Six and a Half Point Pole...Close combat?

[Shaolinstudent]

The Six and a Half Point Pole, who incorporated this staff technique into the wing chun curriculum? How is this particular form considered a 'close combat' technique?

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Well, seeing as it develops staff vs. staff skill first, I'd say that "close combat" isn't really the focus of it. There is, however, the opportunity to develop more attributes which are useful in any combat mode.

[sihing]

Well, seeing as it develops staff vs. staff skill first, I'd say that "close combat" isn't really the focus of it. There is, however, the opportunity to develop more attributes which are useful in any combat mode.

Actually, from the line of WC that I training from, the pole training is more so concerned with improving your empty hands skill than it is with strict pole vs pole fighting. How often will it be in reality that a pole vs pole, stick vs stick, staff vs staff situation will arise? It's all in how you view it and who is teaching you, up until I met people that knew, my thinking was it was for pole vs pole as well.

For example, famous JKD exponent Paul Vunak, he's well versed in the FMA stick fighting stuff, but for him the purpose of the stick training and sparring is not to become good at stick fighting, but to improve your empty hand fight more so. When sparring with the sticks, the action with them is much faster than the empty hands can move, so therefore after awhile, when one goes from stick fighting to empty hand sparring, the empty hands stuff seem to be at much slower pace, since one has become used to the faster stick actions. Knife sparring, according to Vunak, makes one more precise and technical since no errors can be made when dealing with a knife, there's less margin of error.

Shaolinstudent, the Pole training is not about technique, rather it is like Wing Chun weightlifting (my analogy), as now you have a 9' long pole, which feels heavy if you aren't used to it, and your moving around with it, with ease that is. For those that are not used to it, they will execute the form and drills and use the wrong muscles and tire easily (I'm speaking from experience here), for those with experience it is effortless and teaches a connected moving structure that enhances your empty hands, footwork and abiltiy to use that structure while moving in fight. That's the simple explaination of it, I'm no expert in this area of WC training, but that is my understanding of it.

James

[Shaolinstudent]

Actually, I was wondering more why not have a short stick form instead, since the purpose of Wing Chun is self defense against close range attacks, in a close quarters fight.

[couch]

Actually, I was wondering more why not have a short stick form instead, since the purpose of Wing Chun is self defense against close range attacks, in a close quarters fight.

Replace your swords with sticks and voila!

[sihing]

Actually, I was wondering more why not have a short stick form instead, since the purpose of Wing Chun is self defense against close range attacks, in a close quarters fight.

If you want to look at it in a very basic way, yes as Kenton said you could replace the swords with sticks and there you have it, although once again the Sword work is not necessarily meant to teach you have to fight with a sword vs another sword, there is more to it than meets the eye.

Keep learning young padawan.

James

[Lee Chiang Po]

The pole was what the boatmen used to move a junk in shallow water. It was also used to thwart boarding by river pirates or pretty much anyone that was not welcome aboard. The poleman moved back and forth on a narrow gang plank along the side of the boat. The WC fighting system as well as the knives were pretty efficient for fighting in narrow passageways aboard a junk.
WC is not really a close range fighting system. No more than other systems. If you are close enough to hit or kick me, I am close enough to hit or kick you back. It is just that WC can also be very efficient in really close quarters because of it's basic fighting concepts. The pole and knives were not added by any particular lineage, but has been a part of the junk defence from very Conception of WC. This is just what I was taught, and I have to say, it makes more sense to me than some of the other stuff I have heard or read.

[Wayfaring]

The pole was what the boatmen used to move a junk in shallow water. It was also used to thwart boarding by river pirates or pretty much anyone that was not welcome aboard.

So in other words the 6 1/2 point pole in wing chun is developed to keep pirates from touching your junk?

:D

[k gledhill]

distances...weapons back in the day where what you had around you. If you ever have to kill something, you will understand what I said.

The pole is a killing weapon , if you think otherwise your a fool.
One tag from the tip and you are not going to have a good day. The physics of the mass of the pole [9ft] being thrust forwards with the combined timing of the legs/arms into the small 2" point are a force to respect....try tagging some plywood on a wall with full power , then tap your windpipe gently with your finger ..the accuracy of striking with a 9ft weapon are uncanny ..you can hit a 1 " 'X' on a wall 10-11 ft away easily over and over...one strike to the body :eek: it hurts thinking about it.

Displacing force from sudden fast and sharp stopping actions is a pole technique.
the wooden dummy further develops our displacing force in the arms, suddent short lever actions with recovery back to cycling attacking hands..to develop the concept of continuous attacking flow of arms that are both attacking you directly and using this sudden combined displacing force as they come at you....relentlessly, attacking....



the pole exercises develop stronger strikes and stances , pole hand techniques and positions are in SLT , drawing hands back to the chest ..fak sao off body strike/supporting hand of the pole bringing back hand from fak sao, cross body punch the hand holding butt of the pole...fak sao is done by first lowering the elbows and placing the palms upwards as if your a waiter carrying a plate ...the hand extends in a straight line turning as if your turning the plate of food to the floor in a sudden manner , focus is on the finger tips...the elbow is dropped as the lead action in fak for the interception angle it creats in the forearm and the support of the extended 9ft weapon to your side...

close combat is relative to your attacker and his weapon where you get attacked...you could fight several people with a pole if you had the space to fight with it ...get cornered and you look for weapons that will work...chair, bottles, glasses, kicks, punches, head butts, teeth eye gouges, chokes , groin grabs ...

Tactics and ideas that translate to bare hands are VT hands....our bare hands are guided by these two weapons, technically and conceptually .

We have elbow/hand techniques that emulate pole strike/deflection in one action ideas...tan and jum...knives tactical positions and change in positions relative to the movement of the attackers angles of entry....no thinking drills to ensure intuitive actions , not memorized redundancy standing in one spot doing drilling arms moves to gates.

[Lee Chiang Po]

[QUOTE=k gledhill;968331]distances...weapons back in the day where what you had around you. If you ever have to kill something, you will understand what I said.

The pole is a killing weapon , if you think otherwise your a fool.


This is definately so. It was a first line of defense. It was meant to prevent or try to prevent being boarded, and if killing was part of it, the pole was the weapon that could do it. If not kill, it would definately maim and disable. 2 or 3 pole men could probably stand off a large party of men. On land, you would require a large area for movement or your pole would be a liability. Several people could surround you and if they were determined fighting men, would quickly overtake you and your pole. It would be limited to the distance in which you could withdraw it and thrust it. Once inside that the pole advantage is lost. You would have to regroup and fall back on shorter weapons to deal with that.
Of course, with every effective weapon, someone always comes up with an effective counter measure. For defenders on the gang planks there would be bows and arrows, muskets when they became available, poles of their own, spears, and thrown weapons. All of which could, in the hands of a well practiced fighter, bring him off the gang plank.

[Yoshiyahu]

Excellent advice...Yes. Of course the long pole for moving the boat was eventually used to fight off attackers. But it is also said that one Monk taught the long pole weapon to one WC man. An in all actually the long pole form is not really a WC form at all. Of course thats debateable. If you look at some shaolin WC their structure is similair to that of the long pole stances...So one can could conclude that the long pole form might be old WC structure before the other WC forms were modified and refined...



[QUOTE=k gledhill;968331]distances...weapons back in the day where what you had around you. If you ever have to kill something, you will understand what I said.

The pole is a killing weapon , if you think otherwise your a fool.


This is definately so. It was a first line of defense. It was meant to prevent or try to prevent being boarded, and if killing was part of it, the pole was the weapon that could do it. If not kill, it would definately maim and disable. 2 or 3 pole men could probably stand off a large party of men. On land, you would require a large area for movement or your pole would be a liability. Several people could surround you and if they were determined fighting men, would quickly overtake you and your pole. It would be limited to the distance in which you could withdraw it and thrust it. Once inside that the pole advantage is lost. You would have to regroup and fall back on shorter weapons to deal with that.
Of course, with every effective weapon, someone always comes up with an effective counter measure. For defenders on the gang planks there would be bows and arrows, muskets when they became available, poles of their own, spears, and thrown weapons. All of which could, in the hands of a well practiced fighter, bring him off the gang plank.

[GLW]

"How often will it be in reality that a pole vs pole, stick vs stick, staff vs staff situation will arise? "

Well, I don't know... been to a pool hall lately? Pool cues are short but they can be wielded as a staff. They can also be broken in half and used as short rods. Of course you also have the ever popular pool balls that make nasty weapons.

[CFT]

Well, I don't know... been to a pool hall lately? Pool cues are short but they can be wielded as a staff. They can also be broken in half and used as short rods. Of course you also have the ever popular pool balls that make nasty weapons.Only if your aim is good or you can get your sock off in time ;)

[Yoshiyahu]

"How often will it be in reality that a pole vs pole, stick vs stick, staff vs staff situation will arise? "

Well, I don't know... been to a pool hall lately? Pool cues are short but they can be wielded as a staff. They can also be broken in half and used as short rods. Of course you also have the ever popular pool balls that make nasty weapons.

i think outside of actually training with another person just doing the form will not be enough to effectively use a pole in actual combat. I personally believe to be able to use a pool cure one would need to actually do basic partner drills with a live person. Do conditioning drills that will allow your long pole skills to progress and you must do freesparring with a resisting opponent where you work on being able to actually use your pole efficently.

[GLW]

and?

What you just said is that the training for use begins once you have learned the lexicon (techniques) through the form.

And this is different from barehand how?

[Lee Chiang Po]

It is anyone's guess as to when the pole became a weapon. It might have been something a Red Junker watched and decided to develop. Or it might have been the other way around. The pole at 9 feet would not be as useful on solid ground as a 6 foot pole would be, and the length of it tells me it had a duel purpose. The fighting aspect could have been better served with a shorter staff, but it might not be sufficient to shove a boat around in shallow water.

[k gledhill]

the hands are closer to pole fighting than you think....
displace with lead , followed by strike , sound familiar ? but stay on the line miss or not ...iow you parry the others weapon but if you miss it or its drawn away before you can displace it you still hold your line with the short explosive displacing moves allowing strikes to go directly into the target anyway...miss or not.
Why we have a centerline as a reference point when starting forms. A line to train the arms to fight along while shifting and turning to gain optimum angles of attack as the fight moves around...

[Lee Chiang Po]

the hands are closer to pole fighting than you think....
displace with lead , followed by strike , sound familiar ? but stay on the line miss or not ...iow you parry the others weapon but if you miss it or its drawn away before you can displace it you still hold your line with the short explosive displacing moves allowing strikes to go directly into the target anyway...miss or not.
Why we have a centerline as a reference point when starting forms. A line to train the arms to fight along while shifting and turning to gain optimum angles of attack as the fight moves around...

Well yea, this is true. But could it be more of a coincidence than by design? In order to fight off someone with a long pole you would probably use it in the same manner as you would your arm or arms. The pole is the lead, it parries, deflects, and punches. It can sweep at different levels, taking one off their feet, and there is probably no end if one just used the imagination. An extension of the arms if you will. If you can keep an assailant at a distance he is less likely to harm you.

LCP

[k gledhill]

not by coincidence...parrying to centerlines with no over run is a specific action designed to defeat actions that over run / x the line... iow chase actions and leave openings for counters.

[Lee Chiang Po]

not by coincidence...parrying to centerlines with no over run is a specific action designed to defeat actions that over run / x the line... iow chase actions and leave openings for counters.

Again I agree, but again is it possible that it depends on a persons fighting style? A chunner will naturally adhere to his fist fighting principals and concepts I would think. Everything we do is principaled upon the center line concepts. I just watched some video of different pole fighting forms and some of these guys went a little crazy with the stick. They were all over the place, jumping and swinging it like there was no center line. That in itself leads me to at least consider that it really depends on a persons fist fighting system as to his pole form. Just a thought.

LCP

[Hardwork108]

The Six and a Half Point Pole, who incorporated this staff technique into the wing chun curriculum? How is this particular form considered a 'close combat' technique?

According to my kung fu studies there is no purely close combat style of kung fu as there is no purely long range TCMA system. The Chinese have a way of balancing things out (read yin and yang, among other things). Of course, various systems will emphasis different ranges and so Wing Chun emphasizes short range fighting.

However, the various ranges are represented in the unarmed techniques. Example of long range unarmed techniques (in the lineage that I practice, Siu lam Wing Chun) include the long side punch, the side kick and the turning kick.

The weapons reflect these ranges as well. The butterfly knifes the short and the pole the long range. Some lineages (including mine) include among their weapons the darts. Very long range.;)

While having stated the above, I am also in agreement with Sihing as regards weapons trainings' benefits to the unarmed aspect of Wing Chun. I will also add that the mastery of these weapons will help you use substitudes in the event of a self defense emergency.

HW8

[ChuangChuanPai]

I found this here. http://www.awcaonline.com/forms/lukdimboonkwun.html


Who knows how accurate it is, but it's a possible start for further research.

"The history of how the long pole was introduced to Wing Chun is much clearer than that of the knives. Aboard the red junk (a boat of opera performers that would travel from harbor to harbor) were Wong Wah Bo (a master of Wing Chun), Leung Yee Tai (the poler of the red junk) and Master Chi Shin, a surviving monk from the burned down Shaolin monastery.

Showing a great interest in learning pole fighting techniques, Leung Yee Tai learned this skill from Chi Shin. Meeting and befriending Wong Wah Bo, Leung Yee Tai showed Wong Wah Bo the pole techniques while, in exchange, Wong Wah Bo taught Leung Yee Tai the art of Wing Chun.

Altering the pole movements to fit the Wing Chun theory, as well as adapting the stances to fit the length and weight of the pole, the Luk-Dim-Boon-Kwun was born and became the first of only two formal weapons in the system."