Why is your Wing Chun useless in the open range?

[Pacman]

I thought I'd start this topic instead of hijacking another thread :)

this question is for those who feel WC cannot handle long range. please explain why you feel that way.

I am not an expert in other's WC, but from what I have seen some of the fundamental things that could lead to a disadvantage at an open range are

1. fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance, body upright, flatfooted. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.

2. not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.

[YouKnowWho]

not turning the body when punching.

This is a tradeoff and not weakness. If you don't turn your body and remain 90 degree angle between your arms and your chest, you can land your "chain punches" many times on your opponent's face before he knows what has just happened. If you turn your body, you may land a much more powerful punch but just one punch and not many punches.

I don't know which experience is more scary, your opponent knocks you out by one punch, or your opponent hits your face 7 times and you can't do anything about it.

[Matrix]

1. fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.Who fights like this? Nobody I know.

[Phil Redmond]

Who fights like this? Nobody I know.
Thanks Matix. You took the words right out of my mouth.

[Phil Redmond]

I thought I'd start this topic instead of hijacking another thread :)

I am not an expert in other's WC, but from what I have seen some of the fundamental things that could lead to a disadvantage at an open range are

1. fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.

2. not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.
TWC NEVER fights square on for the reasons you mentioned and more.

[SAAMAG]

I can see what you’re saying Pacman. Though I don’t consider either thing a weakness per say. I look at it this way: if someone is looking to hit me he’s got to come close enough to me (and cross the bridge) to do so. Once an attack enters my threat envelope I can use wing chun or any other fighting strategy I want. Because of this, the YJKYM stance wouldn’t be any more a detriment at that range relative to any other range because it won’t be used until the person is close enough to be a threat.

The other thing too, is while in the past many have touched on the ranges of hand-to-hand combat, there really is one range—that is the range by which an attack can reach you and you can be hurt. Once there a person is a threat and should be dealt with. The other ranges that people might discuss (e.g. the kicking, punching, trapping, clinching, and ground fighting) are merely subsets of the overall fighting envelope.

The other idea about punching, I think I see what you’re saying…and I agree that the word trade-off is a better descriptor. But is it the ideal one?

Being balanced and rooted in your techniques will enable one to drive from the ground, whereby the hip is always an inherent component. The wing chun punch to me does use the body—but in a different way than say boxing. Because a major component of body unity deals with mating the shoulders to the hips, the hands to the feet, and the elbows to the knees—wing chun punches should be able to achieve decent power through the (short) movement through full coordination of the joints and movement. I know it’s not the same as my cross (see long drawn out thread on this) but it still has effectiveness.

[YungChun]

Who fights like this? Nobody I know.

LOL...

Love it.. Nice and direct Bill.. Couldn't have said it better.. :cool:

----------

Using karate (generic) as an example.. They don't have any ChiSao, nor many fancy drills, most of the forms are passed over, meaning they don't know what any of it has to do with fighting. . And they just fight.. They also don't complain that "their art is lacking in X".. They just do it.

VT folks are too spoiled and depend too much on specific "instructions" instead of just expressing and doing it.

Moreover, it shows the lack of sparring instruction and too much improper focus on the forms and drills.. And of course if you stand there in YJKYM like a statue you should be gently lead off the floor and sent to remedial sparring class.

[k gledhill]

terence does ...:D

[SAAMAG]

Who fights like this? Nobody I know.

I don't think he means standing like this the whole time, but rather starting like this and shooting into a biu ma on attack. Like LT / EBMAS / Wang Zhi Peng and some many others.

I stand that way starting, and use huen ma, chor ma, side facing stances, and shooting / stepping stances where need be. I move with the opponent simply put.

Bas Rutten also advocates a squared stance, although with one foot behind and one foot in front (more like a higher elevation front stance). No one just stands in YJKYM the whole time of course.

[Bully]

I train in the pigeon toe stance, as does most others.

I fight in a fighting stance, one foot forward, toes slightly turned in (if I remember). I am forward facing, shoulders square. It does go to **** sometimes due to me not being very good. But I would never ever fight in the training stance.

Weird thread.

[Frost]

I train in the pigeon toe stance, as does most others.

I fight in a fighting stance, one foot forward, toes slightly turned in (if I remember). I am forward facing, shoulders square. It does go to **** sometimes due to me not being very good. But I would never ever fight in the training stance.

Weird thread.

so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?

[k gledhill]

I train in the pigeon toe stance, as does most others.

I fight in a fighting stance, one foot forward, toes slightly turned in (if I remember). I am forward facing, shoulders square. It does go to **** sometimes due to me not being very good. But I would never ever fight in the training stance.

Weird thread.

we fight from side stances...lead legs are for a committed line of entry...iow side stances allow shifting pivoting any direction ...in a face off for positions....
I was taught to use a lead leg to start before...doesnt work for tactical movement, back and forth....once your committed, we use lead leg or cutting, side entry, like dummy attack movement...lead legs enter from the sides...cutting attacking lines move left to right or vv across the face while cycling attack/defensive actions..in rotation...

our objective isnt to go into the guys strengths...central to both his arms wailing in on us...but for a commitment from them to a side...usually one sided fighters present one leading weaker side...telegraphing attacks also allows us to intuitively maneuver for counters....we try to turn the opponent or cut off their ability to face us.

[Matrix]

Thanks Matix. You took the words right out of my mouth.No problem Phil. It's amazing how many people think WC people fight this way. Too much misinformation out there.

Bill

[Matrix]

LOL...

Love it.. Nice and direct Bill.. Couldn't have said it better.. :cool:.
Hey Jim,
It's the WC way. I saw the opening and took it. ;)

Bill

[Matrix]

so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?It's a beginner's training stance. What some people refer to as training wheels. Like a child, a beginner must learn to stand, then to walk and finally to run. Some folks I've seen on the internet have not learned to walk and yet they want to race (fight).

[Matrix]

I don't think he means standing like this the whole time, but rather starting like this and shooting into a biu ma on attack. Like LT / EBMAS / Wang Zhi Peng and some many others. I just read the question as it is posed. I don't know what he thinks he means.

Why would anyone even start in a YJKYM stance?


I stand that way starting, and use huen ma, chor ma, side facing stances, and shooting / stepping stances where need be. I move with the opponent simply put. I start by starting. Never stand on ceremony. ;)

Bill

[k gledhill]

so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?


we train structure in a basic stance, center fo gravity, control ...the hips contain the cog. the axis line from head to spine down....for vt fighting this structure is criticala to our effectiveness.
no leaning forwards, backwards....we can shift , pivot along the balance axis line....
for a beginner we adopt the basic stance simply to focus on structure and train the basic actions of the arms.
we 'face' so we can use each arm equally , striking /reaching with either at angles to the target. by adopting this square on drill 'starting' point, we re-enforce the facing. As we progress we start to attack with forward entry from either arm attacking randomly....countered with angling responses from left or right randomly..making us move /react to entry from either arm in a basic idea, using the force transfer from contact to develop , further the stances cog, stability in contact/clashes , structure....mobility with balanced attacking attributes...

all has to start somewhere..ergo a basic stance ....once you learn fighting drills the basic stance is redundant...we never adopt this during face offs or fighting .....

without a systematic system of drilling, training...you might use the beginners basic stance as your main idea :D...I have seen some students of other schools adopt a 'waddling' ygkym as they come at me :D:D to funny but they do succeed in defeating me by making me laugh hysterically on the floor...I have to tap myself out :D so it may be a secret way. humour :D take that , waddle waddle waddle. and that waddle..

true story...a certain mcwc school taught a woman to block a kick to 'her groin' by waddling and closing her knees together as the kick came ...she asked me to try to kick her as she waddled forwards....I grinned uncontrolably

[SAAMAG]

I just read the question as it is posed. I don't know what he thinks he means.

Why would anyone even start in a YJKYM stance?

I start by starting. Never stand on ceremony. ;)

Bill


Well for clarification, we're not talking deep with 45 deg inward pigeon toed stance here number one. At least I'm not. I'm talking about a more natural stance with toes slightly inward and with knees slightly bent. So more like how you'd be standing normally.

That said, think of it this way...in a situation out in public, if I think an altercation may progress into a fight, I'm not going to get into a side stance with jong sao up and ready. Rather, I'd have a natural stance, perhaps naturally turned 45 deg in relation perhaps not. The hands would be up in a reasonable position of "hey lets calm down".

Stance in a natural stance--shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start--you're not going to go back into the "beginning stance" again.

Why would I antagonize the situation (and also make the other person wary) of my martial arts with the fighting stance? Does that make sense?

[Matrix]

That said, think of it this way...in a situation out in public, if I think an altercation may progress into a fight, I'm not going to get into a side stance with jong sao up and ready. Rather, I'd have a natural stance, perhaps naturally turned 45 deg in relation perhaps not. The hands would be up in a reasonable position of "hey lets calm down".

Stance in a natural stance--shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start--you're not going to go back into the "beginning stance" again.

Why would I antagonize the situation (and also make the other person wary) of my martial arts with the fighting stance? Does that make sense? Van,
Thanks for clarifying your position. That makes sense to me. I agree. Sounds like we're on the same page here. :cool:

To me, this is very different that what was stated in the original question.

Bill

Added

Well for clarification, we're not talking deep with 45 deg inward pigeon toed stance here number one. At least I'm not. I'm talking about a more natural stance with toes slightly inward and with knees slightly bent. So more like how you'd be standing normally. I would stand naturally as well, but would not turn both feet inward. I like to drive off one foot or the other depending on what I need. To do this with maximum speed and power my toes would need more outward to straight, depending on what I feel is required. I could have one foot turned in, but not both. But that would mean that I am already commited to going one way versus the other. It's a subtle thing, but only my point of view.

[Bully]

Well for clarification, we're not talking deep with 45 deg inward pigeon toed stance here number one. At least I'm not. I'm talking about a more natural stance with toes slightly inward and with knees slightly bent. So more like how you'd be standing normally.

That said, think of it this way...in a situation out in public, if I think an altercation may progress into a fight, I'm not going to get into a side stance with jong sao up and ready. Rather, I'd have a natural stance, perhaps naturally turned 45 deg in relation perhaps not. The hands would be up in a reasonable position of "hey lets calm down".

Stance in a natural stance--shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start--you're not going to go back into the "beginning stance" again.

Why would I antagonize the situation (and also make the other person wary) of my martial arts with the fighting stance? Does that make sense?

Stance in a natural stance--shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start--you're not going to go back into the "beginning stance" again.


+1

Totally agree, I would be ready to run too:eek:

[Matrix]

+1

Totally agree, I would be ready to run too:eek:Hey, that's my signature move. ;)

[Phil Redmond]

LOL...

Love it.. Nice and direct Bill.. Couldn't have said it better.. :cool:

----------

Using karate (generic) as an example.. They don't have any ChiSao, nor many fancy drills, most of the forms are passed over, meaning they don't know what any of it has to do with fighting. . And they just fight.. They also don't complain that "their art is lacking in X".. They just do it.

VT folks are too spoiled and depend too much on specific "instructions" instead of just expressing and doing it.

Moreover, it shows the lack of sparring instruction and too much improper focus on the forms and drills.. And of course if you stand there in YJKYM like a statue you should be gently lead off the floor and sent to remedial sparring class.

Another good post.

[Phil Redmond]

so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?
The square on YJKYM teaches where your arms should be in relationship to your center/central lines. Begginers are taught standing without moving to gain the muscle memory for the arm positions. By the time the 2nd and 3rd forms are learned the student should have the muscle memory of where the arms should be while moving. Boxers use a speed bag but they don't punch like that in a match. There are many training methods fighters use that aren't used in a fight.

[SAAMAG]

Van,
Thanks for clarifying your position. That makes sense to me. I agree. Sounds like we're on the same page here. :cool:

To me, this is very different that what was stated in the original question.

Bill

Added
I would stand naturally as well, but would not turn both feet inward. I like to drive off one foot or the other depending on what I need. To do this with maximum speed and power my toes would need more outward to straight, depending on what I feel is required. I could have one foot turned in, but not both. But that would mean that I am already commited to going one way versus the other. It's a subtle thing, but only my point of view.

Yea, the inward turn is very very slight. The reason I still do it is because when I step out with the 45 deg stance, the foot relationship is still the same. The front foot is turned slighty inward (the theory being to help guard the lower inside gate) and the rear foot is more facing forward (inward relative to the other foot with the theory being to be able to biu ma better. Actually, now that I look down, the feet are more parallel with an every so slight inward angle.

Though in reality, I don't think a couple of degrees here and there makes all that much of a difference in foot angling. At least I've never seen any pro's or con's from it. I just move...that's it.

[YungChun]

Another good post.


Thanks Phil.



The square on YJKYM teaches where your arms should be in relationship to your center/central lines. Begginers are taught standing without moving to gain the muscle memory for the arm positions. By the time the 2nd and 3rd forms are learned the student should have the muscle memory of where the arms should be while moving. Boxers use a speed bag but they don't punch like that in a match. There are many training methods fighters use that aren't used in a fight.


Well of course it also shows the leg/horse mechanics for generating/managing power, alignment and stability/connection.. The YJKYM (an extreme example intentionally) is two sides of the same machine, as seen later in CK.

Some VT training elements are an abstraction, not always to be taken literally..or kept at all times.. I would never start in YJKYM, or even a deep CK stance.. During natural movement we may see some of these positions occur, there is the need to keep the legs under us, to maintain balance, to compress the springs, to align, etc.. But, they are not to be taken as some kind of "fixture" that stays.. In fighting nothing stays.

The forms may well put you in some odd positions to test/train balance, to build a mechanic, tool or whatever.. That doesn't mean you should then attempt to do, or worse, keep, that *extreme position* in a fight.. That's the finger/moon thing again.

[Xin quan]

I am confused as to what the stance has to do with utility in the open range. At "open range" I'm not in a hand to hand fight. Any kind of relaxing posture will do.

Otherwise my stance is always the same, it is it's relationship to the world that changes.

[Pacman]

This is a tradeoff and not weakness. If you don't turn your body and remain 90 degree angle between your arms and your chest, you can land your "chain punches" many times on your opponent's face before he knows what has just happened. If you turn your body, you may land a much more powerful punch but just one punch and not many punches.

I don't know which experience is more scary, your opponent knocks you out by one punch, or your opponent hits your face 7 times and you can't do anything about it.

different things for different situations. the chung choi or chain punch is just one of many types of attacks. if you are using your chung choi then you are already closer to your opponent. we are talking about what to do when in the long range


Who fights like this? Nobody I know.

i see lots of stuff on you tube. even if they have one foot in front like a leadoff, their body is completely square. i talked to a guy who goes to a school near where i live and he tells me he is taught to fight completely square and to never turn the body (among other crazy stuff)


I look at it this way: if someone is looking to hit me he’s got to come close enough to me (and cross the bridge) to do so.

he'll come close enough to hit you, but that doesn't mean you can hit him. you could either be limited by things such as reach or mobility. he could move laterally while you are stuck like a potted plant and tag


so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?

people fight with one foot forward, but the toes are still turned inward. when you train pigeon toed with both feet square, it is because it is meant to be an isometric excercise to develop certain muscles. you dont only train in the squared off pigeon toed stance, but it has its purpose.


as for who fights like this? try this at 5:00 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=emin+boztepe&aq=f

in this series he talks about a situation if he fought someone at a bar that grabbed his girls ass he would get into that stance and get ready for the "magnetic zones"!

even for people who do not fight in the YKJM, i see a lot of people fight with the "how do you do" handshake and stand super upright and lean back. such as this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV4Jq6H9pEQ

to me that puts you at a disadvantage for mobility. you have a high center of gravity and you are flat footed

im just trying to figure out why some people are saying WC is not sufficient for the open range. i certainly dont believe that. if you feel you need to mix in other arts with WC in the open range, let me know why WC can only be used "in a phone booth"

[TenTigers]

He11, I thought "open range" meant WCK for cowboys, which is stupid.
You can't ride a horse in yjkym.

A goat, maybe....

[YungChun]

He11, I thought "open range" meant WCK for cowboys, which is stupid.
You can't ride a horse in yjkym.

A goat, maybe....

lol

Because on the "open range" they just shoot you... :D

[Matrix]

as for who fights like this? try this at 5:00 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=emin+boztepe&aq=f

in this series he talks about a situation if he fought someone at a bar that grabbed his girls ass he would get into that stance and get ready for the "magnetic zones"! Well, he's entitled to his opinion. I don't subscribe to it. You can't go by what you see on Youtube. There are many different views on these things.


even for people who do not fight in the YKJM, i see a lot of people fight with the "how do you do" handshake and stand super upright and lean back. such as this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV4Jq6H9pEQ

to me that puts you at a disadvantage for mobility. you have a high center of gravity and you are flat footedJust another person's POV. I agree with you that it's less than ideal. You can find all kinds of junk on Youtube.

[Matrix]

2. not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.I just want to say that if you want to reach something you do it with your footwork, not with your arms and over-rotating your body. How much you remain square or rotate is up to you to decide, but know that you are always making trade offs.
By reaching too much with your upper body you are giving up balance and it takes longer to bring your other hand into play. If you are using simultaneous "techniques" such as a tan-da or lap da, or whatever, you will need to fairly square, but you need to turn the upper body too. The question is, how much?

[SAAMAG]

he'll come close enough to hit you, but that doesn't mean you can hit him. you could either be limited by things such as reach or mobility. he could move laterally while you are stuck like a potted plant and tag

Standing in your defined fighting stance with guard up will do nothing to create or futher establish an advantage over someone who isn't even in a range to hurt you. In fact it would put you at a disadvantage given that now the other guys knows you know something and may take extra precaution on come in less haphazardly.

Though I understand what you're saying with reach--it is possible for someone to have greater reach, but when you know he's close enough you react. You don't sit there waiting till he's close enough for you to hit him persay. When there's a threat, you move. That could be stepping back or moving in such a way that he's no longer in your threat envelope, it could be stepping one foot back with the same "hey lets calm down" hand positioning (in prep for something more to occur), it could be you punching him before he punches you. No one is saying that you are to stay in one spot and not move at all.

The point was that you shouldn't worry about a threat until its a threat. The shoulda'-woulda-coulda' hypothetical is an endless one and irrelevent to the point being made.

[Pacman]

this is a little theoretical and not what im trying to talk about.

im saying that by keeping your body completely square WHILE you punch you are limiting your reach (and power but thats another story). 99% of other people do not keep their body square while punching. we all know that reach is an important factor in hand to hand fighting on the outside. its undeniable. so by limiting your reach you are putting yourself at a disadvantage, or limiting your advantage if you already have longer arms, when on the outside.

if you are so close that both people can hit each other it does not matter.

lots of people are replying to this thread like "WTF?". thats good, because the question was "why is your wing chun useless...?". so if its not useless at long range to you, then you should think "WTF?" but there is no need to reply to this thread.

i want to hear from people who think you have to mix WC with other styles to be capable on the outside.



The point was that you shouldn't worry about a threat until its a threat. The shoulda'-woulda-coulda' hypothetical is an endless one and irrelevent to the point being made.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"im saying that by keeping your body completely square WHILE you punch you are limiting your reach (and power but thats another story). 99% of other people do not keep their body square while punching. we all know that reach is an important factor in hand to hand fighting on the outside. its undeniable. so by limiting your reach you are putting yourself at a disadvantage, or limiting your advantage if you already have longer arms, when on the outside." (Pacman)

***EXACTLY.
.................................

"if you are so close that both people can hit each other it does not matter." (Pacman)

***WHICH pre-supposes that you got to that range without getting picked off. And from the longer range, while perhaps not all wing chun fighters are completely square - virtually all wing chun fighters are still pretty close to being square - and this therefore limits reach much more than the kinds of punches (and corresponding footwork) that a boxer might use from that longer range.
.............................

"i want to hear from people who think you have to mix WC with other styles to be capable on the outside." (Pacman)

***NOT EXACTLY what I've been saying, but close. You can be very capable from the outside (long range) with just wing chun against a lot of people - but if you're up against someone with some serious boxing skills, for example, (and especially if he has longer arms than you to begin with)...

you can find yourself in trouble, because you're using a short tool against a long one in exactly the range (distance) where longer tools are the most effective.

Now I realize that many wing chun people will say that from the longer range they will use angling, cutting, timing, etc. - but I'm very sceptical about this compensating when up against a truly skilled striker, ie.- boxer type who knows how to use his reach, footwork, combinations, feints, head movement, etc...FROM THAT RANGE.

[Vajramusti]

this is a little theoretical and not what im trying to talk about.
((???Unsure and Curious-What are you talking about?))

im saying that by keeping your body completely square WHILE you punch you are limiting your reach (and power but thats another story).


((Keeping your wing chun structure square bodied in ygkym is for development of the vertical structure and provides the platform for development of the paths of wing chun hands and the fundamentals of power. Later in application with development of wing chun turning and stepping you further enhancement of power. There is plenty of usable power in good wing
structure and dynamics.With the turns and the stepping you can have usable reach with power.Sorry- your description does not correspond with what I do. ))

99% of other people do not keep their body square while punching. we all know that reach is an important factor in hand to hand fighting on the outside. its undeniable. so by limiting your reach you are putting yourself at a disadvantage, or limiting your advantage if you already have longer arms, when on the outside.

((With footwork, stepping, turning and above all-timing learned-gasp- via chi sao-no real problem.
Most folks are taller than me and they have more surface for being hit. Outside, inside---no problem if wing chun is taught and trained well))

if you are so close that both people can hit each other it does not matter.

((At close quarters- a good wc person should be able to both deflect and attack as well))

lots of people are replying to this thread like "WTF?". thats good, because the question was "why is your wing chun useless...?". so if its not useless at long range to you, then you should think "WTF?" but there is no need to reply to this thread.

i want to hear from people who think you have to mix WC with other styles to be capable on the outside.

((OK- I am not one of those people- but do not begrudge or berate people who think they need to. My comments are in brackets above))

joy chaudhuri

[Pacman]

victor i couldnt agree with what you said more regarding the assumption of being able to get in close without getting clobbered first and with what you said about using angles, footwork, etc. can help, but having shorter arms is still a very huge disadvantage

in YKS WC, when we train our punches we turn our body completely 90 degrees. some videos of kulo WC they seem to emphasize that a lot too. the YM lineage seems to be different. now before everyone goes nuts, i fully acknowledge im just basing this on the vids i see on youtube.

either they dont turn at all, or they turn on their heels which means they are really just using their waste to turn instead of using their legs which is more powerful.

all these ideas about triangles, what the centerline actually is, and pelvic girdles IMO is just nonsense. WC attacking theory and power generation theory is simple. this other stuff is an attempt to justify what you were taught


"im saying that by keeping your body completely square WHILE you punch you are limiting your reach (and power but thats another story). 99% of other people do not keep their body square while punching. we all know that reach is an important factor in hand to hand fighting on the outside. its undeniable. so by limiting your reach you are putting yourself at a disadvantage, or limiting your advantage if you already have longer arms, when on the outside." (Pacman)

***EXACTLY.
.................................

"if you are so close that both people can hit each other it does not matter." (Pacman)

***WHICH pre-supposes that you got to that range without getting picked off. And from the longer range, while perhaps not all wing chun fighters are completely square - virtually all wing chun fighters are still pretty close to being square - and this therefore limits reach much more than the kinds of punches (and corresponding footwork) that a boxer might use from that longer range.
.............................

"i want to hear from people who think you have to mix WC with other styles to be capable on the outside." (Pacman)

***NOT EXACTLY what I've been saying, but close. You can be very capable from the outside (long range) with just wing chun against a lot of people - but if you're up against someone with some serious boxing skills, for example, (and especially if he has longer arms than you to begin with)...

you can find yourself in trouble, because you're using a short tool against a long one in exactly the range (distance) where longer tools are the most effective.

Now I realize that many wing chun people will say that from the longer range they will use angling, cutting, timing, etc. - but I'm very sceptical about this compensating when up against a truly skilled striker, ie.- boxer type who knows how to use his reach, footwork, combinations, feints, head movement, etc...FROM THAT RANGE.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Pacman;1003556]

in YKS WC, when we train our punches we turn our body completely 90 degrees. some videos of kulo WC they seem to emphasize that a lot too. the YM lineage seems to be different. now before everyone goes nuts, i fully acknowledge im just basing this on the vids i see on youtube.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see where you are coming from. Nice to see your acknowledgment of the u tube as the source of your generalizations. Ip Man lineages are too diverse to make a straw man based on u tube.
Not a slam.

joy chaudhuri

[Pacman]

thanks. my point was not about lineage, but that this occurs a lot in the WC universe.

victor acknowledges this as well so apparently it occurs outside the realm of youtube as well


[QUOTE=Pacman;1003556]

in YKS WC, when we train our punches we turn our body completely 90 degrees. some videos of kulo WC they seem to emphasize that a lot too. the YM lineage seems to be different. now before everyone goes nuts, i fully acknowledge im just basing this on the vids i see on youtube.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see where you are coming from. Nice to see your acknowledgment of the u tube as the source of your generalizations. Ip Man lineages are too diverse to make a straw man based on u tube.
Not a slam.

joy chaudhuri

[Matrix]

im saying that by keeping your body completely square WHILE you punch you are limiting your reach (and power but thats another story). 99% of other people do not keep their body square while punching. we all know that reach is an important factor in hand to hand fighting on the outside. its undeniable. so by limiting your reach you are putting yourself at a disadvantage, or limiting your advantage if you already have longer arms, when on the outside. I added the bold to your comment for emphasis. If this is all known, and undeniable then there's no point in having this dicussion. The tea cup is already full. :)

[Pacman]

I added the bold to your comment for emphasis. If this is all known, and undeniable then there's no point in having this dicussion. The tea cup is already full. :)

not necessarily. i didnt say reach is the only factor for long range fighting, and so you could argue that other things can overcome it

im just saying that reach is one undeniable advantage for long range.

the other IME is footwork

[sihing]

not necessarily. i didnt say reach is the only factor for long range fighting, and so you could argue that other things can overcome it

im just saying that reach is one undeniable advantage for long range.

the other IME is footwork

At long range, lets say foot to foot range you need to use slightly different mechanics, one would not be square facing exactly. But realize, that ranges/ positions as described are like pictures, they are moments in time, in a split second one can be a bit further in (knee to knee range) or further away as well. We can't crystalize fights like pictures, you have to know that things change very fast and inches can make a difference.

Longer range techniques and tactics work, no doubt and no one is saying that they don't. Add them to your repitore if you like, the key thing is is it necessary. This question is answered based on your needs and intention. The thing with longer range strikes, your sideways a bit when you launch them, the draw back is that there is no ability to use your other side at the sametime, also you mechanics are such that you are reaching, you only have power in the end of the strike, you are also very committed to your strikes at longer range, and you have less ability to control you opponent while striking, therefore not being able to adequately keep the longer range possible. Generally longer range fighters use footwork to keep the range they want, easy to do in a ring (sport) with no obstructions, harder to do in a confined, unfamiliar area(street) with chairs, tables, people and other things in the way.

In WC the general strategy is to eat your opponents space. Why is this so? So they can't deliver their tools, or generate power from their structure, we jam them. This requires us to square up. If your sideways in anyway that close in you'll be turned away from the action, giving your back to your opponent. For this to work you have to 1) have good stability/root with the ground to use it as a power source, but also be able to adapt and move slightly to adjust for changes, 2)a flexible framework/structure within the body that is connected, strong and powerful (not from muscular strength but from natural body unity), 3) contact reflexes, your eyes won't perceive things quickly from this close in, your feeling reflex provides a faster response to pressure, 4)a focused line of attack/forward pressure upon your opponents center axis/spine, this takes his balance away, 5)power from your legs into your strikes, here there is no need for rotating or twisting torque actions to generate power in strikes, and allows for little windup in our striking, and 6) a spring like reaction in your limbs and body, so where ever the gaps are in his defences your strikes go thru them (lat sau jik chung concept), this is associated with points #3&4. Those are just a few attributes we develop from the WC curriculum to allow us to use our tools at the range we need them. In all reality we won't look much different from some styles of boxing, we don't dance on our feet, but stay closer to the ground, and use less rounder attacking actions, although there is nothing stopping us from using some (jow sau for example), and some other strikes from chum kiu and dummy work.

As someone said earlier (Vankuen I think), in reality there's only two ranges, non contact and contact, either you can engage or you can allow your opponent to do so, either way the system works in each case as we are aggressive when the contact is set and try not to allow a loss of it when that happens.

Nothing is guaranteed or promised, no Martial Arts system can do that, it is still up to the individual to be able to pull it off. The skills are not the easiest to obtain, but are easy to bring forth in your expression of combat once you have them.

James

[Pacman]

i agree with a lot of what you said.

i think the reason a WC practitioner needs to recognize the ability to fight in long range, and distinguish further between just contact and non-contact, is that to use the more advanced WC skills such as sticky hands you need to get close.

so you can practice sticky hands for years and be a master of it, but how are you going to set up an opponent and get into that close position to even use sticky hands?

its like being an expert in every jujitsu lock and choke, but not being able to take a person down.

a WC fighter needs to be able to have long range fighting skills to be able to penetrate, to bridge the gap, etc.

[grasshopper 2.0]

yes i would agree with this. it's easy to say and 'do" by reaching or not squaring up a la the kickboxer for example. But what happens when you face a guy who is 12 inches taller? or how longer arms? all of a sudden your 'reaching" is useless.

footwork on the other hand, doesn't play this reaching game. entry, timing and cutting in with footwork is the way to go, although probably ridiculously scary and is difficult to do, which is why 94.542% of the people out there don't do it.

WC's strength is in being able to use both hands, independently and at the same time, which means, to an extent, we do square up against the opponent. Of course, in the thick of things, yes, many will still incorporate some degree of reaching, twisting, etc. but our strength is in squaring up.

let me also state that i don't imagine my self squaring up, pigeon toed, with man sao/wu sao per se. but, i think the functions of the wing chun weapons have to be there and those functions are based on a foundation where our center-line is facing the attacker, meaning that we would work off this "squared off" positioning.


I just want to say that if you want to reach something you do it with your footwork, not with your arms and over-rotating your body. How much you remain square or rotate is up to you to decide, but know that you are always making trade offs.
By reaching too much with your upper body you are giving up balance and it takes longer to bring your other hand into play. If you are using simultaneous "techniques" such as a tan-da or lap da, or whatever, you will need to fairly square, but you need to turn the upper body too. The question is, how much?

[Vajramusti]

a WC fighter needs to be able to have long range fighting skills to be able to penetrate, to bridge the gap, etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why of course- and it is an important part of good wing chun training.
So- what's the beef?

joy chaudhuri

[Pacman]

if you read this forum you would see i was responding to some people who were downplaying the need for long range fighting

also, the main point of this thread is to talk to people who think that WC does not have the tools to fight in long range


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why of course- and it is an important part of good wing chun training.
So- what's the beef?

joy chaudhuri

[Pacman]

even if you had to fight a guy who naturally had a longer reach than you, would limiting your own reach further help, hurt, or make no difference?

yes footwork is very very important, but again would limiting your reach help, hurt, or make no difference in the situation?




yes i would agree with this. it's easy to say and 'do" by reaching or not squaring up a la the kickboxer for example. But what happens when you face a guy who is 12 inches taller? or how longer arms? all of a sudden your 'reaching" is useless.

footwork on the other hand, doesn't play this reaching game. entry, timing and cutting in with footwork is the way to go, although probably ridiculously scary and is difficult to do, which is why 94.542% of the people out there don't do it.

WC's strength is in being able to use both hands, independently and at the same time, which means, to an extent, we do square up against the opponent. Of course, in the thick of things, yes, many will still incorporate some degree of reaching, twisting, etc. but our strength is in squaring up.

let me also state that i don't imagine my self squaring up, pigeon toed, with man sao/wu sao per se. but, i think the functions of the wing chun weapons have to be there and those functions are based on a foundation where our center-line is facing the attacker, meaning that we would work off this "squared off" positioning.

[SAAMAG]

footwork on the other hand, doesn't play this reaching game.


Yep. That's also the answer to Pacman's stated problem of getting to the desired range of fighting. Footwork is king, and combined with timing one can learn when and how to enter into the desired range.

FWIW, I think WC blends nicely with MT and Boxing--but does it NEED it? Not so much. I personally like to do it because it seems natural to me, but if I didn't do it I could still apply the wing chun.

There are several strategies and tactics you can use to get to your desired range. One thing that pretty consistently gets results (for me) is to step back on the opponents attacks, do it a couple of times. Once the guy is expecting you to do it again upon attack the 3rd or x time, you move INTO his attack countering simultaneously. Another version of it is to simply step back once after an attack and as the person chases you with a follow up you intercept the attack with your own as they're stepping forward to get into range again.

So its not always about assimilating longer punches but moreso about how your experience in sparring with the system and with various people allows you to learn how to use the style in a way that's best for you.

[YungChun]

I just want to say that if you want to reach something you do it with your footwork, not with your arms and over-rotating your body. How much you remain square or rotate is up to you to decide, but know that you are always making trade offs.
By reaching too much with your upper body you are giving up balance and it takes longer to bring your other hand into play. If you are using simultaneous "techniques" such as a tan-da or lap da, or whatever, you will need to fairly square, but you need to turn the upper body too. The question is, how much?

BINGO!!!!

100% correct......

Managing distance is a game, best done with the legs and feet and brain knowing how and when to use them... Be where you need to be when he thinks you were going to be somewhere else...


By reaching too much with your upper body you are giving up balance and it takes longer to bring your other hand into play.


Which is why turning 90 degrees is highly unusual for VT... Sounds more like Long Fist which is worlds different.. VT wants to use the hands together, this kind of move almost completely eliminates that possibility unless it is for some kind of finishing move.

------------------------------

It's not about the distance.. It's about the time--time to land--start time..

An opponent may *seem* to be out of range, he may not be... There are many factors which will determine time to land, the weapon, the momentum, the mechanics he's using, motion, his physical speed, his position..

I have seen guys get KO'd by an opponent who he *thinks* is out of range.. and he was.. He could not simply reach out and land, but he was able to explode his body AS he fired off his attack in such a way that the time factor was too short for his opponent to *effectively* react to it and sleepy-bye he went. This is seen in many kinds of sport fighting/point fighting, but unlike what some say, those kinds of fighters can pack a lot of power and do major damage when they land..

Range is fleeting, it's almost like an illusion.. The only range that isn't is the closest range--grappling.. All other arts will have their hands full trying to *keep* their range IF the opponent wants to get closer.. This is why VT fills up the center "with all kinds of junk" (power/tools) to limit the ability of the opponent to get any closer than we want.. We have all seen how "easy" it is for grapplers to shoot in and get the take down even against skilled strikers because the striker's range (or any range) is so fleeting...

Closing the range (getting closer) is always easier than keeping range...

Here's a drill..

Have one person hold a bag while the other person tries to kick the bag.. The person holding the bag or shield should keep it pulled right up against his or her body..and start the drill from outside kicking range..

The goal of the person holding the bag is to prevent the partner from kicking the bag while finally closing distance and smothering the kicker..IE finally moving too close for the kicker to kick (to show this the bag holder can push the kicker with the bag once the distance is closed--if you catch them right you can knock them over).. The partner's goal is simply to kick the bag/shield.

Both partners can use any kind of movement he/she wants but the goal is for the bag person to get too close for the partner to kick.. Once inside reset the drill..

Watch how quickly the person holding the bag will learn to close in and smother the kicker, simply by using erratic and deceptive footwork and movement.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ranges are for mere mortals !

[TenTigers]

Here's a drill..

Have one person hold a bag while the other person tries to kick the bag.. The person holding the bag or shield should keep it pulled right up against his or her body..and start the drill from outside kicking range..

The goal of the person holding the bag is to prevent the partner from kicking the bag while finally closing distance and smothering the kicker..IE finally moving too close for the kicker to kick (to show this the bag holder can push the kicker with the bag once the distance is closed--if you catch them right you can knock them over).. The partner's goal is simply to kick the bag/shield.

Both partners can use any kind of movement he/she wants but the goal is for the bag person to get too close for the partner to kick.. Once inside reset the drill..

Watch how quickly the person holding the bag will learn to close in and smother the kicker, simply by using erratic and deceptive footwork and movement.

my teacher used to call this,"Check and go," and was taught for use against someone who had a good defensive side kick (or whatever tool used)
We use this drill still.

[Matrix]

yes footwork is very very important, but again would limiting your reach help, hurt, or make no difference in the situation?You see, your phrasing of the question is leading. You are calling not-reaching (by over-rotation or whatever means) as "limiting". I see it differently, as previously stated.

But of course, you said that "the main point of this thread is to talk to people who think that WC does not have the tools to fight in long range." So, I'll just be quiet. :)

Peace,
Bill

[Pacman]

You see, your phrasing of the question is leading. You are calling not-reaching (by over-rotation or whatever means) as "limiting". I see it differently, as previously stated.


ok we can stop if you want, its just a discussion not an argument, but i said limiting because by keeping your shoulders square you are limiting your potential reach.

when we train we turn completely 90 degrees so that we learn to relax and make things fluid. this does not mean you must turn 90 degrees at all times and over commit when fighting.

like anything, you learn what is appropriate for the situation.

but your right this thread is not about reach. i was just trying to theorize why some people, like victor, feel that the WC he knows is lacking on the outside. apparently he agrees with this.

i find lots of WC schools make lots of rules based on certain theories. in a way they take the flexible, principle, soft style approach out of wing chun

for example some teach to never fully extend the arms because someone could break it. well sure, but then you have square shoulders, half bent arms for even less reach and at the same time you train yourself to be stiff.

some also teach to keep the upper body upright and lean back a little so that your face is ****her away from your opponent. well sure, but then your fists are then also ****her away from the opponent...and then try hitting a bag while you are upright and leaning back. you have no power and your fighting from falling over!

[YungChun]

The goal of VT is not to land one from way outside...it's to get inside...AND use the hands together, with close timing in order to project power continuously, remove obstructions, issue force, etc..

Bill (matrix) appears to simply be pointing out that the MORE you turn the LONGER it will take you to get both hands in play in order to do what VT does...that is what makes VT, VT--hands working together, energy issuing, balance destruction, etc.

Good fighters will use mobility to manage the range and close that range.. Additionally, there are a myriad of tools available to issue force as that range is closed.

[wtxs]

He11, I thought "open range" meant WCK for cowboys, which is stupid.
You can't ride a horse in yjkym.

A goat, maybe....


That's funny ... but you can't wear cowboy boots, it had to be rubber boots to ride a goat ... or a sheep ... :p:p:p:p

[LoneTiger108]

this question is for those who feel WC cannot handle long range. please explain why you feel that way.

Then I, for one among others, will stay quiet on this one.


I am not an expert in other's WC, but from what I have seen...

And seeing is believing right? ;)

[Pacman]

no arguments here with what you said.

turning the body definitely definitely has its pros (reach and more power) and its cons (what you articulated below) and the goal of WC is definitely to get inside and do what you said.

i would say that there are different things for different situations. what may be appropriate on the outside might not be for the inside.

but if you can make it work then thats great. this thread got a little sidetracked as I was just hypothesizing why people would say WC has no outside game etc.


The goal of VT is not to land one from way outside...it's to get inside...AND use the hands together, with close timing in order to project power continuously, remove obstructions, issue force, etc..

Bill (matrix) appears to simply be pointing out that the MORE you turn the LONGER it will take you to get both hands in play in order to do what VT does...that is what makes VT, VT--hands working together, energy issuing, balance destruction, etc.

Good fighters will use mobility to manage the range and close that range.. Additionally, there are a myriad of tools available to issue force as that range is closed.

[grasshopper 2.0]

even if you had to fight a guy who naturally had a longer reach than you, would limiting your own reach further help, hurt, or make no difference?

yes footwork is very very important, but again would limiting your reach help, hurt, or make no difference in the situation?


i see your point. the idea i had in mind is that, if by reaching, you're giving up what your body is trained for and what wing chun is designed to do (eg. squaring up), so in essence, we're playing the other persons game.

i guess the same question can be asked: reaching to gain distance against a taller attacker - would that really provide us any more benefit? if by taking away what WC is founded on, don't we put ourselves at even more of a disadvantage?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Squaring up and playing the wing chun game works at close range. So the question is, does wing chun have the tools to get to that place without getting seriously picked off with strikes or kicks, clinched up, or taken down?

Right?

So what do you think about that?

[grasshopper 2.0]

i do believe that squaring up can help you bridge that distance without getting seriously picked off. Of course, there will be some degree of variation to this, but at least the function of 'squaring up" is still intrinsic when there is some reaching or twisting involved..

that said, this is incredibly difficult to do which is why so many resort to not doing it.

just thinking about it now, as kicks/punches come in at those angles (incredibly dangerous no doubt), shifting, wedging, turning has to be there, but the priority of "hitting" has to be number 1 in order for this to work.

[SAAMAG]

Well, if you believe the MMA/Grappler's statistic of 90% of fights going to the ground, then you won't have to worry about being picked off at long range since they're going to come right to you.

Hopefully you'll be able to pick them off before they double leg you and slam you on the ground. ;)

[Matrix]

Well, if you believe the MMA/Grappler's statistic of 90% of fights going to the ground, then you won't have to worry about being picked off at long range since they're going to come right to you.
I saw this clip today (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqymkeKd7S4), and since we're talking about going to the ground, I thought it would be appropriate. Or at least offer a very high level of comedy. :D

Please note that the guy in the yellow is wearing a Tapout shirt.

[sihing]

Squaring up and playing the wing chun game works at close range. So the question is, does wing chun have the tools to get to that place without getting seriously picked off with strikes or kicks, clinched up, or taken down?
Right?

So what do you think about that?

Now this is the equation that all of us have to solve, the other guy throwing the strikes or kicks has to answer this as well. IMO yes it does provide us with the tools to succeed (the art doesn't do it for us, we have to be able to apply it, so it's not about the art lacking in that area).

If your just standing still square on you will get hit, if you maintain an attacking attitude, going forward then your chances are better since you are putting pressure on the other guy, that's the key to what we do. Too many times (from my students as well) I've seen people get the range they need only to stop moving forward and stand still, chasing hands.

That's why in the points I made, moving towards COG is important for all of it too work. At times this is not easy, no one says it is, that is why we work on it alot. Trying to play this game, as well as the in & out game of boxing, doesn't make sense to me, your mixing mechanics and tactics, too much confusion for the average guy to be concerned with, play one or the other generally IMO. Of course there's those exceptional people that can do both and more, too bad most of us don't fall into that category of skill, or have the time to concentrate on developing it.

Your skills at playing your own game vs. his skills at playing his game is what it is all about, can you play yours and not his? This won't be answered on a forum, only in person to person contact.

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Too many times (from my students as well) I've seen people get the range they need only to stop moving forward and stand still, chasing hands." (James/sihing)
............................

***PERHAPS because they're not sure what to do in "no man's land" - because they're not really quite at the range they need yet?

Could that be it?

Maybe because they instinctively know that, not quite being in the "zone" yet, and since their weapon of choice (vertical wing chun strikes) require more-or-less a squared up posture (which means short range weapon)...

they start chasing hands?

Yeah?

What if, at that point just outside the "zone" - they started throwing longer range strikes like a straight, stiff boxer's lead - or a cross? Or both? Or an overhand/long range round punch? With the appropriate corresponding footwork. Or a hop lead front or roundhouse kick?

Might that eliminate some of the hesitation and confusion about what to do next? And the inappropriate chasing of hands?

[YungChun]

"Too many times (from my students as well) I've seen people get the range they need only to stop moving forward and stand still, chasing hands." (James/sihing)
............................

***PERHAPS because they're not sure what to do in "no man's land" - because they're not really quite at the range they need yet?

Could that be it?

Maybe because they instinctively know that, not quite being in the "zone" yet, and since their weapon of choice (vertical wing chun strikes) require more-or-less a squared up posture (which means short range weapon)...

they start chasing hands?

Yeah?

What if, at that point just outside the "zone" - they started throwing longer range strikes like a straight, stiff boxer's lead - or a cross? Or both? Or an overhand/long range round punch? With the appropriate corresponding footwork. Or a hop lead front or roundhouse kick?

Might that eliminate some of the hesitation and confusion about what to do next? And the inappropriate chasing of hands?

I doubt it..

IMO it's because they don't understand that VT is a striking art not a trapping art.. We do not seek to trap, any "trap" or variation on a trap is incidental. They simply don't get this and have the wrong idea about VT.. It's when you focus on hitting them that things begin to come together... And the attack is not so close range IMO.. The attack could start with a kick, a slightly bladed attack or tool... To me it's no different than anything else.. I started fighting on the outside and VT simply fills in that gray area that most don't want to be in...and adds some key attributes that can make anyone more effective IMO, that is IF they focus on the close timing attack, using the line and not on chasing hands..

[Ultimatewingchun]

I'm glad to see that you now have a picture of wing chun/ving tsun that includes both slightly longer range bridging/TWC (what you call "trapping") and a slightly closer range "just go in and hit"/Ving Tsun idea.

But here's a scoop for you: William Cheung knows both approaches (I can tell you this from first hand private one-on-one experience with the man) - but chose to emphasize the slightly longer range TWC concepts of bridging, central line, side body, Entry, and blindside strategy in his TWC incarnation.

And if people really want to avoid the "chasing hands" syndrome, they need to get down with the means of getting to the "just hit" range.

And strictly from a wing chun point of view, TWC has some good answers in this regard.

But I'm saying that, at certain longer ranges, even going beyond the TWC concepts may be in order - and into a slightly more boxing and kickboxing mode.

But I'm very serious about the first part of this post, James, as I know that you did some TWC in the past:

Although I know he (William Cheung) knows it...(but doesn't emphasize it)...I still use the "ving tsun" approach quite often as I attain "the zone" because bridging and blindside work is not the game at that moment - and so I just go in and hit.

It's all there in TWC - but it's simply taken for granted that this is what you do at certain moments in the fight.

[YungChun]

Maybe because they instinctively know that, not quite being in the "zone" yet, and since their weapon of choice (vertical wing chun strikes) require more-or-less a squared up posture (which means short range weapon)...


Think about this....

One of the longest striking attacks in the arts is a reverse punch.. Now if you are unfamiliar with the RP there is a certain mechanic used, but it is known for taking up a large distance AS you attack (strike)... I trained this over and over again when I was in karate and when done well you'll see KOs from well outside often enough.... It also takes up large distances in the blink of an eye..

However when seen at full extension the body is square, not bladed, the body STARTS bladed (side facing) and then squares up AS you enter.. Because of the footwork it is simply not possible to extend more than square on extension..

So.... If this long range striking attack, known for taking up long distances in the blink of an eye can operate from long range then IMO the idea that the WCK strikes are only applicable from close range seems to fall down.. Now there is different footwork involved with VT but nevertheless both these punches or strikes have you SQUARE on with full extension...

So where is the limitation really?

[Ultimatewingchun]

I don't follow this logic, Jim...

Granted at the end of a reverse punch (like the boxer's rear cross)....the shoulders are basically squared up with each other...

but both punches don't start from a squared up position - they start from a much longer reach dynamic and use of footwork than the classic wing chun approach to moving in and throwing the rear hand vertical punch.

[SAAMAG]

I saw this clip today (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqymkeKd7S4), and since we're talking about going to the ground, I thought it would be appropriate. Or at least offer a very high level of comedy. :D

Please note that the guy in the yellow is wearing a Tapout shirt.

Dude that was funny as hell. I thought it was staged at first though because of the terrible head down charge to takedown.

Looks like pants on the ground don't need to be eating any more cheesburgers.

[YungChun]

I don't follow this logic, Jim...

Granted at the end of a reverse punch (like the boxer's rear cross)....the shoulders are basically squared up with each other...


What's not to follow?

The issue seemed to be that the problem (as stated) was being square when landing..



but both punches don't start from a squared up position - they start from a much longer reach dynamic and use of footwork than the classic wing chun approach to moving in and throwing the rear hand vertical punch.


Not sure what you mean here... Most VT folks will start and end more or less square.. The RP square when landing.. Both are square when landing.

The point was that it's not the shoulder's being square or not that is the limitation, but rather how we move..

If you move in AS you fire then.....?

[Pacman]

i see your point. the idea i had in mind is that, if by reaching, you're giving up what your body is trained for and what wing chun is designed to do (eg. squaring up), so in essence, we're playing the other persons game.

i guess the same question can be asked: reaching to gain distance against a taller attacker - would that really provide us any more benefit? if by taking away what WC is founded on, don't we put ourselves at even more of a disadvantage?

well for me i wouldn't say that i am giving up what i am trained to do or not playing the WC game, since this is the WC i learned.

WC's goal is to bridge the gap and to control your opponent via blah blah blah blah blah. The WC I learned does not require you to remain totally square shouldered, and in fact turning is a very important part tool

[YungChun]

well for me i wouldn't say that i am giving up what i am trained to do or not playing the WC game, since this is the WC i learned.

WC's goal is to bridge the gap and to control your opponent via blah blah blah blah blah. The WC I learned does not require you to remain totally square shouldered, and in fact turning is a very important part tool

You can't use the hands together if you are not facing.. 95% of VT is about facing, and facing/following is a core attribute..if you are not facing you cannot use the hands together, if you are not facing you cannot initiate the close (hyper) timing of striking (continuity) that defines what VT is.. Without those core elements IMO you are not able to use core VT concepts..and btw turning is 90% about facilitating FACING, NOT turning away... The basic drills show/teach this clearly.

[Pacman]

has anyone here learned the arrow punch?

the RP mentioned gets its distance via the footwork. the arrow punch is the same idea with the footwork except that you are using the leadhand and that you start square and end up completely sideways.

we have talked about reach to death, but i believe that is only one component. lets talk about footwork and the specifics.

other people mention footwork and the problem i see with many WC practitioners is that they are standing erect, flatfooted, sometimes even leaning backwards with the weight on the back leg. often i see fighters with the legs pretty straight

sure you can shoot forward, but not as well as someone who is hunched, knees bent and on their toes.

[YungChun]

sure you can shoot forward, but not as well as someone who is hunched, knees bent and on their toes.

The classical (dynamic entry) Reverse Punch is not done on the toes...or hunched, depending on what that means.

Folks who stand like a statue are masters of literal and frozen interpretations of the form... "Plane spotters" are masters of a literal interpretation of poor form--it is flawed and incorrect.

People do all kinds of things.. The key is to actually do it and see...

As I said somewhere else: Anyone who stands like a statue in YJKYM for sparring should be gently led off the floor and sent to remedial sparring class..

[LoneTiger108]

has anyone here learned the arrow punch?

the RP mentioned gets its distance via the footwork. the arrow punch is the same idea with the footwork except that you are using the leadhand and that you start square and end up completely sideways.

we have talked about reach to death, but i believe that is only one component. lets talk about footwork and the specifics.

other people mention footwork and the problem i see with many WC practitioners is that they are standing erect, flatfooted, sometimes even leaning backwards with the weight on the back leg. often i see fighters with the legs pretty straight

sure you can shoot forward, but not as well as someone who is hunched, knees bent and on their toes.

FINALLY! The side body approach is mentioned when you're all discussing the reach-ratio! And for those who believe 95% of Wing Chun is square-on, I think you've got 'application' confused with 'basic training methods'.

I do wonder sometimes if anyone here has actually learnt how to apply their pole form to empty hand applications?? Or even their 108? Any weaponry/equipment like this assists with our drilling and FWIW I see the pole as the origin of our arrow punch. It also uses biu ma to shoot in sideways to the opponent from a distance, and I've had this done to me from at least seven feet away in the blink of an eye!

There. Nuff said by me on the subject. My Wing Chun is far from useless at long range! :D

[YungChun]

And for those who believe 95% of Wing Chun is square-on, I think you've got 'application' confused with 'basic training methods'.


Of course, because we all know that application of VT (tools, techniques, tactics) is entirely different than what we all trained (tools, techniques, tactics) in the forms and drills, right?

Train one way, fight another way right? :rolleyes:

[Matrix]

I do wonder sometimes if anyone here has actually learnt how to apply their pole form to empty hand applications?? Or even their 108? Any weaponry/equipment like this assists with our drilling and FWIW I see the pole as the origin of our arrow punch. It also uses biu ma to shoot in sideways to the opponent from a distance, and I've had this done to me from at least seven feet away in the blink of an eye!Spencer, I think you're being quite condescending here.

[Vajramusti]

Spencer, I think you're being quite condescending here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uncharacteristically true.

Relationship between pole work and the hands- of course.

joy chaudhuri

[HumbleWCGuy]

I thought I'd start this topic instead of hijacking another thread :)

this question is for those who feel WC cannot handle long range. please explain why you feel that way.

I am not an expert in other's WC, but from what I have seen some of the fundamental things that could lead to a disadvantage at an open range are

1. fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance, body upright, flatfooted. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.

2. not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.

This is a lot more complex issue than what people realize. Malicious compliance to principles is part of the problem with some WCers. I don't know of anyone who fights in the goat riding stance to be honest.

As far as the stance some stand square and others stand bladed. There is nothing wrong with either stance. The problem lies in the fact that WCers either do not accept, understand, or fully embrace the strengths and weaknesses of the stance that they use.

[LSWCTN1]

i cant believe that the majority of you dont use turning in training more.

its not just about the extra reach as Pacman rightly states, its also about the 'sidebody' aspect of ALL wing chun.

Ip Mans vt has it, its just not shown as much.

if hes bigger and stronger than you and punches straight with his right, you use your left (the 'facing' hand) to attacked with the punch, the outcome is:

your punch hits first
his punch misses by your manoeuvring
leaves you attacking his squared off stance at a 45 degree angle

Simples!

[HumbleWCGuy]

i cant believe that the majority of you dont use turning in training more.

its not just about the extra reach as Pacman rightly states, its also about the 'sidebody' aspect of ALL wing chun.

Ip Mans vt has it, its just not shown as much.

if hes bigger and stronger than you and punches straight with his right, you use your left (the 'facing' hand) to attacked with the punch, the outcome is:

your punch hits first
his punch misses by your manoeuvring
leaves you attacking his squared off stance at a 45 degree angle

Simples!

My lineage trains to fight both side body and front body. The are considered separate, but complementary arts. This style of training teaches one the strengths and weaknesses of each method and how to integrate them. Most of the WC that I see just picks one. It is a lacking approach in my opinion.

[YungChun]

i cant believe that the majority of you dont use turning in training more.

its not just about the extra reach as Pacman rightly states, its also about the 'sidebody' aspect of ALL wing chun.

Ip Mans vt has it, its just not shown as much.

if hes bigger and stronger than you and punches straight with his right, you use your left (the 'facing' hand) to attacked with the punch, the outcome is:

your punch hits first
his punch misses by your manoeuvring
leaves you attacking his squared off stance at a 45 degree angle

Simples!


I'm all for whatever you can make work.. I have not seen this used myself anywhere in actual sparring.. Got clip?????

In any case can you show this dynamic anywhere in the dummy form?

Again, do what works for you but this is not what I learned....or use.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Watch this video about Fedor Emelianenko - and especially from about 2:20-7:10...

And besides being amazed at his all around fighting ability, awesome aggression and focus...

look carefully at his punching attacks that come from longer ranges.

Now forget for a moment that you're watching probably the greatest fighter in the world, and just ask yourself what you, as a wing chun fighter, would do against someone (anyone) launching these kinds of attacks from those distances.

How would you handle that? Using your wing chun as you know it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrM_iyuYgJ4&playnext_from=TL&videos=Z4YWM1Er0xk&feature=rec-fresh%2Bdiv-r-4-HM

[YungChun]

Watch this video about Fedor Emelianenko - and especially from about 2:20-7:10...

And besides being amazed at his all around fighting ability, awesome aggression and focus...

look carefully at his punching and kicking attacks that come from longer ranges than what wing chun is mostly accustomed to being in.

Now forget for a moment that you're watching probably the greatest fighter in the world, and just ask yourself what you, as a wing chun fighter, would do against someone (anyone) launching these kinds of attacks from those distances.

How would you handle that? Using your wing chun as you know it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrM_iyuYgJ4&playnext_from=TL&videos=Z4YWM1Er0xk&feature=rec-fresh%2Bdiv-r-4-HM

Choosing to stay in longer striking range (if that is the proposed option) wouldn't help the matter IMO.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Okay. Question, though...

How would you try to take the fight to closer quarters against this kind of a fighter?

What would you be be doing, exactly?

[YungChun]

Okay. Question, though...

How would you try to take the fight to closer quarters against this kind of a fighter?

What would you be be doing, exactly?

1.. Praying as I attempted to find a way out..

2.. Making lots of buggy feints/fakes/movement/kicks from outside while doing #1..

3.. Wishing I knew more BJJ...

4.. Finally if no other options attempting to use any/all of the above to start my attack and likely a long sleep. :o

[LoneTiger108]

Spencer, I think you're being quite condescending here.

That wasn't my intention at all Bill. I was just responding honestly to Pacman mentioning the arrow punch, and its link to the pole.

If you really think about it, in some ways this thread is being a little condescending towards Wing Chun students (On this forum?? Never!!) Just look at the title and how it has developed. Just another MMA thread picking holes in Wing Chun.

How would we deal with this fighter, or that fighter? It does get a little frustrating so I do apologize if anyone has been offended... :(

[LoneTiger108]

i cant believe that the majority of you dont use turning in training more.

its not just about the extra reach as Pacman rightly states, its also about the 'sidebody' aspect of ALL wing chun.

Ip Mans vt has it, its just not shown as much.

if hes bigger and stronger than you and punches straight with his right, you use your left (the 'facing' hand) to attacked with the punch, the outcome is:

your punch hits first
his punch misses by your manoeuvring
leaves you attacking his squared off stance at a 45 degree angle

Simples!

Be careful not to point out the obvious! It may come across as condescending. ;)

[chusauli]

Fedor is an amazing athlete and all round skilled fighter. Most people in the world couldn't beat him or even train like him. More than 50% in MMA is the all round conditioning. I know many of you couldn't run around the block at full speed without gasping for air (you type too much to be able to do so :))...how many of you have 8-10 hours a day to train, and train at full intensity for 5 5 minute rounds with 1 minute break per round in all?

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=Ih0yVvolkxg&feature=related

All the WCK in the world won't save you if you don't have the conditioning. And if you're not in his weight class, forget about it.

[YungChun]

Be careful not to point out the obvious! It may come across as condescending. ;)

There's nothing obvious about it..

[sanjuro_ronin]

Fedor is an amazing athlete and all round skilled fighter. Most people in the world couldn't beat him or even train like him. More than 50% in MMA is the all round conditioning. I know many of you couldn't run around the block at full speed without gasping for air (you type too much to be able to do so :))...how many of you have 8-10 hours a day to train, and train at full intensity for 5 5 minute rounds with 1 minute break per round in all?

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=Ih0yVvolkxg&feature=related

All the WCK in the world won't save you if you don't have the conditioning. And if you're not in his weight class, forget about it.

You make a very valid point Robert and one I have mentioned over and over to some of my co-MA.
I have heard in reply various things but the main one usually is:
What are the chances of running into a "fedor"?
usually this is asked by one of my bigger MA friends, the smaller ones that have practical experience know all to well the real dangers of it.

Fact is, there is NOTHING that can be done other than hoping that you have the power to incapacitate someone like that as fast as possible.
And that is the reality of it.
When someone outweights you by 80 or even 100 lbs ( not uncommon nowadays) the only chance you have is IF your strikes ( or grappling) can incapacitate him BEFORE he does it to you.
Sounds like common sense right?
Well, I can tell you, it isn't.

[YungChun]

You make a very valid point Robert and one I have mentioned over and over to some of my co-MA.
I have heard in reply various things but the main one usually is:
What are the chances of running into a "fedor"?
usually this is asked by one of my bigger MA friends, the smaller ones that have practical experience know all to well the real dangers of it.

Fact is, there is NOTHING that can be done other than hoping that you have the power to incapacitate someone like that as fast as possible.
And that is the reality of it.
When someone outweights you by 80 or even 100 lbs ( not uncommon nowadays) the only chance you have is IF your strikes ( or grappling) can incapacitate him BEFORE he does it to you.
Sounds like common sense right?
Well, I can tell you, it isn't.

Ever heard of the Force Continuum?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ever heard of the Force Continuum?

The latest episode of Star wars ??
:D

[Ultimatewingchun]

Granted, we're talking about Fedor Emelianenko...whoooa!!! :eek:

But let's level the playing field a bit.

You're up against someone approximately your own height and weight, but he's in real good shape/conditioning, etc...and yeah, he's a strong guy.

And he launches similar kinds of punching attacks that you saw in the vid - not Fedoresque - but pretty d a m n good.

Using your wing chun as you know it - what would you be trying to do against this guy?

[YungChun]

The latest episode of Star wars ??
:D

No... lol

It's the idea of bringing force equal to the threat.... and being prepared to use it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Granted, we're talking about Fedor Emelianenko...whoooa!!! :eek:

But let's level the playing field a bit.

You're up against someone approximately your own height and weight, but he's in real good shape/conditioning, etc...and yeah, he's a strong guy.

And he launches similar kinds of punching attacks that you saw in the vid - not Fedoresque - but pretty d a m n good.

Using your wing chun as you know it - what would you be trying to do against this guy?

Vic, I am 5'6" and 173lbs, when I bounced I was younger and lighter, about 160lbs while most of the guys were over 6 ft and over 200.
I don't recall EVER fighting someone my height or weight !
In kyoksuhin we had no weight limits ( they were add on after and I still fought when there was only 2, under 200 and over 200) and at that time I was competing in the 140's-150's.
Things are never equal for some guys ( though in boxing it wasn't THAT bad).
There were times I was outweighted by 100lbs, easily.
Imagine fighting full contact, bare knuckle with a kyokushin BB that is taller and heavier by 100lbs !!
You learn a lot about MA in a situation like that.

[sanjuro_ronin]

No... lol

It's the idea of bringing force equal to the threat.... and being prepared to use it.

I understand what that means but not sure what you mean bringing it up....

[YungChun]

Granted, we're talking about Fedor Emelianenko...whoooa!!! :eek:

But let's level the playing field a bit.

You're up against someone approximately your own height and weight, but he's in real good shape/conditioning, etc...and yeah, he's a strong guy.

And he launches similar kinds of punching attacks that you saw in the vid - not Fedoresque - but pretty d a m n good.

Using your wing chun as you know it - what would you be trying to do against this guy?

Too many variables.. I know you want technical answers but I don't know if that's reasonable.. You play your game the best you can and do your best to take the guy out... VT offers some measure of safety using it's tools and tactics, but in the end it's up to us to know how to move, when to move, read the opponent, etc, I don't think you can label it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Going back to Roberts point.
We don't have the time to get high level conditioning, at least I know I don't and I am being honest.
I do HIIT training and I can go balls to the wall for a very good period of time, all full speed, full force with control, but NO WAY I can out last a well conditoned fighter, just not gonna happen.
So I focus on what CAN be trained in "minimal time":
Force production - speed and strength.
My goal is to take the person out in as quick a time as possible with as little as I can.
Now, I must admit, I am genetically suited for this so I do favour this approach.
( I am very fast - national level sprint speed and strong - advanced level powerlifting numbers when I used to train).

[Pacman]

Of course, because we all know that application of VT (tools, techniques, tactics) is entirely different than what we all trained (tools, techniques, tactics) in the forms and drills, right?

Train one way, fight another way right? :rolleyes:

you have to know what you are trying to train. the problem is some people don't understand what these excercises/drills passed down like a game of telephone are meant to teach and they misinterpret things.

its like working the speed bag. people dont punch in fights like they do when they hit the speed bag, but the focus is not punching its developing other skills.

you wouldnt say that he is training one way and fighting another

[YungChun]

you wouldnt say that he is training one way and fighting another


If the bag fits....:D

[Ultimatewingchun]

Vic, I am 5'6" and 173lbs, when I bounced I was younger and lighter, about 160lbs while most of the guys were over 6 ft and over 200.
I don't recall EVER fighting someone my height or weight !
In kyoksuhin we had no weight limits ( they were add on after and I still fought when there was only 2, under 200 and over 200) and at that time I was competing in the 140's-150's.
Things are never equal for some guys ( though in boxing it wasn't THAT bad).
There were times I was outweighted by 100lbs, easily.
Imagine fighting full contact, bare knuckle with a kyokushin BB that is taller and heavier by 100lbs !!
You learn a lot about MA in a situation like that.

***I KNOW exactly what you're saying, Paul/Sanjuro. I go 5'10"/165-170...and I've spent a lot of years sparring a group of guys who go 5'11"/6'/6'1"/6'2"/6'3"...all of whom out weigh me - and I still spar some of these guys occasionally.

Their weights range anywhere from 175-210 lbs...

And I can also remember a streetfight against a wild brauler/ex-semi pro football player (as an adult in my late 20's) who must have gone about 5'11"/230 - and in those days I weighed about 140...

And definitely, it's against these kinds of guys that you learn the most - because you're at a natural size disadvantage.

[Matrix]

That wasn't my intention at all Bill. I was just responding honestly to Pacman mentioning the arrow punch, and its link to the pole.

If you really think about it, in some ways this thread is being a little condescending towards Wing Chun students (On this forum?? Never!!) Just look at the title and how it has developed. Just another MMA thread picking holes in Wing Chun.

How would we deal with this fighter, or that fighter? It does get a little frustrating so I do apologize if anyone has been offended... :(Hey Spencer.
No problem. This can be a problem with forums like this.

And I agree with your point on the title of the thread, at least at first glance. However, it seems that Pacman was throwing this question out to those folks who say that they need other tools at different ranges (specificly open range in this case). Then the rest of jumped in to say that wasn't the case. I believe that the question wasn't meant for us. :)

Cheers,
Bill

[Liddel]

Using your wing chun as you know it - what would you be trying to do against this guy?

Couldnt view the clip, but....

I do what i consider the 2 laziest combat styles out there. Wing Chun and CQB. Having said that i would do what i do for any situation, as trained....Using CQB or WC techs -

Eyes throat chin stomp ! :eek: followed by run.

As a 6 foot 155 lbs guy ive found there a bunch of different techs and mindsets that will level out the playing field, of which these are at the top of the list.... still no ones invincible.
Timing is key.

[HumbleWCGuy]

TWC NEVER fights square on for the reasons you mentioned and more.

I can't agree with that.

[anerlich]

How would you handle that (Fedor)? Using your wing chun as you know it.


Why am I fighting Fedor? He's in a different weight division.

I wouldn't have got in his face in the first place, and if I did by accident, I would RUN AWAY VERY FAST.

There are limits to everything. No WC guy in the world is going to prevail against an angry bull elephant.

[Ultimatewingchun]

...since this thread was probably aimed at me more than perhaps anyone else. To begin, as I said on post#34 on page 3 of this thread: I do not think that wing chun is useless at ranges other than short range - but it has its limits in longer ranges, imo.

On both offense and defense.

And what I was goin' for with the Fedor vid, and the same with boxers like Marciano, Tyson, Duran, and some others who use a similar ferocious style...

is the brutal onslaught of all kinds of punches and corresponding footwork that these fighters (including Fedor) use from longer ranges.

(Not that they don't also offer some great things from close range as well - because they do - but right now I'm talking about what boxers/fighters like these people I've mentioned do from longer, non contact ranges).

It's devastating stuff, imo...and I've been working to incorporate some of it into my game in recent years.

Why?

Because I believe that it offers more weaponry to the wing chun arsenal from longer, non contact range than what exists right now...that attacking with such punches, footwork, and other boxing moves (feints, slips, ducking, weaving, etc.)...can easily meld with wing chun principles as you get closer-and-closer to the opponent...

and that such attacks quite simply add to your offense and make you much less predictable than a pure wing chun type advance/attack...

and can also provide some more defensive skills/maneuvers from the longer ranges as well.

So to answer my own question from earlier on the thread: If I had to fight a guy (let's say my size for the sake of a level playing field) who was very aggressive, strong, fast, etc. - and he was using a style of punching attack similar to a Fedor:

I would play a similar game as I tried to work my way in - either looking for a big punch (or combo of punches and perhaps kicks) of my own to do damage from longer range - or as a means of taking the fight to him so as to maybe finish from close range - and possibly (probably?) using more wing chun type punches and maneuvers once I got there.

[sihing]

...since this thread was probably aimed at me more than perhaps anyone else. To begin, as I said on post#34 on page 3 of this thread: I do not think that wing chun is useless at ranges other than short range - but it has its limits in longer ranges, imo.

On both offense and defense.

And what I was goin' for with the Fedor vid, and the same with boxers like Marciano, Tyson, Duran, and some to others that use a similar style...

is the brutal onslaught of all kinds of punches and corresponding footwork that these fighters (including Fedor) use from longer ranges.

(Not that they don't also offer some great things from close range as well - because they do - but right now I'm talking about what boxers/fighters like these people I've mentioned do from longer, non contact ranges).

It's devastating stuff, imo...and I've been working to incorporate some of it into my game in recent years.

Why?

Because I believe that it offers more weaponry to the wing chun arsenal from longer, non contact range than what exists right now...that attacking with such punches, footwork, and other boxing moves (feints, slips, ducking, weaving, etc.)...can easily meld with wing chun principles as you get closer-and-closer to the opponent...

and that such attacks quite simply add to your offense and make you much less predictable than a pure wing chun type advance/attack...

and can also provide some more defensive skills/maneuvers from the longer ranges as well.

So to answer my own question from earlier on the thread: If I had to fight a guy (let's say my size for the sake of a level playing field) who was very aggressive, strong, fast, etc. - and he was using a style of punching attack similar to a Fedor:

I would play a similar game as I tried to work my way in - either looking for a big punch (or combo of punches and perhaps kicks) of my own to do damage from longer range - or as a means of taking the fight to him so as to maybe finish from close range - and possibly (probably?) using more wing chun type punches and maneuvers once I got there.

You actually have enough sense and time to realize the style of the person your fighting (on the street right?) in the moment and be able to adjust to that specific style? Wow.

Sounds like some "conceptual" thinking IMO.

My advice, just hit him, with whatever, hopefullly you training has helped you do that, if not then run...

James

P.S. all the fighters you mentioned, they were devestating not because of the "style" the practiced, but because of who they are. They would be dangerous even if they didn't learn boxing.

[YungChun]

TWC NEVER fights square on for the reasons you mentioned and more.

Different folks may mean different things by this term.. Some are talking simply about facing, meaning that both hands are in play, not meaning that you are standing at the front door..

All VT that I know uses the hands together.. Of course William Cheung talks about how the wrists of both hands must be able to (cross?) to validate the "central line" etc.. This is consistent with facing or what some are calling being square with the upper body.

[Ultimatewingchun]

If you're watching the man you're about to fight - or who seems as though he may be a threat...

if you're watching him carefully...

no matter how brief the moments you have to size him up - you can get a feel for what type of attack might be coming, yeah.

By the posture, where his hands and arms are, how low or high he may be standing, the way he moves his feet, etc.

And one more thing, James, oh former TWC pal-o-mine...

by watching his elbows and knees like a hawk - with particular attention paid to the lead elbow.

Remember that one? :cool:

[sihing]

Different folks may mean different things by this term.. Some are talking simply about facing, meaning that both hands are in play, not meaning that you are standing at the front door..

All VT that I know uses the hands together.. Of course William Cheung talks about how the wrists of both hands must be able to (cross?) to validate the "central line" etc.. This is consistent with facing or what some are calling being square with the upper body.

In TWC they face with the upper body, and turn the lower body/hips away at a roughly 45 deg angle. If you look at alot of the vid of William, he's at times almost sideways when striking. The problem as I see it now is the TWC punches are all arm punches, no power from the ground. When I started learning the VT method, with more square facing with the hips and lower body, my power increased as well as the people I taught it too, we all noticed a big difference. The ground became a power source.

There's actually not much difference btwn the TWC central theory and facing theory I use now, as now I try my best to keep my opponent within my facing range, except we don't face the point of contact on defences, too much turning IMO, slows down followup big time (chasing hands).

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Okay, James...it's time to revisit an old issue that never seems to go away with you: the guy you learned TWC from, Brian Lewadny I believe was his name, either had no clue - or you just seemed to be absent whenever he taught the principles in question...

because the following is bull5hit:

"The problem as I see it now is the TWC punches are all arm punches, no power from the ground. When I started learning the VT method, with more square facing with the hips and lower body, my power increased as well as the people I taught it too, we all noticed a big difference. The ground became a power source." (James/sihing)
...........................

***I'VE been hit with enough punches from William Cheung to know better than what you "think" about "no power coming from the ground".

[sihing]

I should have expected your response Victor, it's always the same. I say something considered negative about TWC, you bring up my 1st instructor and try to discredit him. How about trying to argue my points logically, without all the people bashing and political BS. Brian got the same certificate you did from William, so either he just sold it to him, or he earned it. I hope for your sake and all the other certified TWC instructors out there that every certificate given was earned, if not then all certificates would be put into question.

Now a legitimate question for you, and you may want to start another thread for this. Please explain and correct me then, how does TWC body mechanics and structure work in regard to generating striking power for it's practitioners? So far in all my years in Wing Chun (18 in TWC, 4th yr in VT), I haven't read/seen a single thing regarding how TWC generates power in strikes, most articles, books, and video's are about either history, form, blindside theory, BOCE concept..

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by Phil Redmond
TWC NEVER fights square on for the reasons you mentioned and more.


Different folks may mean different things by this term.. Some are talking simply about facing, meaning that both hands are in play, not meaning that you are standing at the front door..

All VT that I know uses the hands together.. Of course William Cheung talks about how the wrists of both hands must be able to (cross?) to validate the "central line" etc.. This is consistent with facing or what some are calling being square with the upper body.
................................

***I DON'T KNOW if Phil actually expressed that thought he had fully, or perhaps it's a matter of semantics, but I can tell you this:

TWC does square up the shoulders and throw punches quite often; and by that I mean that the TWC centerline will often face the opponent's center-of-mass (COM) while the TWC fighter attacks with punches traveling right there on his own centerline towards the opponent...

and Grandmaster William Cheung refers to this as "roll" punches.

For example, William Cheung might describe a defense against a front kick as "a full sidestep with garn sao, followed by three roll punches"...

meaning that after the full sidestep T-stance, which started from a neutral side (body) stance - and while the arms blocked/deflected the kick with garn sao on the TWC fighter's center line (meaning that the TWC man's centerline is directly facing the point-of-contact at the block - and not facing the opponent's center-of-mass)...

you could now follow up by stepping directly into the opponent's space from the side step angle and throw punches right on your own centerline that are attacking directly into his center of mass.

So the first part of this defense is "very" TWC, so to speak, and the second part is a direct attack into his COM (just like Ving Tsun might do it).

I hope this makes sense to those unfamiliar with TWC but who do COM wing chun.

[Frost]

Going back to Roberts point.
We don't have the time to get high level conditioning, at least I know I don't and I am being honest.
I do HIIT training and I can go balls to the wall for a very good period of time, all full speed, full force with control, but NO WAY I can out last a well conditoned fighter, just not gonna happen.
So I focus on what CAN be trained in "minimal time":
Force production - speed and strength.
My goal is to take the person out in as quick a time as possible with as little as I can.
Now, I must admit, I am genetically suited for this so I do favour this approach.
( I am very fast - national level sprint speed and strong - advanced level powerlifting numbers when I used to train).

i understand your point Paul but I think a lot of people on this forum would be amazed at the time these athletes spend on conditioning, it’s more like 8-10 hours a week not a day, I know of quite a few fighters who when they actually found a proper strength and conditioning coach were amazed at the fact that the first thing the coach did was cut their training hours, in some cases in half. Granted they also do a lot of technical work that also assists with the conditioning but that is the beauty of sports, you can train conditioning along with your skill set and reduce the amount of time needed to spend on conditioning.

The problem is that if your style is not geared to give you strength and conditioning whilst learning technical skills then you have to find more hours to train, how many people can honestly say that every technical training session they do improves their conditioning as well as their skill level? Most sports guys I know can say this...not many traditional guys I know can

[LSWCTN1]

I'm all for whatever you can make work.. I have not seen this used myself anywhere in actual sparring.. Got clip?????

In any case can you show this dynamic anywhere in the dummy form?

Again, do what works for you but this is not what I learned....or use.

very quickly as i have got to run...

gaan sau drill from luk sau - same movement slightly different idea

does that answer your question?

[sanjuro_ronin]

i understand your point Paul but I think a lot of people on this forum would be amazed at the time these athletes spend on conditioning, it’s more like 8-10 hours a week not a day, I know of quite a few fighters who when they actually found a proper strength and conditioning coach were amazed at the fact that the first thing the coach did was cut their training hours, in some cases in half. Granted they also do a lot of technical work that also assists with the conditioning but that is the beauty of sports, you can train conditioning along with your skill set and reduce the amount of time needed to spend on conditioning.

The problem is that if your style is not geared to give you strength and conditioning whilst learning technical skills then you have to find more hours to train, how many people can honestly say that every technical training session they do improves their conditioning as well as their skill level? Most sports guys I know can say this...not many traditional guys I know can

A very valid point.
I myself make my MA workout my conditoning workout ( strength is a workout on its own).
Fact is, I have had guys puking 20 min into my typical MA workout.
Of course I myself have puked while doing the workout of those very same people because it is different.
While I am doing my workout in less than 60 min and more like less than 45, they can go on for 2 hours with THEIR workout.
Intensity is tow fold- either full blast short term or medium blast long term.
Thing is, even "ONLY" doing 10 hours a week of conditioning is like 2 hours every day, 5 days a week.
Fact is, pro fighters are in a league all their own, I know, I have been there.
When competing I was training 3 hours a day, every day, 5-6 days a week and no less than 4 days a week.
The shape I was in was, well, professional level.
Because I know I can't get that level of conditoning now, I need to "take what I can get" and optimize it.
In the end we care what others do to the extent that we need to know how to deal with it, but beyond that, we have to do what WE CAN.

[chusauli]

Why am I fighting Fedor? He's in a different weight division.

I wouldn't have got in his face in the first place, and if I did by accident, I would RUN AWAY VERY FAST.

There are limits to everything. No WC guy in the world is going to prevail against an angry bull elephant.


What Clint Eastwood movie was when he said, "A man's got to know his limitations."?

I know! Perhaps the secret thumb in the eyes and kick to the nuts will take down Fedor! :rolleyes:

[chusauli]

A very valid point.
I myself make my MA workout my conditoning workout ( strength is a workout on its own).
Fact is, I have had guys puking 20 min into my typical MA workout.
Of course I myself have puked while doing the workout of those very same people because it is different.
While I am doing my workout in less than 60 min and more like less than 45, they can go on for 2 hours with THEIR workout.
Intensity is tow fold- either full blast short term or medium blast long term.
Thing is, even "ONLY" doing 10 hours a week of conditioning is like 2 hours every day, 5 days a week.
Fact is, pro fighters are in a league all their own, I know, I have been there.
When competing I was training 3 hours a day, every day, 5-6 days a week and no less than 4 days a week.
The shape I was in was, well, professional level.
Because I know I can't get that level of conditoning now, I need to "take what I can get" and optimize it.
In the end we care what others do to the extent that we need to know how to deal with it, but beyond that, we have to do what WE CAN.

Paul,

That speaks volumes.

Even if one makes a living teaching martial arts, one still can't devote all that time to training oneself like a pro MMA fighter because they are also training others.

A pro MMA fighter has money to live off while preparing for the fight that takes care of his family, home, trainers, food, expenses...ordinary joes don't have those resources.

One also gets in condition with their own routine - for example, if a Goju Ryu guy went to a Choy Lay Fut class, they'd have a totally different workout and be panting in no time...

[Ultimatewingchun]

...a simple one post response about how TWC generates power should do, James.

To begin, and which should come as no surprise to anyone, is the way SLT is learned and performed, with the feet set at just slightly more than shoulder width - but not pidgeon-toed, knees bent and pushed slightly inward, and hips locked forward...and chest and head up, and with the shoulders completely squared up. This is the basic body structure and alignment that needs to be maintained at all times...

with the exception of the shoulders always being squared up to each other, since in TWC we will often throw a punch (or a kick) on some part of the CENTRALINE - and not always along the exact middle-of-the-body centerline.

In other words, sometimes punches (or kicks) are thrown from the one of the two chest (pectoral) lines...or perhaps from a shoulder line near the arm pit.

But the basic full body structure and alignment will remain the same even when executing strikes that don't travel along the main centerline.

And when moving, the feet are not gliding or sliding along the floor; but rather they are picked up when stepping, and moved with the whole foot being parallel to the floor when up in the air...and the foot lands first on the ball of the foot - with the rest of the foot immediately following back down to the floor in one very simple and fast motion.

Everything I've said so far is meant to generate power and force in a very direct and evenly balanced movement that focuses the power in a relatively small area - so force is concentrated at the point of impact - with the body in a sense, wedging forward.

And the same structure is applied during chum kiu, bil jee, wooden dummy, chi sao and all related drills, when using butterfly swords, sparring, fighting, etc.

Next, the focus in TWC is keeping the elbow down and in during most strikes, with the force coming from a push from the elbow (and the concentration of power/energy being generated from the elbow is first learned during the slow and easy focus performed during the first section of SLT).

And when punching - the arm muscles are relaxed until the last moment - except for the triceps...which are actually in a slight state of tension throughout the whole punch that's more noticable than the rest of the arm.

And of course there is follow through with the whole body(and legs) when moving in with a strike, unless the resistance and structural balance coming from the opponent as you land a punch is still strong (ie.- you've hit him but you haven't affected his overall balance as of yet)...

so you keep striking with forward pressure but without breaking you own structure in an attempt to push him back or unbalance him (ie.- you stay aligned as you try to generate force from the floor, up through your legs and torso - to your elbow - and out through your hands).

And one more thing, James: I've made none of this up. This all comes from the instruction/teachings of William Cheung directly.

[chusauli]

Here's a good article by my student Alan Orr and grandstudent Kim Elman focusing on body structure:

http://www.alanorr.com/htdocs/articles/wcpowerarticle.html

[YungChun]

very quickly as i have got to run...

gaan sau drill from luk sau - same movement slightly different idea

does that answer your question?

You seem to refer to but a single drill variation you folks do.. So, no, it doesn't even begin to address the points I made about this dynamic being invisible across Yip's classical progression.

[k gledhill]

I thought I'd start this topic instead of hijacking another thread :)

this question is for those who feel WC cannot handle long range. please explain why you feel that way.

I am not an expert in other's WC, but from what I have seen some of the fundamental things that could lead to a disadvantage at an open range are

1. fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance, body upright, flatfooted. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.

2. not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.

there is lot of mobility in VT. We never fight from a ygkym stance. thats for drilling etc...

1) seung ma toi ma, seen as a tactical idea, allows us to move at angles to a side of entry , responding to gain space to counter attack by making our space for our strikes. This can be any direction. Not to move away , but to make an attack. If i stay and hold my ground the opponent can steal my ability to make ko force. If i just go backwards Im still infront of 2 potential arms and a takedown. mobility makes anyone a harder target. Moving to the precise spot that i can hit you but you cant hit me takes time.

2) We ONLY turn so we face at angles to the entry to us and avoid being in the center with a lead leg, tactically we attempt to gain an advantage by turning the opponent.

drilling in chi-sao, we use this for distance training . To make us always able to make ko contact iow not out of reach or too close.
Hard but then further to the chi-sao drills are sparring drills. these have simple entry and counters using the reality of over parrying or under parrying strikes to see what to do from positions attained from 'action' rather than block gate a with a tan while pivoting bs.

if one partner does attacking entry striking only for the partner who does counters,..learning not to over stick/feel/trap redundantly. Leading us to becoming a fast striking aggressive relentless assault. like water crashing on rocks.

reaching the 'target' is done in chi-sao by making contact with the jaw with loose hands
and correct elbow positions for force transfer from the hips . We deliberately remove our arms from contacting the partners arm so they will strike a gap....then with sufficient force ? does elbow go out losing forces/defensive line etc.... we maintain the idea that chi-sao isnt to develop feeling things. rather a drill for random striking contact /striking technique/elbow training, under force of pressure from a partner trying to work the techniques...not feel hands .


the basic tan striking entry with seung ma is also seen as a 1/2 step to allow us to stalk the opponent as they 'move' . In the drill the opposite partner is counter striking this tan striking entry line, with surprise surprise, jum striking. Only now the jum strike developed in 2 beats in dan chi is now a 1 beat counter angling off line to the partners attacking step in...iow he attacks me by entry and I counter by angling to the correct side and dont do a jut :D but a striking counter attack. IOW I train to make my space to move with them as they come staying in the range of my ability to make a counter attack with contact to the head , using the right angles, balance, hips, stance..fist to jaw...in that single moment in time.

This drill leads to other mobility drills..like one driller suddenly disengaging and moving away from the chi-sao position at angles, making the partner attack to regain the space

subtle but it will develop a fighter with an intuitive ability to move for space to make their attacks or attack when they can enter and capitalize on the opponents focus on hand chasing our attacks....not a feeler.
Learning to keep attacks coming , attacking mobility, distances that are maintained by staying with an attacking entry and countering it or going after someone with relentless intent to KO them in 'our space' .

[Wayfaring]

A very valid point.
I myself make my MA workout my conditoning workout ( strength is a workout on its own).
Fact is, I have had guys puking 20 min into my typical MA workout.
Of course I myself have puked while doing the workout of those very same people because it is different.
While I am doing my workout in less than 60 min and more like less than 45, they can go on for 2 hours with THEIR workout.
Intensity is tow fold- either full blast short term or medium blast long term.
Thing is, even "ONLY" doing 10 hours a week of conditioning is like 2 hours every day, 5 days a week.
Fact is, pro fighters are in a league all their own, I know, I have been there.
When competing I was training 3 hours a day, every day, 5-6 days a week and no less than 4 days a week.
The shape I was in was, well, professional level.
Because I know I can't get that level of conditoning now, I need to "take what I can get" and optimize it.
In the end we care what others do to the extent that we need to know how to deal with it, but beyond that, we have to do what WE CAN.

You know, Paul I understand what you're saying here. The level of conditioning alone of an amateur and pro fighter builds an athletic ability that can overcome a whole lot of technique or "science".

Pros/Ammy's I train around train 10 sessions a week plus their personal conditioning. Each session is high resistance and a cardio / strength session in and of itself.

Often the coaching advice in sparring against them to the question "why isn't this effective?" is typically "because they are an athlete - you need to be perfect technically and step it up athletically".

We may not be able to dedicate that kind of time now, but if you've done it in the past, you understand. If you train around it, you understand. I'd rather train with athletes like that because it brings my game up. It's inspires you to take steps in that direction, which actually are great healthy life choices.

It's just a whole different mentality than the low activity high philosophy training sessions you find in traditional training approaches.

No, no, people on this forum couldn't handle Fedor. Or even people in their own weight class of that caliber like GSP, Silva, BJ. Or even any UFC fighter in fighting shape. Because even if they might look sloppy at times in areas, everything degrades under that level intensity, so the perfect technical form WCK guys will look sloppy under that level intensity as well.

[anerlich]

In TWC they face with the upper body, and turn the lower body/hips away at a roughly 45 deg angle.

Utter b0ll0cks.

I've always been taught that even in a front stance with one foot forward, one back, you're always trying to have your hips facing forward. Power comes from the ground through the hips, an you can't apply punch properly with the rear hand if you're turning your hips away. I've been continually bombarded with "punch comes from the ground", "power comes from the legs".

Pretty much the same as boxing, karate, most percussive arts. AS Tom Jones said,"It's not unusual". That you regard this as some recent revelation makes me wonder about your earlier tuition.


So far in all my years in Wing Chun (18 in TWC, 4th yr in VT), I haven't read/seen a single thing regarding how TWC generates power in strikes, most articles, books, and video's are about either history, form, blindside theory, BOCE concept..

So far in all my years in MA (21 in TWC, 5+ in IMA, 5 in an eclectic style with a senior Cheung student, 10 in BJJ, 2 in MMA since you seem to feel numbers matter) I've not seen a whole lot on how your lineage develops power either (i haven't been looking that hard though, which might be your issue as well). So feel free to expound - just don't try to compare it with TWC, because your statements indicate you learned it in some bizarro parallel universe where physical laws apply differently.


What Clint Eastwood movie was when he said, "A man's got to know his limitations."?

It was Magnum Force, I believe. The quote seems to apply to some who share their opinions on this forum...

[Vajramusti]

Maybe one needs the right horse in the open range.

joy chaudhuri

[duende]

Maybe one needs the right horse in the open range.

joy chaudhuri

And a bow an arrow. ;)

[anerlich]

Maybe one needs the right horse in the open range.


And a bow an arrow.

An armoured dune buggy with rack mounted machine guns and rocket launchers.

[duende]

An armoured dune buggy with rack mounted machine guns and rocket launchers.

now your talkin!

[sihing]

Utter b0ll0cks.

I've always been taught that even in a front stance with one foot forward, one back, you're always trying to have your hips facing forward. Power comes from the ground through the hips, an you can't apply punch properly with the rear hand if you're turning your hips away. I've been continually bombarded with "punch comes from the ground", "power comes from the legs".

Pretty much the same as boxing, karate, most percussive arts. AS Tom Jones said,"It's not unusual". That you regard this as some recent revelation makes me wonder about your earlier tuition.



So far in all my years in MA (21 in TWC, 5+ in IMA, 5 in an eclectic style with a senior Cheung student, 10 in BJJ, 2 in MMA since you seem to feel numbers matter) I've not seen a whole lot on how your lineage develops power either (i haven't been looking that hard though, which might be your issue as well). So feel free to expound - just don't try to compare it with TWC, because your statements indicate you learned it in some bizarro parallel universe where physical laws apply differently.



It was Magnum Force, I believe. The quote seems to apply to some who share their opinions on this forum...

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for your response. I think Rick may have seen the weakness of a twisted structure and corrected it. All the hours of vid I have on William and others in TWC indicates something else, so it's not about what I learned from Brian, but also what is out there representing the art. It's not too important anyways, just an observation I had, and I offered my opinion. Even Phil mentioned earlier in this thread that they never fight square on, so I guess there is a difference of opinion in TWC circles as well.

Intersting, I bought all of William's books, even ordered old magazine articles on TWC, nothing really mentioned about how to generate force in their bodies, also bought a bunch of Williams tapes, and with the invention of Youtube viewed lots of stuff uploaded and even there I found only one occasion where he talks about it, at a seminar at the VT museum. So I think I've done plenty of researching on TWC and it's method, never mind the fact that I met the man himself and trained with one of his certified students for over a decade, lol, so pls think again when it comes to how much research I've done concerning this matter.

From day one I was told about the generation of power in VT, Gary has a ton of info in articles on it on his site, Ernie too, and in Gary's vids it's there reflected in everything they do. Also in other literature and vids on VT they discuss a united structure behind everything they do, with power coming from the ground, as soon as I started researching it, that is what has been written and demonstrated, so pls look again, in the right places this time:)

James

[SAAMAG]

Getting back to the original idea of the thread; perhaps those that have trouble with the open range should do this ChinaBoxer drill!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foqUqIVWcEc :p