WCK's "operating system"

[Xiao3 Meng4]

I dislike the term "economy of motion." I prefer the term "optimal action." To me, Wing Chun is about optimal action in a given circumstance.

Optimal action may or may not be in line (pardon the pun) with "economic motion" as it is often described in Wing Chun via "straightline theory," "midline theory," etc.

If, however, "economy of motion" relates not to economic actions such as the JKD approach of "closest target, closest weapon" but refers instead to economy of motion as a whole, ie smallest amount of actions/time needed to win a fight (meaning no messing around with style or showboating, etc.), then it is more in line with the idea of "optimal action" and I agree with it in that sense.

[YungChun]

I dislike the term "economy of motion." I prefer the term "optimal action." To me, Wing Chun is about optimal action in a given circumstance.

Optimal action may or may not be in line (pardon the pun) with "economic motion" as it is often described in Wing Chun via "straightline theory," "midline theory," etc.

If, however, "economy of motion" relates not to economic actions such as the JKD approach of "closest target, closest weapon" but refers instead to economy of motion as a whole, ie smallest amount of actions/time needed to win a fight (meaning no messing around with style or showboating, etc.), then it is more in line with the idea of "optimal action" and I agree with it in that sense.

If the idea is to use minimal motion mechanics I fail to see the logic here--everything is trying to be optimal, Chun is a minimalist art.

Longest weapon to nearest target may sound economical until you start thinking about fansao (or what comes next).

[Xiao3 Meng4]

If the idea is to use minimal motion mechanics I fail to see the logic here--everything is trying to be optimal, Chun is a minimalist art.

Longest weapon to nearest target may sound economical until you start thinking about fansao (or what comes next).

Minimal and optimal are two different things in my mind. I look at optimal action as referring to "the most efficient action available to regain/maintain the initiative." Sure the action might be a minimalist set of moves which disables the opponent immediately a la Donnie Yen in Ip Man, but it can also mean going absolutely berserk, leaving chaos and collateral damage in your wake. I would rather find a middle ground; instead of "straightline theory," I like to explore "straightest line theory."

[duende]

Parrying leads to more parrying.. hence the looping comment.

Kiu Sau bridging, is contact/control via control of COG and occupation/domination of space. Not exchange, but intercepting, destroying and crossing WCK bridge.



Side body, leads to limbs being stretched out which makes you highly vulnerable to grappling submissions as well as long arm/short arm of weapons.

Center facing isn't simply squaring off. There is much more of a dynamic range involved. But this requires what we call Big Wheel body mechanics and knowing oneself/knowing one's box. That way, one is aware of what point they have gone a "bridge to far".

[kung fu fighter]

In the overwhelming majority of cases, if you give your opponent your side/flank, you are at a distinct and serious disadvantage.

Pien san wck does not expose your side/flank to the opponent, it allows you to expose theirs

Try doing chi sao while maintaining a sideways facing and see how far you get.

There are many platforms of doing chi sao in wing chun, the luk sao platform commonly seen in yip man wck is not the only version, there is also sheung huen sao platform, as well as pien san chi sao platform

[Pacman]

The "sao" is really short-hand for "kiu sao", bridge hand. So tan sao is really tan kiu sao, bong sao is really bong kiu sao, etc. They are not used for *bridging* but are in fact bridges, i.e., solid connections to our opponent.

Parrying, deflecting are tacked on "concepts" -- they are not a part of WCK. WCK does not have a "backfist" either (the hanging punch isn't a backfist).

All the bridges are attacks-- they are used to attack and disrupt an opponent's structure, permitting us to control them.

what you said about kiu sao is wrong. you said you learned sum nung wing chun and you are an expert in this right? since all WCK is the same you know all about it right? well then you should know there are 4 types of bong sau--used to block, parry and attack

not sure why you said there is no backfist. its in the forms and in the 12 san sik

[Jim Roselando]

Mr. T,


You seem to be confused on a few things. Let me help out a bit:

1) The so-called Kuen Kuit you are talking about is an adaption of white crane's san chin to our art and not specifically wck. Most of the Kuen Kuit we find in today's lists are things that have been picked up and fused over the years. So, while you may think your #2 of Facing Square is an important key to fighting with WC, anyone who has researched Kuen Kuit with an open mind would have noticed there is no mention of this in Yik Kam's kuen kuit and other lineages like Kulo village. So, one may say it was adapted later by some schools but not all. I tend to think Wong Wah Bo was the source of the Straight Body art but more research needs to be done.

2) If facing square was so I important for fighting then real fighters would have adopted this platform/theory to their art. Name one professional mma or Thai or anyone who fights pro level who faces their opponent square facing?? The entire belief that you can take someones flank so easily only happens in lala land (fantasy fu) or against an un-trained scrub.

Perhaps you can post an example or two of someone (anyone) who can do what you
say against a skilled and resisting opponent for everyone to see??? Notice I didn't ask you to show yourself in action. I wouldn't dare ask you to demo anything. haha Everyone knows that is taboo....


Wing Chun is not a slave to Jung Sein or Pin Sein. It has the ability to utilize both as we are an adaptive art!


Gotta run and thanks for the chat.


Peace,

[YungChun]

Any way you slice the art, facing is a key part of making it work and can be seen in the forms, seen and felt in the training.. I can't imagine how anyone could do the classical training and not see how vital facing is..

In Chun both hands and body, often even the legs all need to assist each other and work together.. Without facing when in close range this can't happen and certainly not in a timely fashion..

A similar component is seen in not only other Southern arts but in any art where people use the hands to assist each other, like grappling and even some boxers face. It's also something many or most of Yip's students have passed down as well as being in the Kiut.

[k gledhill]

the dummy is a good example of facing and shifting as you attack side to side or shift/pivot to face changing lines of engagement, using body weight in motion to coincide with arms cycling attacking /defending/attacking..etc...hips are engaged in short pivoting facing actions too...
If you stop thinking of the main wooden body as your target it helps to stop thinking your standing in front of a guy, then turning away from the opponent, then refacing ...where your centerline points the 'guns' fire.

[Knifefighter]

2) If facing square was so I important for fighting then real fighters would have adopted this platform/theory to their art. Name one professional mma or Thai or anyone who fights pro level who faces their opponent square facing?? The entire belief that you can take someones flank so easily only happens in lala land (fantasy fu) or against an un-trained scrub.

Pretty much everyone does this once they get into clinch range.

[taojkd]

2) If facing square was so I important for fighting then real fighters would have adopted this platform/theory to their art. Name one professional mma or Thai or anyone who fights pro level who faces their opponent square facing?? The entire belief that you can take someones flank so easily only happens in lala land (fantasy fu) or against an un-trained scrub.

Um, pretty much every MT, MMA instructor i have heard of takes a front face stance with the lead shoulder raised slightly. Also, wrestlers are largely front facing even when applied to MMA. BJJ sometimes will sometimes turn their bodies and place their rear hand on the front lapel of the GI, but that is to prevent a grip on the front collar and is usually only used for BJJ GI Tourneys. Most NO-GI tourneys you will be front facing with a low wrestlers stance.

Most MT, MMA do step around or to the side/flank to stay away from their opponents power hand but they are front facing. And I will agree that it is easier said than done to get to the outside of an opponent as their job is to do the exact same thing to you.

Pretty much everyone does this once they get into clinch range.

Agreed.

[Frost]

Um, pretty much every MT, MMA instructor i have heard of takes a front face stance with the lead shoulder raised slightly. Also, wrestlers are largely front facing even when applied to MMA. BJJ sometimes will sometimes turn their bodies and place their rear hand on the front lapel of the GI, but that is to prevent a grip on the front collar and is usually only used for BJJ GI Tourneys. Most NO-GI tourneys you will be front facing with a low wrestlers stance.

Most MT, MMA do step around or to the side/flank to stay away from their opponents power hand but they are front facing. And I will agree that it is easier said than done to get to the outside of an opponent as their job is to do the exact same thing to you.




Agreed.

true if you dont stand square its hard to do alot of things, like sprawl, and in the clinch you have to square up to your opponent or get thrwon or hit

[Jim Roselando]

Hey guys,


I am just giving Mr. T's a taste of what he likes to dish out. So, asking him to show one example of anyone doing it against a decent fighter is only fair. Still waiting BTW. Muay Thai and most boxing arts are not square facing. They always have a shoulder/hip slightly back. Muay Thai usually has less angle to their body tho.

For me, Wing Chun has both methods and it can be seen in all wing arts. Side does not mean you must fully side face. As soon as one shoulder/hip is not square you fall into the side facing method. The amount of Side or Straight body used will depend on the situation.


A few examples of how both is found in all :

Pin Sun: First set is Jut Choi which is trained in Kim Yeung Ma frontal facing. Square
facing is the first thing taught in the Side art. Second set uses Side facing.

Yeun Kay San: In their sup yee sic have the Ji Ng Choi which is front facing and the Pin San Choi which is Side Facing.

Yip Man: In their Chum Kiu they have times when they turn with double Lan Sao and the head faces that direction so it is front facing and in the same set they have the 3 shifting bong's which is Side facing.

Etc...


Without a doubt both aspects have always been a part of Wing Chun. Perhaps the reason Wong Wah Bo's line tend to focus more on frontal facings because of how he taught the art which would be based around his size/attributes. Leung Jan's nephew, Wong Wah Sam, was only 4' 11" tall and was about 95lbs. This is more likely the reason Leung Jan taught him a to utilize the Side element more...


Today's collections of the so-called Kuen Kuit are largely mish mashed stuff collected over the years and not specifically wing chun. We need to be careful as we do not want to be a slave to any theory. The one theory that is universal in Wing Chun is loi lao hoi sung etc... It doesn't say loi lao square or loi lso side hahaha.... Side Body is not about always being fully sideways no matter what is going on and Straight Body should not be slaves of their method. Utilizing two hands together is found in both methods so keep in mind you do not need to fully square off to accomplish this concept.


I have to get running. Appreciate the chats!



Peace,

[HumbleWCGuy]

Mr. T,
You seem to be confused on a few things.

It would be easier to list what he isn't confused about.

Let me help out a bit:

Are you a psychiatrist?

[HumbleWCGuy]

Today's collections of the so-called Kuen Kuit are largely mish mashed stuff collected over the years and not specifically wing chun. We need to be careful as we do not want to be a slave to any theory.

Of course... This Kuen Kuit crap has been bubbling for a while. T. has made a huge push over the last week to use it to set himself up as a wc authority. I wonder what scheme this nut will cook up next. Perhaps he will throw in his lot with VTM and jump on board with the next newest oldest lineage?