Is this true?

[Hendrik]

Is this true?

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-dkNr77QGnY&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-dkNr77QGnY

[sanjuro_ronin]

Is what true?

[Hendrik]

Is what true?

What Izzo says in the youtube.

[Hendrik]

Kungfu fighter,

Are you asking me your questions yesterday because you watch this youtube?

[Hendrik]

If both big guy and small guy using the same engine.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2vhm97tkf0&feature=youtube_gdata

[kung fu fighter]

Kungfu fighter,

Are you asking me your questions yesterday because you watch this youtube?

No, The reason I asked you those questions is because i normally use the double Helix round about type of WCK Jin during chi sao and it works amazingly, but then i got curious as to how the Direct coil spring type of WCK Jin works to receive the opponent's incoming force or momentum without get blown backwards when in a YJKM or Emei equal shoulder width stance.

From my notes, i figure the Direct coil spring method of receiving force is just allowing the opponent's incoming force to compress one's 7 joints from the contact point by just keeping one's joints relaxed and loose.

If you have any youtube video which demo this, is would be great to see

[Hendrik]

Ok.

Direct and double helix only different in force flow type. They both are a standing stake so your blown backwards phenomenon example of a rack doesnt apply.

Watch my axis youtube here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJMjQz1gwsU&feature=youtube_gdata -




No, The reason I asked you those questions is because i normally use the double Helix round about type of WCK Jin during chi sao and it works amazingly, but then i got curious as to how the Direct coil spring type of WCK Jin works to receive the opponent's incoming force or momentum without get blown backwards when in a YJKM or Emei equal shoulder width stance.

From my notes, i figure the Direct coil spring method of receiving force is just allowing the opponent's incoming force to compress one's 7 joints from the contact point by just keeping one's joints relaxed and loose.

If you have any youtube video which demo this, is would be great to see

[kung fu fighter]

Ok.

Direct and double helix only different in force flow type. They both are a standing stake so your blown backwards phenomenon example of a rack doesnt apply.

Watch my axis youtube here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJMjQz1gwsU&feature=youtube_gdata -

Ok, thanks Hendrik.

so to sum it up both types of wck jin utilizes force line type , double helix receives the opponent's incoming force along a downward spiral via your loose relaxed 7 joints, where as Direct receives the opponent's incoming force directly down as in compressing a coil spring downward via your loose relaxed 7 joints?

[Hendrik]

See if this one work

[Hendrik]

Yes. As in the picture.

But this only apply to force line type.


Not structure holding type or body type. As show in picture. Those are clamping type which is holding the body as a rack structure to against force. A different animal.

Force line stake type root into the group with force flow while structure holding never can do that no matter how they clamp their joints. And always end up figjting force with force as Izzo. Izzo tilting body is the evidence of rack type holding a structure to fighing force. Instead of play with force flow. A different game.



Ok, thanks Hendrik.

so to sum it up both types of wck jin utilizes force line type , double helix receives the opponent's incoming force along a downward spiral via your loose relaxed 7 joints, where as Direct receives the opponent's incoming force directly down as in compressing a coil spring downward via your loose relaxed 7 joints?

[Hendrik]

Wck chi sau is the indication of wck is a force line art, play with force flow. Root with force flow.

It is not bak mei, southern mantis, or other shao lin art which hold structure and with big muscle. Thus, wck is called a female art.

[kung fu fighter]

Yes. As in the picture.

But this only apply to force line type.


Not structure holding type or body type. As show in picture. Those are clamping type which is holding the body as a rack structure to against force. A different animal.

Force line stake type root into the group with force flow while structure holding never can do that no matter how they clamp their joints. And always end up figjting force with force as Izzo. Izzo tilting body is the evidence of rack type holding a structure to fighing force. Instead of play with force flow. A different game.

Yes that makes sense! Force line type has an action reaction component which the sustain or Rack type does not, so every action is alot more springy vs steel rod like body type (sustain)

[YouKnowWho]

It is not bak mei, southern mantis, or other shao lin art which hold structure and with big muscle. Thus, wck is called a female art.

If you punch from the center of your chest, your body is not rotated. This make a big difference in "power generation".

If we look at the following clip. It's easy to see that his punch came from "beside his ear". We can also clearly see his "body rotation". His punch started from his right shoulder behind his body and end with his right shoulder in front of his body. That's a movement from one extreme to another extreme, the general Shaolin power generation method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87tZB1HmFpE

My question is, can you truly be able to generate the same "knock down" power by using "momentum" only without that "body rotation"?

[Hendrik]

Rack type is like you have a rack with fix joints , just like a water tower with every joints mouting solid. The structure or joints has to take the shake if shock.

Stake is like a tower with shock absorbs. Any shake going to be transfer down to ground , the tower ideally dont take any force.


Yes that makes sense! Force line type has an action reaction component which the Body or Rack type does not, so every action is alot more springy vs steel rod like body type (sustain)

[Hendrik]

John,

You need to ask yourself a question.


Do you move your body to collide the target or you inject force flow into the target.


If you punch from the center of your chest, your body is not rotated. This make a big difference in "power generation".

If we look at the following clip. It's easy to see that his punch came from "beside his ear". We can also clearly see his "body rotation".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87tZB1HmFpE

My question is can you truly be able to generate the same "knock down" power by using "momentum" only without that "body rotation"?

[Hendrik]

This picture is the taboo of wck yjkym.

Simple physics on what works what dont work. But many dont like it presented.


Body type, rack type, cannot avoid to have action
and reaction force fighting in your body.

Rack type doing sustain. There is not a sustain type.

In genetal There are :
body type ( rack, kneeling) performing sustain and resist, moving or holding the body.
Force line type ( stake) performing receive and issuing, transport action and reaction force.



Once your hold your structure, you actually causing action and reaction force to fight in your body. You have to spend effort to balance that.

[YouKnowWho]

John,

You need to ask yourself a question.


Do you move your body to collide the target or you inject force flow into the target.I would say to "inject force". But my question is

- to borrow the counter force from the ground,
- add body momentum into it,

may not be enough. You will still need to "rotate your body". I just ask the question and I don't draw any conclusion here.

Can you generate maximum power without "body rotation"?

[Hendrik]

John,

The issue is even you say inject force but your body is not develop that way. Because body rotation is act of moving body with muscle.

Inject force is about pressure per area. Or force flow density. I dont need maximum power. I only need high density force flow.




I would say to "inject force". But my question is

- to borrow the counter force from the ground,
- add body momentum into it,

may not be enough. You will still need to "rotate your body". I just ask the question and I don't draw any conclusion here.

Can you generate maximum power without "body rotation"?

[kung fu fighter]

What are the strengths of the Rack and Body Types?

I find if i can maintain bridge contact space (wrist to wrist or forearm), and don't allow the opponent to collapse my bridge structure, the Rack works, but if your bridge structure is compramised and the opponent is able to make contact with my body or torso, the Rack falls apart. where as with the jong type, i can still attempt to deal with force applied directly to my body or torso since my body is not locked in any way with a fixed structure.

Ideally under what conditions does the Rack and body type works or functions best, and ideally under what conditions does the Rack type fall apart or fails to work/functions?

[Hendrik]

If you watch Izzo demo above on how he hold his structure to against his opponent. That holding of structure is clumpsy. In real life where dynamic momentum those type of holding structure can hold. Take a look at Allen Orr video. No way you can hold structure in the Izzo way to play with Allen Orr demo dynamic momentum. Imho.

[Hendrik]

If you are 300lb and six feet six. You can do rack and body type or anything.

But if you want to teach it to your daughter. She never will have a good chance in defend herself.


Look at Izzo demo above, he is good but rack and body type is not realistic for small guy and clumpsy.



What are the strengths of the Rack and Body Types?

I find if i can maintain bridge contact space (wrist to wrist or forearm), and don't allow the opponent to collapse my bridge structure, the Rack works, but if your bridge structure is compramised and the opponent is able to make contact with my body or torso, the Rack falls apart. where as with the jong type, i can still attempt to deal with force applied directly to my body or torso since my body is not locked in any way with a fixed structure.

Ideally under what conditions does the Rack and body type works or functions best, and ideally under what conditions does the Rack type fall apart or fails to work/functions?

[kung fu fighter]

If you watch Izzo demo above on how he hold his structure to against his opponent. That holding of structure is clumpsy. In real life where dynamic momentum those type of holding structure can hold. Take a look at Allen Orr video. No way you can hold structure in the Izzo way to play with Allen Orr demo dynamic momentum. Imho.

Is Alan Orr using force line type or body Type?

looks more like body type from what i can see


If you are 300lb and six feet six. You can do rack and body type or anything.

But if you want to teach it to your daughter. She never will have a good chance in defend herself.

makes sense! I agree

[Hendrik]

Is Alan Orr using force line type or body Type?

looks more like body type from what i can see



makes sense! I agree


Allen is using body type very agile for his mma fighting.

Allen has force line type too. If you look at Allen Medicine ball practice.


Izzo type is typical wck structure holding ideal for some but not very applicable in real life mmA dynamics.

[kung fu fighter]

Allen has force line type too. If you look at Allen Medicine ball practice.

What's the link to the medicine ball clip?
are you referring to this clip? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBn37HEnv0

[Hendrik]

http://www.everythingwingchun.com/Alan-Orr-DVD-1-Controlling-Your-Opponent-p/ao01.htm

What's the link to the medicine ball clip?
are you referring to this clip? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBn37HEnv0

[Hendrik]

Is this true?

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-dkNr77QGnY&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-dkNr77QGnY

Somehow Izzo mis understood Gary , take a look at what Gary says in this utube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u63OJRXyq68&feature=youtube_gdata -


Also,

Izzo demo in 3.45 to 3. 5 1 is a kiss of death violating the law of momentum. It is like a person try to stop a rolling stone roll down from the hill.

[Paddington]

Somehow Izzo mis understood Gary , take a look at what Gary says in this utube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u63OJRXyq68&feature=youtube_gdata -


Also,

Izzo demo in 3.45 to 3. 5 1 is a kiss of death violating the law of momentum. It is like a person try to stop a rolling stone roll down from the hill.


Thanks for posting the Garry Lam clip. In all of the fights I have had, slipping and letting the opponent pass has worked for me every time.

[Hendrik]

Thanks for posting the Garry Lam clip. In all of the fights I have had, slipping and letting the opponent pass has worked for me every time.


Not compete with the opponent momentum is a main key. Not to mention if one is smaller size.


just a simple math. P = m x v.

Under the same speed A big guy with a weight of 200ib will have twice the momentum of a 100lb guy.

If the 100lb guy just want to parr the big guy momentum, he has to double his speed.

Now, with Izzo case, the big guy has already fire the strike. Meaning the momentum has started.

The small guy has to speed up from zero speed to double the big guy's speed just to parr him. Not even be able to dissolve the momentum yet, since dissolve momentum needs higher momentum.


Now, what is the chance for the small guy to do that? Accelerate from zero speed to say three times the speed of the big guy Just to handle the incoming momentum , in the short amount of time and distance? You will not see this in mma fight. But kungfu movie.
That is physical reality one needs to face.

How is this Izzo type of demo can effectively handle the bigger size? Can't.