Wing Chun Strategy

[Redrooster]

Could someone please post a link or comment on the essentials of WC strategy.

Ive done considerable reading and am left confused. Assuredly some of the

confusion comes from watching too many you tube clips and seeing far too many

styles claiming to be WC which I suspect are not.


Here are some of the concepts I associate with WC...

Close range blocking/ parrying, trapping and rapid striking.

Low kicks, for attacking and jamming opponents kicks.

Throws accompanied by strong finishing blows on the ground.

I am aware of the center line theory and angled attack but do not understand

them well.


I have also read about elbows being used and have seen full contact sparring

with students climbing over the opponents guard and using what appeared to be

verticle elbows to the clavicle. Are these techniques traditional WC as well?

Any positive thoughts are appreciated.

RR

[sanjuro_ronin]

Punch face, rinse and repeat as needed.

[monji112000]

Could someone please post a link or comment on the essentials of WC strategy.
Ive done considerable reading and am left confused. Assuredly some of the
confusion comes from watching too many you tube clips and seeing far too many
RR

If you are attempting to create a list of essential "WC" strategies from various schools, clips, ect.. your wasting your time.
First off they vary too much ("styles of WC". Second off you can't really do that from clips, ect..
Not to be negative but its honest. any good fighting style can't be summed up by a few lines. (even the "strategy"). Strategy should reflect the situation you are presented not the other way around.

basic plan = don't get knocked out. how do you go about it.. anything you feel can help the basic plan come to fruition.

[Mr Punch]

Punch face, rinse and repeat as needed.

I never rinse: I like dirty fighting.

Throws accompanied by strong finishing blows on the ground.

There are lots of sites that will deal with your qs. And like here some of it will doubtless cause trouble among other practitioners!

But my opinion on this point FWIW (the other points seem OK so far) is that

a) wing chun mostly works with sweeps and stamps over throws. This is because we don't want to break our structure or risk getting caught up and taken down (not to say this works - but it's the theory)

b) The following to the ground and 'string finishing blows' is a crock. A fundamental wing chun adage says: nearest target - nearest weapon. Following this adage if you can stay on your feet you stamp and kick the thrown/swept target, you DO NOT follow them down. I suspect this following down and punching thing is a recent development by people trying to compensate for chun not having any groundfighting and half-arsedly inventing some! Wing chun structure and the wing chun punches are not designed for following anyone down anywhere, and what looks to be strong are unrooted arm strength only punches.

I am aware of the center line theory and angled attack but do not understand

them well.

Centre line is an imaginary line down the centre of your opponent. You attack it. From your centre line. It's that simple.

However, chunners being the ultimate theorists, it's been made more complicated in the name of simplification!
Hint: the centre line is a line, not a plane. It doesn't matter which way you are facing, you can still attack your opponent directly, you just have to change the weapon.
Hint 2: it's a theory. Do not become its slave.

I have also read about elbows being used and have seen full contact sparring

with students climbing over the opponents guard and using what appeared to be

verticle elbows to the clavicle. Are these techniques traditional WC as well?

Not sure what you mean by 'climbing over the opponents guard'...? Vertical elbows as in point down? No, they are not found in any of the several wing chun lines I've been exposed to. I have seen them among some practitioners of Leung Ting's line online tho.

There's one more basic concept that makes glaring omission (actually prob more than one, but I'm out of time...): straight line attack. A straight line is always faster than a curve... so for example, if someone attacks with a hook, you should punch straight up the middle and you'll win. This is, of course, utter bollocks in many cases. There are also hooks and round kicks in wing chun, but you won't learn them for a while.

Any positive thoughts are appreciated.

George W Bush can't serve another term.

[monji112000]

A straight line is always faster than a curve...

just to split hairs and pick a fight
thats 100% wrong. A straight line isn't always faster than a curve. This is the difference between theory and reality. If this was the case nobody would use curve lines for anything. It depends on the situation, most of all in relation to fighting .. timing, distance, reaction. Many boxers are able to counter straight punches with hooks.
and the faster method between two points is not always a straight line. Just try driving a perfect straight line from NY to LA. you will end up in space. If you instead drove a curved line(well not perfectly) then it would be the fastest.

But hey what do I know? Just keep throwing those powerless punches!! Maybe one will magically knock someone out.

[Mr Punch]

just to split hairs and pick a fight
thats 100% wrong. A straight line isn't always faster than a curve. This is the difference between theory and reality. If this was the case nobody would use curve lines for anything. It depends on the situation, most of all in relation to fighting .. timing, distance, reaction. Many boxers are able to counter straight punches with hooks.
and the faster method between two points is not always a straight line. Just try driving a perfect straight line from NY to LA. you will end up in space. If you instead drove a curved line(well not perfectly) then it would be the fastest.

But hey what do I know? Just keep throwing those powerless punches!! Maybe one will magically knock someone out.

Retard. Read my post, rather than just the bit you cut out.

[AmanuJRY]

Protect yourself with your attack!

[monji112000]

Retard. Read my post, rather than just the bit you cut out.

Sticks and stones... I did read your post. I thought would would be fun to talk about the the topic and also point out how different styles can be( and understanding of concepts).

another most fun topic is that of torque. stand square and never turning your body only using your hand to generate power. Another "strategy" adopted by some styles and not by others. the list is endless but the point remains... its like comparing apples and vodka.

[Mr Punch]

There's one more basic concept that makes glaring omission (actually prob more than one, but I'm out of time...): straight line attack. A straight line is always faster than a curve...

... This is, of course, utter bollocks in many cases.

What are you arguing about you eejit? I said in many cases and you said 100%... sorry... how wrong could I be?

[k gledhill]

http://www.philippbayer.info/index.php

heres some ...new video

[jigahus]

Punch face, rinse and repeat as needed.

I approve of this theory.

[YungChun]

thats 100% wrong. A straight line isn't always faster than a curve.

No it isn't but it is always shorter...

The main concept of WCK IMO is about an energy or power delivery system. This operates on the famed Centerline theory that states, simply that two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time..

So we try to fill up the space between ourselves and our opponent..

How do you prevent someone from getting into a room?

Lock the door?

But locks and doors are weak...

But if you fill the room up with junk they'll have a hard time getting in.

So we fill up the space between us and the opponent---with attack, in general..

There are a lot of supporting ideas in the system but they mainly support and maximize the efficiency of the main concept.

For a visual imagine that your power is directed in the form of a big azz high pressure water hose.. The idea is to aim that energy stream from your center to his.

The idea is to overwhelm him with this continuous power. As you move around or into the opponent you maintain focus of this power at his center and blast him out of his socks.

His resistance if in the center is either blown away by your 'stream of attack', negated by flanking him (changing the angle/moving the line) or if his resistance crosses laterally it is ignored (no unnecessary hand chasing) in order to maintain the continuity and directness of the attacking force that you project into him.

Continuous, powerful (no excessive force against force tho) and direct--that's WCK IMO..

But the Devil's in the details and how folks go about this will vary..

[k gledhill]

Could someone please post a link or comment on the essentials of WC strategy.

Ive done considerable reading and am left confused. Assuredly some of the

confusion comes from watching too many you tube clips and seeing far too many

styles claiming to be WC which I suspect are not.


Here are some of the concepts I associate with WC...

Close range blocking/ parrying, trapping and rapid striking.

Low kicks, for attacking and jamming opponents kicks.

Throws accompanied by strong finishing blows on the ground.

I am aware of the center line theory and angled attack but do not understand

them well.


I have also read about elbows being used and have seen full contact sparring

with students climbing over the opponents guard and using what appeared to be

verticle elbows to the clavicle. Are these techniques traditional WC as well?

Any positive thoughts are appreciated.

RR

strategy comes from the weapons of the system not chi-sao.

the guiding idea is that you are facing an EQUALLY armed adversary...given this scenario, where would you want to be if he/she charged you with 2 shartp knives ? and how would you approach the clash ? run and evade ? or counter by flanking the charge at precisely the right time?

bare hands have a tighter footwork , compared to knives...allowing for the extended blade. Knife footwork is taught later on to avoid confusion. The ideas stay relatively the same only the knives dont X the line like the hands do.

[MapoTofu]

Hi Red Rooster,
You raised a very interesting question and I apologize in advance for my ramblings. The concepts you associate with WC, upon inspection, IMO are not unique to Wing Chun and this humbles me because I can't think of an answer.

Centerline theory, which can assign gates to yourself certainly must surely be understood by other Arts. Similarly, "the shortest distance between two points" concept cannot only be unique to Wing Chun. Even circular punches, it can be argued, travels a "straight line" if viewed in relation to the target. As the puncher turns/torques his body, the path defined by the fist as it races towards the target, is pretty straight.

Strategies in the Kuen Kuit can similarly be attributed to other styles. So, I too am at a loss. What defines Wing Chun? I don't think it's strategies, I don't think it's theories. I wonder how our Ancestors defined it? Heck, I wonder how you define it.

M.T.

[Redrooster]

Lets try it this way.....

Il use a western boxer as an example as I believe they are the most difficult to defeat for many styles. The footwork and highly effective handwork pose potential problems for most styles. Ill lay out strategy for these fictional battles of styles.

Style vs style is always fun to speculate, and you may not agree with my ideas laid out here ,but remember this is about what would a Wing Chun man do ultimately.....

Against a boxer, in a street situation:

A Judoka would - work inside his punch, take him by his shirt throw him to the ground and follow him down to chioke himout or break an arm.

This fight would be decided on who scores first with thier strength , a knockout or a throw


A Tae Kwon Do fighter would- seek to fight at an outside distance, in his power range and slightly out of the boxers most effective range, looking to score a victory via kicks or kick/fist combos...

This fight would go to the boxer if he has any skill at jamming a kick or sweeping
Likely the same for a Praying Mantis kung fu man.

Ba Gua fighter would- circle and attempt to exploit any opening with a palm strike.

While ba Gua intrigues me I believe a western boxers footwork is superior even to Ba Guas and his arsenal of punches is superior as well

Muay Thai man- Strong leg kicks to neutralize forward momentum, clinch and elbows/knees to finish.

Muay Thai along with the Judoka in my opinion have the best chance of defeating the boxer. the thai fighter has the advantage outside and in the clinch, the boxer has superior hands and footwork- flip a coin

Now I know some of you will disagree with what Ive said but I believe this to be correct at least in a general sense.

Ive always believed that a boxer has the edge on the WC man, with superior footwork and an outside game, jabs and straight rights , as well as a decent inside game with hooks and uppercuts.

However the more I read about WC tactics the more I like it and the more I want to learn. I admit my knowledge of it is less than Japanese and Korean arts. How would WC deal with hooks and uppercuts inside as well as the footwork and head movement of a boxer?

In an attempt to answer my own question I will look to a recent boxing match you may have seen. Ricky Hatton vs. F. mayweather Jr. Hatton pressed the attack, his style is to press and jam the more tradition mayweather. Now in this fight Hatton lost, but in a street encounter he would have overwhelmed maywether, at least in my opinion. Would this be the best WC tactic, to jam the boxer?

So you tell me how a Wing Chun man beats a western boxer in a street fight?

I look forward to your replies!

RR