Friendly debate on weight distribution in shifting

[k gledhill]

Apparently most people who practice WCK don't fight at all.



No we don't -- we do it extremely well. We're able to walk around for days at a time without falling down!



More theoretical nonsense.

http://discovermagazine.com/2001/jul/featphysics

tell him I just copy pasted ....

[LoneTiger108]

IMHHHHO

if WCK is like this then WCK is over.

Agred 100%!

Mainly due to the fact that our "Ed" in the clip just bursts into a yawn the moment shifting is mentioned!

[t_niehoff]

http://discovermagazine.com/2001/jul/featphysics

tell him I just copy pasted ....

I was a physics major as an undergraduate (and I earned a bachelor of science in physics). Physics won't help you learn or understand WCK or fighting. That approach -- looking to physics -- is nonsense. It's what theoretical nonfighters, martial art nerds, do.

[CFT]

I agree with Terence. Using science to analyse physical movement is OK but one can usually only analyse isolated movements. It would not be realistic to extrapolate any insight to a complex one-on-one encounter like a fight.

I did find an interesting part of that article. About how Keynan women from certain tribes carrying heavy loads on their heads actually were more efficient in their locomotion. I have, at times, done turning and stepping from the Chum Kiu forms with my (then) baby son in my arms. It has always felt much better than when unloaded.

[Hendrik]

I agree with Terence. Using science to analyse physical movement is OK but one can usually only analyse isolated movements. It would not be realistic to extrapolate any insight to a complex one-on-one encounter like a fight.

The serious problem one usually doesnt aware totally with the science analysis is that one cut down a dynamic flow of action and sample it frame by frame and then do the analysis on a particular frame.

Then, one keep talking about that frame and trying to mimic that frame, which is just a static frame and no longer dynamic.

How the heck is mimic a frame can represent the whole dynamic flow?

It cant.

So, why is people cant do fighting? fighting is dynamic. and anyone keep training trying to perfect that "frame" according to science is actually solving a wrong issue which is real life NON exist.

It is like trying to make perfect a photograph and thinking by making perfect a photograph somedays it can turn into a video clip. It is totally a mis logic but i guess most just goes blind.

Wake up WCner.

[CFT]

It not that (IMO). Knowing how is not necessarily knowing why.

Even if you know how to perform a movement efficiently, with power, etc. You still need to know how to apply it in the right context.

[chusauli]

WCK is basically concerned with balance. When a force acts upon you, you have to be stable or else it will topple or delay you.

[chusauli]

That's true.. but is the bik ma step walking? Is there really a point of "falling" during any part of that step?

There is centered movement, balanced motion and unbalanced, off centered motion... The former is the goal...

In Bik Ma, it is the WCK person's attempt to minimize unbalance, but there is a point when uprooted...

To discuss percentages is silly - it depends on the situation.

[k gledhill]

I was a physics major as an undergraduate (and I earned a bachelor of science in physics). Physics won't help you learn or understand WCK or fighting. That approach -- looking to physics -- is nonsense. It's what theoretical nonfighters, martial art nerds, do.

thats why I posted it NERD ! I already said the thread went silly , duh. For some and its becoming obvious why now, we need sledge hammer subtlety ...nerds love 'em. Im a nerd too .

guys are starting to analyze 'walking' get it ?....no ? thats because, your too busy over 'anal' yzing Terence.

[YungChun]

Yes, bik ma is stepping

I asked if it was *walking*... It isn't... The point was covered...The step minimizes the duration of "balance empty"...