Wing Chun and Boxing

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Extrapolating(!!!??? Why not just go and learn an effective technique from someone who actually knows how to do it instead of extrapolating and probably getting it wrong?

I've been on the receiving end of a punch like this. Afterwards I tested its structure, power, speed and effective range myself. I'm happy with the results, and satisfied that it can be observed within the above mentioned chum kiu mechanics.

Regarding Chum Kiu's turning double Lan Sao upper limb mechanics and intent, what do you see? Are you allowed to look for yourself, or does someone look for you?

[t_niehoff]

If one uses the form as a blueprint for building on, the same type punch occurs in BJ for me.

I disagree with the notion of using movements from the forms as "blueprints for building on". I think that is just another way to do whatever the hell you want and call it WCK.

Besides, is it efficient to learn something that you will need to"extrapolate" or "build on" to make work when you can learn the "end product"?

What I think this process does is just produce people who are doing poor boxing and poor kickboxing -- just like the guys who extrapolate stuff to the ground: they just end up doing poor groundfighting.

The lower Ginger punch at the end of BJ has always been the seed for using hooks in my VT. It uses the twist/turning body and elbow behaviour to be a hook but make the fist travel in a straight line. Its quick and can be very heavy.

It may be quick, but it won't be "heavy", certainly not like a boxer's shovel hooks.

By the time i reached BJ i had already realised from regular sparring with VT partners and KBers that i needed this type of action at times.....

Yes, if you fight on the outside and in noncontact like boxers and kickboxers, what you do will need to "look" like what boxers and kickboxers do (that's the nature of that range).

No need to look for mechanics from elbows or Lan Sao etc.

The lan sao is not a hook punch, and as such, it won't use the same mechanics as a hook punch.

Faster, sure depending on the person. Shorter, in what dimension hawkings LOL
care to elaborate Dale ?

Here's an example. Put your hands up in a boxing guard. As your opponent throws a straight at your chin, slip it but *leave you lead hand fixed to the point in space it was before you slipped* (your other goes with your head). If you do this, you'll see that your elbox of your lead hand comes "out" from your body as your body moved. Now let that punch fly around/inside his straight in a direct, straight, and short line. That (the hook) is a shorter punch than a straight.

[Matrix]

Besides, is it efficient to learn something that you will need to"extrapolate" or "build on" to make work when you can learn the "end product"?.

I think it depends on how you look at it. Learning any skill is a progression. You start with basics and build on them to achieve higher skill levels. You don't sit a beginner down at a piano and ask them to play a concerto. However there should be no need to "extrapolate" the end result. It should be part of a predefined path of progression. Having said that, different people learn different ways, so you may be able to refer to some dynamic that they already understand and ask them to use that skill in a slightly different way.

What I think this process does is just produce people who are doing poor boxing and poor kickboxing -- just like the guys who extrapolate stuff to the ground: they just end up doing poor groundfighting.

I've not been watching the forum as closely as I used, so I am struck by the difference in the tone of your post - at least that is my perception. I see what you're saying and can see how you draw these conclusions.

BTW, your example at the end of the post seems very WC in the way you describe it. You have left the front hand out to cover, changed the line and hit.

Bill

[Liddel]

I disagree with the notion of using movements from the forms as "blueprints for building on". I think that is just another way to do whatever the hell you want and call it WCK.

I disagree also.
Others can use that as an excuse, i dont. The mechanics are the same so your point doesnt apply in this instance. The applied action has the same mechanics as when trained in the form.

when you face different opponents you take the blueprint or habbit actions of what the forms have you do and apply them to a specific opponent thus making you have to apply minor changes....from my POV this is building on the forms.

like a height change for instance. Dont make out other styles dont have this to. My KBer sparring partners complain when i hold the pads to high or to low. I mean do they expect to only fight guys at the same height or something LOL

Besides, is it efficient to learn something that you will need to"extrapolate" or "build on" to make work when you can learn the "end product"?

Depends. your acting like the before and after actions are different beasts. IME Its making an action personal, to suit you. And is common in every art.

Extrapolating something so far that the end result doesnt resemble anything near the original action is silly and what i believe your focusing on. I agree not good.

It may be quick, but it won't be "heavy", certainly not like a boxer's shovel hooks.

Tell that to my sparring partners LOL. They should be lucky im no boxer then

Yes, if you fight on the outside and in noncontact like boxers and kickboxers, what you do will need to "look" like what boxers and kickboxers do (that's the nature of that range).

Look is not the issue. It will need to help you avoid damage while delivering your own. The idea a VT guy should work and stay in the pocket is absurd. you bridge in and out just like any other art. What you do while there is the difference IME. Your VT is mucho different to mine by the sounds T.

The lan sao is not a hook punch, and as such, it won't use the same mechanics as a hook punch.

I agree.

Here's an example. Put your hands up in a boxing guard. As your opponent throws a straight at your chin, slip it but *leave you lead hand fixed to the point in space it was before you slipped* (your other goes with your head). If you do this, you'll see that your elbox of your lead hand comes "out" from your body as your body moved. Now let that punch fly around/inside his straight in a direct, straight, and short line. That (the hook) is a shorter punch than a straight.

ok good, thanks for the example T. This is similar to the punch in my BJ only in the respect the body essentially is creating the roundness to said action but the path the weapon travels (your fist) is straight....(although i make a fist and dont use the ginger punch like in the form) thats me building on the form making it mine...it works better for me.

DREW

[anerlich]

I don't buy the anti-"extrapolate" argument either. There are plenty of examples in BJJ or wrestling where a technique is similar to another technique, an armbar from guard similar to one from mount, knee ride, back, top of turtle, etc. etc. If you don't make the jump to seeing techniques come in "families", your BJJ progress will be extremely slow.

Some things can be built on certain strong basic techniques, other's can't. You can't for example extrapolate an armbar into a double leg. But to suggest that everything is different and you cannot develop a wide range of effective techniques from a smaller range of basic effective stuff is disproved daily in all sorts of disciplines.

[t_niehoff]

I disagree also.
Others can use that as an excuse, i dont. The mechanics are the same so your point doesnt apply in this instance. The applied action has the same mechanics as when trained in the form.

No one trains mechanics in a form, as mechanics are learned from doing the task. What people do is take the mechanics they practice and put them into their forms (whether they are aware of it or not).

when you face different opponents you take the blueprint or habbit actions of what the forms have you do and apply them to a specific opponent thus making you have to apply minor changes....from my POV this is building on the forms.

Yes, I understood your view -- I just think it is wrong. A person can learn fundamental skills, though not from forms, and then use those skills. Open skills are by definition adaptable to the environment (like different opponents).

Depends. your acting like the before and after actions are different beasts. IME Its making an action personal, to suit you. And is common in every art.

Extrapolating something so far that the end result doesnt resemble anything near the original action is silly and what i believe your focusing on. I agree not good.

The way people learn and develop psychophysical skills, like fighting, is universal. You develop a skill by beginning with the task (what it is you are trying to do). You don't start with some generic movement and then try to extrapolate things you can use it for.

Tell that to my sparring partners LOL. They should be lucky im no boxer then

On the internet everyone hits like a mule.

Look is not the issue. It will need to help you avoid damage while delivering your own. The idea a VT guy should work and stay in the pocket is absurd. you bridge in and out just like any other art. What you do while there is the difference IME. Your VT is mucho different to mine by the sounds T.

No, WCK is an attached fighting method. It is not "macho" but relies on getting contact, staying in contact, and then controlling the opponent while hitting. Moving in and out is what boxers and kickboxers do, it is an outside game and WCK is an infighting method (why all of the classical WCK drills are contact drills). If you fight on the outside, you will see that you can make very little of WCK movement work and you'll end up moving like a kickboxer (because you need to). Just like if you try to make WCK work on the ground, you'll not beable to make your WCK movement work and you'll end up looking like a BJJ/wrestler.

ok good, thanks for the example T. This is similar to the punch in my BJ only in the respect the body essentially is creating the roundness to said action but the path the weapon travels (your fist) is straight....(although i make a fist and dont use the ginger punch like in the form) thats me building on the form making it mine...it works better for me.

This is not the movement from the form at all -- all you've done is use a boxer's hook and call it your extrapolation of the form. Your extrapolation changes the way the body moves, how you make the fist, etc., changing everything about it. Then you call it your "own". Yes, it is your own. Your own creation that has nothing really to do with the movement in the biu jee form.

[Liddel]

No one trains mechanics in a form, as mechanics are learned from doing the task.

Indeed we are different.

On the internet everyone hits like a mule.

Im humble enough to realise that i dont hit like a mule. But perhaps my sparring partners are pussies LOL because i have hurt them in sparring as they have hurt me.

Point being - a boxers Shovel hooks may be heavier like you mentioned but what ive got works for me.....so far.

No, WCK is an attached fighting method. It is not "macho" but relies on getting contact, staying in contact, and then controlling the opponent while hitting.
EDIT
Moving in and out is what boxers and kickboxers do,

No comment.

This is not the movement from the form at all.

really ?

-- all you've done is use a boxer's hook and call it your extrapolation of the form.

Your extrapolation changes the way the body moves, how you make the fist, etc., changing everything about it.

Youve confused me with the original poster of that comment T, go back. Im not keen on big changes but to not let actions grow from experience is stupid also. I agree with Andrews post above.

Id be more keen to hear your ideas how ever different to mine if you didnt assume what my VT does and doesnt contain. Ive mentioned what MY Chuns focus is in that sence (the BJ action ive mentioned). Take it or leave it man.

Good chat

DREW

[sanjuro_ronin]

FWIW:
A typical counter to the jab or cross ( both straight punches) is the hook, and by counter I don't mean an "after the fact" counter punch either.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Typically, a Jab or a straight lead will travel between 2 to 3 feet, depending on the distance of the target.
Typically a hook, witch is an infighting technique, will travel between 8-10", a foot at the most.
Hooks are short and tight.
Perhaps some are confusing "roundhouse punches" or "haymakers" with properly executed hooks.

[Liddel]

Typically, a Jab or a straight lead will travel between 2 to 3 feet, depending on the distance of the target.
Typically a hook, witch is an infighting technique, will travel between 8-10", a foot at the most.
Hooks are short and tight.
Perhaps some are confusing "roundhouse punches" or "haymakers" with properly executed hooks.

I wouldnt argue with that....

I also think the confusion is coming from the fact some that some have boxing experience here on a VT forum and when they read a chunner write "straight punch" they think of a boxers jab or straight lead like you mention man, launched from further out.

All of VT is infighting techs so unless its specified otherwise i take the words "straight punch" as been the VT straight.

DREW