Banned
If you read "The Operating System" thread, you may recall that square-on facing is one of the four elements in that operating system.
We all know the basic square-on facing, right? We do it in every empty hand set, we do it in our drills/exercises.
So, why do we learn and practice that square-on facing?
And, if we use square-on facing, how can we use rotational power?
Registered User
Jumping on my elemental band wagon dear Watson??Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Why not just answer your own questions because you know that's all you can hear dude
Ti Fei
詠春國術
Registered User
That is "element" as in component, feature, etc. Pretty normal use of English. You might as well critique his use of punctuation marks because he seems to use the same symbols that you do.
BTW, Terence's use of the word "element" on these forums pre-dates yours by a few years.
TN
http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...&postcount=102
LT108
http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...0&postcount=49
Last edited by CFT; 11-18-2010 at 09:45 AM.
Registered User
I realize you're trying to create some sort of discussion on this...but really...like Lone said...you're going to dismiss everything except what you agree with. That's not much of a learning experience or exchange of ideas.
"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."
Banned
What does it matter if I agree or disagree?
And, you may be surprised but I do learn somethings from these discussions. First, because they sometimes make me think (or rethink) and try to verbalize things I haven't verbalized before. So, it helps me to clarify my own ideas. Second, because sometimes people do offer perspective, ideas, etc. that I haven't heard or considered, and they can offer solid reasons (and evidence) that support their views.
Truth springs from argument among friends. David Hume
Not agreement but argument.
Registered User
So, why do we learn and practice that square-on facing?
---In order to use both our arms (or legs) equally so that we are not putting one side of our body and therefore half of our weapons at a disadvantage by pulling them back in a "pivoted" position.
And, if we use square-on facing, how can we use rotational power?
---By developing a "coiling" or "spiraling" dynamic that uses a small rotation through the core of the body to help project power out through an arm. This doesn't require pivoting the body by moving the feet.
Banned
I agree. Although, I assume by "weapons" you mean our limbs.
So what you are advocating is a "small" rotation? What are you using the rotation for?And, if we use square-on facing, how can we use rotational power?
---By developing a "coiling" or "spiraling" dynamic that uses a small rotation through the core of the body to help project power out through an arm. This doesn't require pivoting the body by moving the feet.
And, if you use rotation for striking power, even a small rotation for power, doesn't that then mean you can only use "half your weapons"? Since once you rotate, the lead side (since you are no longer square-on) is dead?
Registered User
So what you are advocating is a "small" rotation? What are you using the rotation for?
---Yes a small coiling or rotation like the small almost imperceptible "twist" that goes into a Tan Sau, Fook Sau, or Bong Sau. This small "twist" adds to the power generation.
And, if you use rotation for striking power, even a small rotation for power, doesn't that then mean you can only use "half your weapons"? Since once you rotate, the lead side (since you are no longer square-on) is dead?
---No, I don't think so. There is an element of "elastic recoil" that is part of normal physiology that brings the body back to "square" quickly without any real effort. Just as the punch naturally drops back without having to pull it back. Unless of course, someone has exaggerated the rotation.
詠春係一個家庭
In TWC we do SNT/SLT and "some" chi sao training square on but we never fight square on.
And we're still able to strike the same points in space with both hands. I know most will disagree with that but I'm good with it.
Banned
***CLOSE....but no cigar. In TWC we will fight square on once a line has been completely taken and occupied. From a side body position (ie.- not square on) we will fight for dominance - and after a hit has been made, for example, from the blindside positioning - a hit that gains us control because it did some damage...then we will often continue the attack by squaring up and blasting away as a fan sao (followup attack).In TWC we do SNT/SLT and "some" chi sao training square on but we never fight square on.
And we're still able to strike the same points in space with both hands. I know most will disagree with that but I'm good with it.
Have seen GM William Cheung do this dozens of times through the years as part of his fighting method.
詠春係一個家庭
Got video from the 11/7/10 seminar of Sifu Cheung saying we never fight square and why when someone from another WC style questioned our methodology. And no, I'm not getting into a p***ing match with you about the subject. We will use the centerline if we are positioned like this
I---
Last edited by Phil Redmond; 11-18-2010 at 07:27 PM.
Banned
I've got video too, wherein GM Cheung uses squared up punching as fan sao.
Would you like me to send you a copy of some of it?
Just pm me your current address and I'll mail a dvd to you.
詠春係一個家庭
Registered User
An argument in the Greek sense is indeed the search for "truth". But that only works when one is open to the ideas that are presented by those opposing parties. You say that one should provide proof to validate, yet its the logic that is presented that leads the argument. Did you know that one of the pieces of "logic" that was used by Greek philosophers was "stranger things have happened"?
But as not to digress, some of the common reasons given for square facing off the top of my head are to allow for both arms to be used equally and in succession, to give a structural base for the centerline punch, and to provide multiple options for turning your opponent and gaining the preferred blindeside.
In response to your turning question, I generally will turn the other guy as I move in, or step to the outside and turn into them to face and attack on a new line.
Last edited by SAAMAG; 11-18-2010 at 09:39 PM.
"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."
Registered User
So here is where theory departs from reality.
MT also has the element being different from boxing of having 2 sides live. In contrast, you see much shallower stances, with greater lateral movement, and a shorter distance between the back side strikes and kicks than you do in boxing.
In boxing there is the jab / cross. However, there is a long/short disparity in boxing - the cross has a much ****her distance to travel to land than the jab. This is counteracted by the jab being a quicker and lighter strike to open up target areas for the cross to traverse and strike.
WCK is built upon centerline, and having 2 sides live. However, this does not mean a square stance. A square stance is weak front and back, and does not have depth structure. However, it is stronger in dealing with clinch / grappling.
In reality, even in the most square stance, there still are 2 gates - the outer and inner. In WCK this is represented by the man sau and wu sau hand skills. There can be no true structure in the wu sau hand in a completely square stance.
IMO WCK in a live environment there is migration between a square stance and a stance that has more structure, which is a 6 gate stance, with structure involved in the wu sau hand. However, there is not a complete commitment one side to the point where you lose the 2 sides live element.
There is ALWAYS SOME functional rotation or curvilinear motion in any powerful strikes. However, in WCK this is not the extreme rotation found in the larger movements of the boxing power punches. There is an element of the bridge, controlling the opponent's center, and forward pressure along the centerline. With absolutely no functional rotation in body parts there can be no power in striking.
Reply With Quote
