Does 'nanba' relate to your wing chun?

[Mr Punch]

'Nanba' is a style of walking which depending on who you believe was used by anyone from samurai in some schools to the whole of the Japanese people up to the Meiji Era, to the Mongol Empire, to the Ottoman military...

Put basically it refers to walking without swinging your arms, by moving the same side arm as leg, and in the very least, it is a fundamental principle of power generation in many if not most Japanese kobujutsu (old school martial arts).

It goes against the fundamental principles of most modern sports dynamics which all rely on ****ing or winding up your body to use a coiled motion.

Given that many wing chun lines seem to have some reference to not compromising the integrity of the chest and keeping hip and shoulder in alignment, does anyone have anything to add?

A couple of articles:
http://www.newschoolaikido.com/stories/masterofthegame.pdf
http://www.taiiku.tsukuba.ac.jp/~sshimizu/research6.htm
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...57C0A96F958260

[southernkf]

Can you explain how it "MIGHT" be used in wing chun? I doubt many understand what it is your talking about, I know I don't. So I can't really say if I do it or not. I am not explicitly aware of doing this, but perhaps it is under a different name in wing chun.

I don't "walk" in wing chun so I don't swing my arms in any fashion. Of course I move, but it is not like walking. I use walking as a specific term of normal moving and not generally as in moving. If I am not in a danger zone, I am not as concerned with specific movements. It is only when I am in fighting range and contact range where I am concerned with how I move. Typically it is very little and in a way to control the opponent the best I can. There isn't any swinging motions in my arm.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Doesn't seem natural...

[southernkf]

lol, I guess I should have looked at the links. My favorite quote was:

''But now in modern Japan, there's no walking education at all. People walk any way they want to.''

Man, he would freak if he lived through the 60's

Anyways, like above, it seems unnatural. I am sure they have a good reason for what they do, but it seems too much. The mental image I get is some of the Aikido and Samurai stuff I have seen, but I don't know if that is correct. One of the articals talked about the Nanba as a sort of walking as in every day thing. I think this type of walking is counter productive and not how the body was meant to work. Perhaps they found a unqiue use for the walking for specific activities, like martial arts as the last article suggested. Then perhaps it is useful. But it is interesting that the second article seems to suggest it MAY exist but there is little information to prove it does, yet the second seems to imply it is a reality. Sounds a little contradictory to me.

In any case, I don't see any similarities in wing chun.

[anerlich]

It sounds like its original intent was at least partly militaristic. I can't see anyone winning at athletics or race walking with this sort of gait.

Moving the same side arm and leg in concert has obvious martial applications, but even karate has plenty of reverse punches and the like. I can't see that extrapolating this all the way out to walking is going to help your fighting much, or your walking for that matter.

AS you say, I think this contradicts much of modern sports science and kinesiology. And I'm also reminde of the proverb of the centipede who tried to analyse his gait and ended up unable to move. Not everything needs to be tweaked.

[Mr Punch]

I wasn't clear enough in my original post I guess, though I thought it came across in the articles.

I'm not just talking about walking: I'm talking about applying the principles of same-side limb movement to wing chun. It's also not a question of extrapolating your body dynamics all the way out to walking - to the women and girls in Japanese society it was considered elegant and graceful, as they were taught to glide across the tatami with a measured number of steps; but the same principles were a part of the samurai's martial body dynamics - the idea being that they were to live this dynamic, not just assume it in combat. I'm not saying that going that far is a useful paradigm for modern MA practitioners, but I am saying that nanba is useful to train, and I can especially see many useful parallels for chunners.

I've heard it stated in at least mainstream Yip Man wing chun lines that the torso shouldn't be compromised in a twisting motion.

Let's look at some common principles (also bear in mind that karate is primarily a modern art):

Nanba (obviously as applied to MA)

1) No telegraphing (there is no ****ing, just explosive movement from the same side)
2) Instant direction change (again, as the body is not twisting it doesn't have to untwist for you to step off preserving your structural integrity in order to change direction quickly)
3) Stance becomes unimportant - relatively slightly squared natural stance is all - so you can easily strike/kick from and to any angle, with either side, with good connection from ground to fist.
4) There can be reverse punch actions but it prevents twisting too much and losing energy at the hips.
5) Hip to shoulder connection.

Chun

1) No telegraphing (just explosive movements from whichever side)
2) Instant direction change (no excessive twisting, just flowing into sticking/striking with whatever nearest body part)
3) Stance becomes unimportant - after initial training stance natural stance is more important especially before the actual moment of contact - the natural stance can be seen as a loose relatively slightly squared horse/goat gripping stance (irrelevant as to feet at 45 or not) so you can easily strike/kick from and to any angle, with either side, with good connection from ground to fist.
4) Punches with the rear arm are also common, but emphasising not overcommitting to prevent twisting too much and losing energy at the hips.
5) Hip to shoulder/elbow connection.

Pole warm-up exercises are especially relevant/similar to shin-tai-jiku and other martial nanba drills...

Anyone getting this?

It's not supposed to be a big revelation, just might be help for some people in reassessing their training paradigms.

[southernkf]

I am not so sure nanba is relevant in wing chun, though perhaps there are parallels. The upper an lower body should be coordinated and unified. Atl east that is the goal for my current understanding. I don't think twisting the waist is a direct relation to Nanba but is found in many styles, including some technqiues in Hung Gar. Lots of power is derived from rotating from the feet and hips rather than the waist. Other arts use much more waist.

Wing chun isn't preoccupied with one side or the other, as nanba seems to be. I feel certain motions feel more comfortable if your in a certain stance as the knees can absorb the force more readily. But it doesn't seem to dictated by the same side theory, though it often maybe. Wing chun seems to be much more ambidextrous than many other art and not use things like the reverse punch (which is more in accordance with normal body motion of walking). As we bik ma with the punches we can hit with either hand, for an example.

I think there are some similarities. It seems balance and control as well as maximizing your efforts are some of the key byproducts of wing chun and seems to be part of this Nanba. But what is it your looking for? Are you looking for a relation between the two? Exploring Nanba and looking for parallels? Looking to improve your wing chun by experimenting with other ideas?

[Lugoman]

Would this be the Nanba principle at play if you were in your fighting stance, one leg forward, you shoot out a Tan Sau on the side that is the leg forward to deflect an attack, and then you shuffle forward and the tan turns into a punch?

I sometimes manage to pull this off in free-style single hand chi sao. It seems to work well... for now

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I am not sure I see this as being applicable as structure is not reliant on same side symetry. Try this for example, take a Taun Sau Position with the right leg extended and the right arm forming Taun, apply pressure. Now place the Right leg Back and apply Taun with the right arm forward and left leg forward, which is stronger? Now do the same with Bong Sau and see which side feels stronger or more stable.

Maybe I am missing something here but it just does not seem all that practical to me. Besides, if you lead with one side then does'nt that compromise your ability to hit with either hand? I am sure there are times when you would want to extend one side over the other but as a whole I do not see it being all that beneficial to WC in general. But hey what do I know

[anerlich]

I'm not sure that nanba necessarily prevents twisting. It's arguable that swinging the opposite arm to leg might help one stay more front on.

[Mr Punch]

I am not so sure nanba is relevant in wing chun, though perhaps there are parallels. The upper an lower body should be coordinated and unified. Atl east that is the goal for my current understanding.

Yep, there are parallels, and although upper and lower body unification is one of them, of course there could be many ways to achieve that.

I don't think twisting the waist is a direct relation to Nanba but is found in many styles, including some technqiues in Hung Gar. Lots of power is derived from rotating from the feet and hips rather than the waist. Other arts use much more waist.

Twisting the waist is not forbidden as such, but the basic rules of nanba-based arts (as wing chun) is that upper and lower body (i.e. hips and shoulders) are unified, so the abdomen/chest are not twisted in on themselves and causing a block in the issuance of power from the feet.

Personally I always went for rotation for power shots but after I learned about nanba-based movement in my koryu class and got deeper into biu jee by using its small hip movement to reassess my chum kiu, I realised that the straight-body principle is a lot stronger than I'd thought.

Wing chun isn't preoccupied with one side or the other, as nanba seems to be. I feel certain motions feel more comfortable if your in a certain stance as the knees can absorb the force more readily. But it doesn't seem to dictated by the same side theory, though it often maybe. Wing chun seems to be much more ambidextrous than many other art and not use things like the reverse punch (which is more in accordance with normal body motion of walking). As we bik ma with the punches we can hit with either hand, for an example.

I don't know how you work out nanba to be based on 'one side or the other'. Quite the opposite. As there is no stance other than 'shizentai' (natural posture), there is no favouring one side and any movement from that posture is natural, quick and untelegraphed. I learned the same thing in wing chun. Stance work (inc of course SLT) are stance work, to learn the fundamental relationship between your body and the ground, and when you fight basically any stance is OK: your wing chun stance becomes your natural stance and your natural stance becomes your wing chun stance. When I'm standing on a crowded train and I can't reach the strap, I'm standing in a wing chun stance. And no, I don't mean the pigeon-toed stance itslef, but I can feel that stance.

This is why sinking to the tanden is in wing chun is wrong to me. There should be no overreliance on the lower tanden: that is just one point of many in whole body-awareness.

I think there are some similarities. It seems balance and control as well as maximizing your efforts are some of the key byproducts of wing chun and seems to be part of this Nanba. But what is it your looking for? Are you looking for a relation between the two? Exploring Nanba and looking for parallels? Looking to improve your wing chun by experimenting with other ideas?

I'm not looking for anything. My wing chun is my wing chun. My nanba-based work is just that. There are strong parallels which help each other, though mostly the nanba-based stuff helps the chun, but I am not altering either.

Just thought I'd mention some of these parallels and see if anyone else had experienced anything similar.

[Liddel]

Punch - After quickly reading the thread id say i use this concept in my VT, if i understand you right.

As far as the unity thing goes id say it happens often during sparring and Chi sao related drills.

Someone pulls on my Bong i step foward with the same side leg as the bong for supporting the action as i close the gap.

Jab type punches - Falling step - same side leg adding stiff power to the punch.

Someone mentioned earlier if i block a hook with a Tan like action and follow up with the same side into a punch the same leg follows and supports the power in the punch....

I would expect alot of simlarities in co ordinating hand actions and horse when comparing my VT with the walking Senario you mentioned.... although i do twirl some punches with the shoulders and waist and of course utilise the old VT turning horse - anywhere around 30 - 40 degrees left or right.

So id say its present in my VT , sure...

DREW

[LoneTiger108]

I found the articles very interesting, and can see a relative similarity to some Wing Chun movements but obviously like others here I definately couldn't say that that is 'all' we do.

Looking at this extract:

"Scholars have noted that more ritualized kinds of movement -- in noh opera, kabuki theater, folk dancing or kendo -- usually involve the right leg moving with the right arm, or the left leg with the left arm. Namba itself is a kabuki term referring to this kind of synchronism between arms and legs."

I think its important to consider the historcal refernces first as most 'drawings' etc of the time pictured a simple 2 dimensional image, rather like the Egyptians, where most people are seen with the same arm and leg forward as it was easier for the artist to draw or carve.

For the 'Martial' connection you need only look at the 'lead jab' in Boxing, the 'lunge puch' of Karate or 'long fist' of Wushu. This may be due to the overwhelming 'driving force' the body can gain by using this momentum to its extreme.

In Wing Chun, I believe we refer to a similar theory we call 'Side Body' or 'Pien San'. In essence, any time your 'weight' is mainly set on the leg of the leading or punching arm we are doing 'nanba'... IMO

[southernkf]

Hi Mr Punch,

Thanks for more info on the subject. My assesments and conclusions are based obviously based on VERY limited information, so I probably misunderstood nanba principles and how they are expressed. That is probably the difficulty in a topic like this, where few can really comment on it. What I was refering to was something about left side and right side being coordinated in an unnatural way. By unatural I just mean different from how people normally cordinate themselfs in walking. I got the impression Nanba stressed the left side cordinated together and the right side in some manner. In wing chun, I was just noteing that it really doesn't matter as long as there is a good connection between the ground, our hands, and everything in between.

I am sure Nanba is a very sophisticated method, so I don't want to sell it short or pretend to understand it enough to criticize it. Just offer some discussion points and that will hopefully bring out more info about it.

I myself find that much of wing chun is subjective. Diseminating information is difficult because it seems to me that wing chun is a very personal art. It isn't like boxing say, where you can gauge your punching skill because you can hit harder. Boxing has a nice feedback system where you can tell if your doing it correctly. It is easy to judge. With wing chun it is different. I get confused by terms often used and much later figure out I was using them in the wrong manner. A training partner and I have several different arts between us we have studied and other interests that seem to help us decipher wing chun. Much like the Rosetta Stone. Knowing Greek won't help you with Hiergplyphics, but if you know Greek and can figure out some of the missing stuff, your well on your way. I have noticed similarities in other arts that have helpped me to understand some aspects of wing chun better. Some Tai Chi principles as well as other stuff seemed to make things clear for me. So that is why I was asking what you were looking for in Nanba. Maybe you saw something there similar to what wing chun does and maybe it was useful for you to look into it.

[Liddel]

To me it makes perfect sence to back hand actions up with the same side leg during the exchange stage.

For me using VT, the hand action is first - followed shorty by the supporting leg. I find it supports my power lines of cetain punches and especially when you are closing a gap and moving foward already.

Often when im backing up i switch my lead leg to the rear and give a punch from the new lead side, the fact that my lead leg is supporting the punch on the side adds great power for me and means i can hurt you when im backing up if i land, which is a useful tool against those that preasure me

Id say "Nanba" is less utilised when im in a lead leg stance though, meaning i have to employ the waist and turning horse for added power and to be explosive.

But in situations like the clinch or face to face senarios where i use a neutral stance (Chi Sao type stance), the application of the Nanba concept is even more importnat for me as a VT guy.

Breaking an opponents bridge taking the center or turning the opponent off line is mostly accomplished (for me) by way of using hand leg unity often favouring same side leg hand action.

I was thinking about this last night, i use it quite a bit - although i wouldnt call it Nanba but its essentially the same idea....

Im curious how you might think it applies to your style of fighting ?

DREW