tough luck for you. When training listen to your Sifu/Coach, and try to apply what he is teaching you to the tee, with perfect execution in mind. When using it in a fight, then just use it, don't worry about perfection or pleasing your master or anything of the sort. Get the job done, and get out of there safe & sound.

That's the problem with forums like this, everything we write is theory & discussion (even though some of us can actually apply it), but still it is Monday morning quarterback stuff. There are no absolutes, and everything and anything can work under the right circumstances. The thing is when you learn an effective method, like WC, it gives you a advantage over most opponents. Relying too much on that advantage makes some c0cky and too confident, thus leading to underestimation of an opponent. The idea is to use the method, don't let it use you and when you are in need of it's services, just do it and get it done and over with. To me that is the essence of what WC is teaching us. (Sorry for gettin off topic..)

James

nelsonmarcelino

10-15-2006, 08:50 PM

The only way you can hit with force while stepping back is after grounding yourself. Try pushing/forward forcing a stationary object,like a Frigidaire, while stepping back: rolleyes:

Mr Punch

10-15-2006, 10:25 PM

When forced to step 'back' do you generally...

step forward to attack the attack. pivot to receive and redirect. if bad situation, half step back and then attack the attack. step back = no forward energy. step back to much and you welcome the bulldoze.Hello Nelson, nice to see you around.

I think one of the problems here is with definitions. To me your idea of a pivot is the same as a step back. I've seen Ali on the chi sao competition on your site pivoting off to one side, which is what I would call a step back with one foot to 45 (Of course, I realise you can also pivot without putting a foot back at all) and a half-step back is still, well, more of a step back than it is a step forward or a stationary pivot!

That being said, my original poll was for if you're forced out of position... so maybe your pivot hasn't worked and you're still getting steamrolled. Sure, ideally, I don't want to give ground, and I want to keep up the forward pressure, but realistically this is next to impossible all the time in a fight. If things go well, we win! But I also want to train for if things don't go my way.

As for the bit about not getting any forward energy from a backward step, I don't necessarily agree. IMO a good fighter can get a root (albeit a momentary one, but that's all you need to punch) from the front foot, the back foot, and in the middle of a movement... If I step back with my left foot, I can pivot on my right, extend the right side of my body and get a good lead punch from my right hand. It's just an extension from the 'take what comes' adage: the same as if someone pushes my left side, I pivot and shoot out my right hand. Of course if your school doesn't ever practice turning the body in this way, you won't be able to get any power into punches stepping back (this isn't a criticism of any school, just an observation about different ways of training).