WCK is attached fighting

[t_niehoff]

T, You have a valid point, but but fights don't start attached like in chi sao, how do you propose to get this attachment with an opponent who uses the feeler jab by using his footwork to stay just outside your reach, trying to provoke you into commiting foward with your counter attack in order to throw your timing and distancing off?

WCK method provides the tools to "get inside" the phone booth and then fight from there -- how well you can do that depends on how good your training is. The bottom line is that if you aren't already doing it (in your training), you won't be able to do it.

[Hendrik]

T, You have a valid point, but but fights don't start attached like in chi sao, how do you propose to get this attachment with an opponent who uses the feeler jab by using his footwork to stay just outside your reach, trying to provoke you into commiting foward with your counter attack in order to throw your timing and distancing off?

IMHHHHHHHHHHHHo,

Isnt it attached means " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ".
one can be very close range with body contact one can be far way without body contact. but one always let him passed and using him to seal himself off.

That is the WCK way. and WCner suppose to be good in this because WCner keeping drilling this with Chi Sao, Chi Gek, Chi Po (step) it is just the WCK way of Door opening. Chi doesnt mean stick. Chi in modern language means Control. and the WCK way of control is " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ". isnt that Lay Lau Hoi Song Lat Sau Jek Choong?


In addition, Kiu as in the Kiu Sau, the Bridge is just the contact point. Most southern TCMA has a fix Kiu Sau or Bridge or contact point handling method. WCK prefer Adaptive control of the contact point based on purpose instead of shape. Thus, a Tan Sau, when the bridge is touch, It could be having a different purpose based on the situation and condition of the manupulate of the force vector to implement " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off " , it is not a Tan Kiu as in other southern art where one needs to always cross the bridge and attack. WCK doesnt need to attack directly, in fact wCK prefer to not attack directly but using your own attack to control your center line before WCner go and finished the job. Thus , that is what i mean, WCK doesnt attact the center line directly but indirectly.

So, the number one job of a WCner is to master all different variation of " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ". that simple, just one goal. and ofcorse, the rest the power generation.....structures... the center line....... is to support the WCK way but not the WCK way.

So, different art play they way they are good at WCner play the way they are good at. and if we WCner doesnt master this WCK way. what are we doing?

Figthing needs a strategy which one is good at. and if one is not clear with this strategy and having all the tool needs and the drill needs what is one doing? so are you invincible if you have these all? no ofcause not. your opponent might be Oyama or Mohamad Ali or someone who doesnt know how to punch.

[t_niehoff]

IMHHHHHHHHHHHHo,

Isnt it attached means " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ".
one can be very close range with body contact one can be far way without body contact. but one always let him passed and using him to seal himself off.

That is the WCK way.

That is ONE of the tactics WCK uses. It is not the exclusive tactic (it doesn't work in every situation) for "entering".

and WCner suppose to be good in this because WCner keeping drilling this with Chi Sao, Chi Gek, Chi Po (step) it is just the WCK way of Door opening. Chi doesnt mean stick. Chi in modern language means Control. and the WCK way of control is " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ". isnt that Lay Lau Hoi Song Lat Sau Jek Choong?

That is ONE way to lai lao hoi soong.

In addition, Kiu as in the Kiu Sau, the Bridge is just the contact point. Most southern TCMA has a fix Kiu Sau or Bridge or contact point handling method. WCK prefer Adaptive control of the contact point based on purpose instead of shape. Thus, a Tan Sau, when the bridge is touch, It could be having a different purpose based on the situation and condition of the manupulate of the force vector to implement " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off " , it is not a Tan Kiu as in other southern art where one needs to always cross the bridge and attack. WCK doesnt need to attack directly, in fact wCK prefer to not attack directly but using your own attack to control your center line before WCner go and finished the job. Thus , that is what i mean, WCK doesnt attact the center line directly but indirectly.

No, it depends on your what your opponent is doing.

And, I think that you really shouldn't speak as to what other TCMAs do or don't do -- my experience is that when people do that they generally speak from ignorance.

So, the number one job of a WCner is to master all different variation of " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ". that simple, just one goal. and ofcorse, the rest the power generation.....structures... the center line....... is to support the WCK way but not the WCK way.

No, no, no, no, no. That tactic has limited usefulness in fighting.

So, different art play they way they are good at WCner play the way they are good at. and if we WCner doesnt master this WCK way. what are we doing?

Figthing needs a strategy which one is good at. and if one is not clear with this strategy and having all the tool needs and the drill needs what is one doing? so are you invincible if you have these all? no ofcause not. your opponent might be Oyama or Mohamad Ali or someone who doesnt know how to punch.

Your argument would carry more weight if YOU got in the ring with boxers, MMA fighters, MT fighters, etc. and tried it. WCK gives us a general strategic battle plan or method and the tools (movement/actions and tactics) for carrying out that plan. In terms of "entering" to the inside, the "let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off" is just ONE of many tactics. If you get in there and try it, you'll see that I am telling you the truth. No one tactic works in all situations. Most tactics have limited usefulness, and the "key" -- you seem so fond of keys -- is learning through fighting which ones work for you and in what circumstances.

[Hendrik]

One always need to start clearly with what is WCK way even in the most simplist form.

So what is WCK in the most simplist form? it is always easy to say WCK is not this not that, this is one of the way, that is not correct....etc. But what is it? one doesnt carry ten things into a battle field. It is not a mind speculation game.

From Gary Lam to Senior Fung of Koo Lo, different ways of applying/implementing/realization of this strategy are used. isnt it tell something?

Dont tell me Gary Lam never fight MT...etc.

Again, my interest is not to argue with you but look at what is reality instead of spinning within the head.

So, instead of argue with me.
if there is only one strategy is WCK way then what is yours?

That is ONE of the tactics WCK uses. It is not the exclusive tactic (it doesn't work in every situation) for "entering".




No, no, no, no, no. That tactic has limited usefulness in fighting.



Your argument would carry more weight if YOU got in the ring with boxers, MMA fighters, MT fighters, etc. and tried it. WCK gives us a general strategic battle plan or method and the tools (movement/actions and tactics) for carrying out that plan. In terms of "entering" to the inside, the "let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off" is just ONE of many tactics. If you get in there and try it, you'll see that I am telling you the truth. No one tactic works in all situations. Most tactics have limited usefulness, and the "key" -- you seem so fond of keys -- is learning through fighting which ones work for you and in what circumstances.

[Wayfaring]

From Gary Lam to Senior Fung of Koo Lo, different ways of applying/implementing/realization of this strategy are used. isnt it tell something?

Dont tell me Gary Lam never fight MT...etc.

The problem is if Gary Lam or Senior Fung got on this forum tomorrow or if someone called them and asked this, neither one of them would say that this is true:

"So, the number one job of a WCner is to master all different variation of " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ". that simple, just one goal. and ofcorse, the rest the power generation.....structures... the center line....... is to support the WCK way but not the WCK way."

A more genuine way to ask this question is to call each of them and ask like a reporter "What do you feel the number one job of a WC practitioner is?"

If they both answer exactly the above, then I will agree that you have the universal observation on commonalities in WCK.

If not, then it's just one more guy trying to attach his name to someone famous to give validity to his flawed arguments.

[Wayfaring]

Again, my interest is not to argue with you but look at what is reality instead of spinning within the head.

You can't look at "what is reality" by removing it from a martial or fighting context. The moment you do that it becomes no longer reality.

[Hendrik]

instead of start with "if" ( why not review the Gary and Fung's youtube and learn what they are saying before starts with that "if")

why dont you share what is WCK way according to you ? What is the strategy, the power generation, the conditioning, the implementation....etc?

The problem is if Gary Lam or Senior Fung got on this forum tomorrow or if someone called them and asked this, neither one of them would say that this is true:

[Hendrik]

You can't look at "what is reality" by removing it from a martial or fighting context. The moment you do that it becomes no longer reality.

I share my view and encourage others to share theirs. Why dont you share your?

[kung fu fighter]

Appreciate the response guys!

WCK method provides the tools to "get inside" the phone booth and then fight from there.

T, in your opinion what are the WCK tools to "get inside" the phone booth?

the WCK way of control is " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ". isnt that Lay Lau Hoi Song Lat Sau Jek Choong? So, the number one job of a WCner is to master all different variation of " let his attack passed and using the his strike to seal himself off ".

I find " let his attack passed and using his strike to seal himself off/ Lay Lau Hoi Song Lat Sau Jek Choong" only works against a commited attack.

It does not address how to close in against an opponent who uses non committed feeler jabs with mobile footwork to stay just out of the wing chunner's reach to throw a chunner's timing and distancing off.



Again how do you guys propose to get this attachment (getting inside the phone booth) with an opponent who sticks and moves, and does not committ foolishly, but instead uses non committed movements to draw out your counter attack, thus catching you off timing and range/distance?

[sihing]

T, in your opinion what are the WCK tools to "get inside" the phone booth?





Thanks for the reply Hendrik,

I find " let his attack passed and using his strike to seal himself off/ Lay Lau Hoi Song Lat Sau Jek Choong" only works against a commited attack.

It does not address how to close in against an opponent who uses non committed feeler jabs with mobile footwork to stay just out of the wing chunner's reach to throw a chunner's timing and distancing off.

In my perspective, WC is mostly about when attachment is made while in a closer range, that is when it the structure, sitting, and stuff is needed. This is great when in self defence situations there is an unexpected attack upon you, in this situation that guy is not interested in "feeling you out", rather he just wants to take your head off. In comps and situations where there isn't that sort of intention, the guy is a bit smarter and knows how to keep distance, things change. To defeat a "WChunner" is easy, just stay on the outside and strike from there and then you have him, but for me its six and half of one, half dozen of the other, as it is hard for most to strike powerfully and land it from the outside, unless of course your a step above most and are a serious fighter/boxer and you have those well developed skills.

So to answer your question, to defeat that sort of thing, you need to work at in the gym, it requires your ability to perceive his actions, to time it and then work the entry, do this over and over again and you will develop a good entry against the outside fighter (technique wise you may use a low line kick to set up the hands, or angles of entry, so many factors at play here..). It is also expected that you may take one or two on the way in, hopefully you can deflect most of the force away from you so your not KO'd on the way in, that is the chances you take when you fight, as nothing is guaranteed and no one can teach 100% success.

James

[Wayfaring]

instead of start with "if" ( why not review the Gary and Fung's youtube and learn what they are saying before starts with that "if")

Instead of starting with "why not?" and lecturing others in what to review before disagreeing with you, why don't you stop making claims about Gary Lam and Fung without contacting them to ask if you can speak for them?

why dont you share what is WCK way according to you ? What is the strategy, the power generation, the conditioning, the implementation....etc?

When I do share what WCK is, why don't you listen? Why do you keep insisting this is not going on, when it is? When I share my view that you cannot remove WCK from a fighting context without losing site of it, why is your next post saying 'why don't you share your views'?

Are you unable to read and comprehend what is going on around you?

[Hendrik]

It does not address how to close in against an opponent who uses non committed feeler jabs with mobile footwork to stay just out of the wing chunner's reach to throw a chunner's timing and distancing off.

[/B]

isnt his mobile footwork a seal for himself?

[horserider]

Lol when post publish I see Mr. Henrick give answer. So no sense in my post .

[Hendrik]

Instead of starting with "why not?" and lecturing others in what to review before disagreeing with you, why don't you stop making claims about Gary Lam and Fung without contacting them to ask if you can speak for them?

When I do share what WCK is, why don't you listen? Why do you keep insisting this is not going on, when it is? When I share my view that you cannot remove WCK from a fighting context without losing site of it, why is your next post saying 'why don't you share your views'?

Are you unable to read and comprehend what is going on around you?

Perhaps I dont see your points, perhaps you dont see my points, and there is no big deal at all.


Why do you care for my approval when you share your reality?
Why do you care if others agree with you if you know what you share is a reality?

So, it is the discussion of WCK or the discussion of needing others approval, agreement....?

[horserider]

James, nice but not really as for distance. If you can hit me I can hit you. If you can kick me I can kick you. So staying away and jabbing for example is not how to defeat wing chun. Unless of course you are 7 feet then I suppose you can hit me and I cant hit you if we neither move.

otherwise yes all skills must be practiced to learn how to perform them. More real the practice greater chance of good performance under real pressure.