Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 696

Thread: The Key

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316

    The Key

    From my perspective, the key to WCK is breaking the opponent's structure. That is the thing around which everything else revolves.

    And it is the thing I look for in determining how good someone's WCK is (andin, for example, determining how well I am doing).

    When we break the opponent's structure, we take away his strength and his speed, we take away his offense and his defense. If you've ever had your structure broken by someone who knows what they are doing, you feel like you are being tossed around like a rag doll. What breaking the opponent's structure provides is control (and safety).

    If you don't break an opponent's structure, then he is free to use all his strength, all his speed, free to attack you -- and you have to deal with all of that.

    So how can we break an opponent's structure and keep it broken? You can do that through striking him in certain ways. Is striking alone enough? Rarely. But, you can also push, pull, press, lift, jerk, etc. him, using leverage and momentum, to break and keep his structure broken.

    What do you need to be able to push, pull, press, jerk,etc., to use leverage and momentum, against your opponent? You need a couple fundamental things. First, you need a solid connection, a good handle. What in WCK we call "a bridge". This isn't a momentary, fleeting connection (like a block) but one that is solid enough (the so-called "iron bridge") and which lasts long enough for you to perform the action, to lift, to press, to pull, etc. In other words, sustained contact in such a way as to provide that connection (bridge).

    Second, you also need a certain body structure or way of using your body, one that not only makes it difficult for you to have your structure broken (that withstands being directly pushed, pulled, jerked, etc.) but that can you can use to push,pull, jerk, lift, press, etc. Because you don't do those things with your arm (localized muscle), you do them with your body. The bridge provides the connection, but it is the body that does the action (press with your body, pull with your body, lift with your body, etc.).

    And, btw, this strategy of breaking the opponent's structure isn't unique or special to WCK -- you see it in judo (kazushi), you see it in MT clinch, you see it in wrestling, etc. How it is implemented in those various arts differs since their approaches differ.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Hitting people really hard breaks their structure really well, amongst other things.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    Hitting people really hard breaks their structure really well, amongst other things.
    Sure it CAN (didn't I say so?).

    The issue is whether breaking your opponent's structure is your aim (your objective) or what you hope will be the by-product of your striking. Because when it is your aim, it changes things (how you hit, how you set up your strike, etc.). And, you may come to realize that it is just one tactic among many to accomplish breaking structure -- often, for example, it is much simpler to pull to break structure than to strike to break structure.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Sure it CAN (didn't I say so?).

    The issue is whether breaking your opponent's structure is your aim (your objective) or what you hope will be the by-product of your striking. Because when it is your aim, it changes things (how you hit, how you set up your strike, etc.). And, you may come to realize that it is just one tactic among many to accomplish breaking structure -- often, for example, it is much simpler to pull to break structure than to strike to break structure.
    Being brought up in a "one hit, one kill" MA - Hung Kuen, then kyokushin- and taking that view into boxing and beyond, I never viewed the "goal" of any strike to be anything other than "to compromise the opponent" ( That was borrowed from my first boxing coach in Portugal), a strike MUST make the opponent "compromise" himself, either by the effect of the hit, or what he must do NOT to get hit.
    If you wanna view that as "structural compromise" great.
    Now, "one hit,one kills" are rarer than a Virgin after prom night, but the core principle is very valid and, in my view, a bit neglected nowadays.
    Hitting in a way that every strike MUST be taken seriously by your opponent, IE: no 10 year old girl slaps.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,355
    What Terence is speaking about here is the method that I teach.

    Even in Hung Kuen, you have the concept of continual striking (Lien Wan Da Faat), along with "one punch kill".

    You have to continue to do Bik Ma to smother the opponent and isolate his resources, of course, controlling the center of gravity is also slowing the opponent's reaction time, thereby allowing you to strike him multiple times.

    There is no disagreement in using striking tools.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by chusauli View Post
    What Terence is speaking about here is the method that I teach.

    Even in Hung Kuen, you have the concept of continual striking (Lien Wan Da Faat), along with "one punch kill".

    You have to continue to do Bik Ma to smother the opponent and isolate his resources, of course, controlling the center of gravity is also slowing the opponent's reaction time, thereby allowing you to strike him multiple times.

    There is no disagreement in using striking tools.
    I totally disagree.





    Just kidding
    LOL !

    I am probably the least "bridge orientated" southern kung fu guy you will find !
    Probably all that pesky boxing I did.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by chusauli View Post
    What Terence is speaking about here is the method that I teach.
    Exactly. The focus of your teaching is breaking the opponent's structure and what you need to do that -- and that's because you recognize it is one of the fundamentals of WCK.

    But this isn't just something you came up with, it is a part of YM WCK, it is a part of YKS WCK, it is a part of Gu Lao WCK, etc. What you've done with your curriculum/teaching is IMO to make these things explicit and to teach them in a clear cut way.

    Even in Hung Kuen, you have the concept of continual striking (Lien Wan Da Faat), along with "one punch kill".

    You have to continue to do Bik Ma to smother the opponent and isolate his resources, of course, controlling the center of gravity is also slowing the opponent's reaction time, thereby allowing you to strike him multiple times.

    There is no disagreement in using striking tools.
    Of course not. As I have repeatedly (as I am often reminded) said, WCK is controlling WHILE striking -- it is not, like some knuckleheads keep misrepresenting, standing grappling. It is pushing, pulling, pressing, lifting, sinking, etc. WHILE you strike. The striking is continually going on. But the objective is not just to strike, it is to keep hi structure broken so that we can continue to strike in safety.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    Hitting people really hard breaks their structure really well, amongst other things.
    ***YOU said a mouthful, right there...

    Breaking the opponent's structure (ie.- unbalancing him, setting him back on his heels, or in retreat) - is all well and good...

    but not necessary in order to win a fight.

    You can drop a man with several well placed punches, knee strikes, elbow strikes, kicks, etc. - and it's over.

    The breaking of structure comes as he hits the floor.

    Simple, direct, efficient. Sounds like a wing chun kuen kuit !!!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun View Post
    ***YOU said a mouthful, right there...

    Breaking the opponent's structure (ie.- unbalancing him, setting him back on his heels, or in retreat) - is all well and good...

    but not necessary in order to win a fight.

    You can drop a man with several well placed punches, knee strikes, elbow strikes, kicks, etc. - and it's over.

    The breaking of structure comes as he hits the floor.

    Simple, direct, efficient. Sounds like a wing chun kuen kuit !!!
    Funny, "sounds like a wing chun kuen kuit"! TWC doesn't have the kuit -- apparently Cheung never learned them or, if he did, never understood their significance.

    Of course breaking structure isn't necessary to win a fight. Many arts, the noncontact ones particularly (boxing, kickboxing, etc.), don't focus on breaking structure. But all arts that involve sustained contact while standing, call it clinch or whatever, do. And there is a reason they do. So it makes sense that if you see WCK as some sort of kickboxing, then breaking structure wouldn't be important to you.

    It makes me wonder what people are learning since the chum kiu form pertains to the skills for breaking structure (the name of the form tells you that), or that chum is one of the faat mun, or that our signature exercise is an attached one (chi sao) -- which provides the conditions (sustained contact) to permit practice of breaking an opponent's structure . . . . Oh, well.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,699
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Funny, "sounds like a wing chun kuen kuit"! TWC doesn't have the kuit -- apparently Cheung never learned them or, if he did, never understood their significance. . .
    What a D**k head statement. I never say anything negative about Hawkins. Also, if you think you have the goods I'd like to see it.
    Sifu Phillip Redmond
    Traditional Wing Chun Academy NYC/L.A.
    菲利普雷德蒙師傅
    傳統詠春拳學院紐約市

    WCKwoon
    wck
    sifupr

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    459
    My Ng Chun Hong lineage practices this in the exact same way as you describe,

    the pure WSL i have experienced seemed to do something very similar but by hitting constantly and using very fast footwork - very nice!

    i agree with pretty much everything T has written, FWIW

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Redmond View Post
    What a D**k head statement. I never say anything negative about Hawkins. Also, if you think you have the goods I'd like to see it.
    Phil,
    Don't take the bait. Trash talk is just trash. Don't even make the effort to pick it up. It's not worth it.
    'Talk is cheap because there is an excess of supply over demand'

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Redmond View Post
    What a D**k head statement. I never say anything negative about Hawkins. Also, if you think you have the goods I'd like to see it.
    TWC is Cheung's curriculum (that he created) for teaching WCK.

    Does TWC -- Cheung's curriculum -- have the kuen kuit?

    No.

    Is the kuen kuit a part of the WCK core curriculum?

    Yes. The same core kuen kuit are in YKS, YM, Gu Lao, etc.

    So why does TWC lack the kuen kuit?

    Well, either Cheung didn't learn it or if he did, he doesn't think it worthwhile teaching -- which indicates to me that he doesn't appreciate their significance.

    Who is Cheung but some guy who teaches WCK for a living -- he's nothing special. Neither is Hawkins, neither are any of these guys. These are just guys who have learned the WCK curriculum or portions of the WCK curriculum.

    Attachment to lineage only holds you back since then you are not looking at the broader art but only one person's way of teaching it.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    Hitting people really hard breaks their structure really well, amongst other things.
    You can skip all the WCK and run over them with a Mack truck.

    True story.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayfaring View Post
    You can skip all the WCK and run over them with a Mack truck.

    True story.
    I am a MACK TRUCK !!!
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •