Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 61 to 65 of 65

Thread: Reaching Rules of Thumb

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    [QUOTE=kung fu fighter;1035751][QUOTE=t_niehoff;1032026]There isn't a "WCK-take".

    sure there is, reaching in wck is basically when one sacrifices his own posture/alignment and body structure to make contact with something that is out of range for that specific technique instead of using his footwork and body unity.
    This is what I described as offensive reaching in boxing.

    What people do is take things -- movement, terms, etc. -- from other arts and incorporate them into their WCK, and then insist it is WCK, has always been WCK, etc. Sorry, but that just isn't how it works. "Reaching" is a term for a (kick)boxing mistake.

    The mistake you describe above in WCK terms would be not hitting (making contact) with structure -- which, btw, you can do even when in range.

    FWIW, most WCK that I see makes this elementary mistake routinely.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, canada
    Posts
    964
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    This is what I described as offensive reaching in boxing.

    What people do is take things -- movement, terms, etc. -- from other arts and incorporate them into their WCK, and then insist it is WCK, has always been WCK, etc. Sorry, but that just isn't how it works. "Reaching" is a term for a (kick)boxing mistake.

    The mistake you describe above in WCK terms would be not hitting (making contact) with structure -- which, btw, you can do even when in range.

    FWIW, most WCK that I see makes this elementary mistake routinely.
    Hey T,
    Overextending in WCK does not always necessarily mean striking at long range, it can also mean trying to over power the opponent at close range by using incorrect body mechanics/usage and muscle instead of structure to deal with the opponent.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by kung fu fighter View Post
    Hey T,
    Overextending in WCK does not always necessarily mean striking at long range, it can also mean trying to over power the opponent at close range by using incorrect body mechanics/usage and muscle instead of structure to deal with the opponent.
    So now it is overextending instead of "reaching"?

    I didn't use either term.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by HumbleWCGuy View Post
    What do you guys tell your students to help them to understand what reaching is.
    "Reaching" will mean difference things to different people...though most will agree that in the context of fighting it denotes an over-extension on striking--common in young strikers.

    Within the WC context, I would look at it as that, as well as with the phenomena of folks chasing the hands. Reaching for a grab would be more prevalent I think in WC then an overextension of a punch, at least in my experience.

    I tell them to keep things tight, no matter whether it's boxing, muay thai, or wing chun. Your body is what you're trying to protect, and your body is what generates the power. If you're not close enough to hit with normal extension, use your feet to get closer.
    "I don't know if anyone is known with the art of "sitting on your couch" here, but in my eyes it is also to be a martial art.

    It is the art of avoiding dangerous situations. It helps you to avoid a dangerous situation by not actually being there. So lets say there is a dangerous situation going on somewhere other than your couch. You are safely seated on your couch so you have in a nutshell "difused" the situation."

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,228
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    To strike ONLY because you can strike (there is an opening so I must take it -- your "it is a mistake to stick when you can hit) is stupid, and that will easily be exploited by a good fighter (who can then easily bait you, can easily read you, etc.). Not only that, but it can leave you exposed to trading punches (yes, you can hit him but he can also hit you).
    Bull$hit..

    From in contact, he leaves the line I must take the line and then land on him..

    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    What you and Kevin don't seem to appreciate is that the closing down of the opponent is MORE important than the striking as it is what sets up the striking and keeps you safe. That is lien siu die da: linking our defense (closing him down) to bring in hitting.
    What you don't appreciate is anything outside your little black and white box..

    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Yes, people do all fight the same way -- just like they all run the same way. It's natural.
    You're delusional.. The example is not running it's something more like dancing.. You say people all fight the same way yet you criticize people for fighting the wrong way... That alone is enough to show your likely a schizophrenic.. There are many different ways to fight and if you ever fought someone doing another Southern Chinese style then you'd see how Chun adapts to that verses say WB..

    Everything you say is a load of BS because there is no example you can site, you tell everyone from every lineage they are doing it wrong and you can't stand up, didn't stand up, didn't man up and show the right way after insulting and crapping all over those who did.. You're a cowardly little douche.
    Last edited by YungChun; 08-30-2010 at 08:36 PM.
    Jim Hawkins
    M Y V T K F
    "You should have kicked him in the ball_..."—Sifu

Posting Permissions

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