H.Cheung's WC Mind

[Kenshiro]

http://www.thechinaboxer.com/forum/p...-true-fighter/

Hello,

I've been training on and off for about a year now, with breaks interjected due to military service. Being in the Navy for 11 years now, in Deck Department, I've had a few instances where I was engaged in some brawling, and played with boxing and muay thai here and there. I've tried out different forms of martial arts or martial arts collections such as "True Mudo" in the San Diego area, and various eclectic mixtures of karate, kickboxing, tae kwon do. Tried a little Aikido, Ba Gua, some traditional Kung Fu style headed by a Grandmaster in the Norfolk Va area.

When I was first exposed to WC in VA, it was pretty much love at first sight, but the military had me move and it was some years before I tried again in California.

As stated before, I often take breaks from the school and garage training and all, but I try not to stop training or at least filling my head with knowledge geared towards application.

I cannot claim to be a "know it all," and I cannot claim to use "reason" to argue since I cannot really spar with the system yet (though I have), but from reading most of these posts in this forum it is of course really apparent that the differences in the lineages promote more fighting than learning. Often, when someone states something that I feel is correct based on all I've read, and pressure tested with local MMA guys (there always seems to be one nearby, willing to prove WC doesn't work), there are a handful of people who claim that person is wrong and offer different reasons as to why.

While a little different than the above, I had a meeting yesterday at work where an Officer clearly stated how a certain procedure went earlier the day prior, and how things have changed since and how it is going to be. It was probably two short sentences spanning a single minute, and he had everyone's full attention.
What I heard, sitting in front of him, was contrary to five Coast Guardsmen in the corner listening in as well, and in a semi-confrontation later that day when I called the Coasties out on an issue they wondered where I got this information from. I told them, and they collaborated, then came back to me saying that none of the five remember hearing him say that. All I could say was that, "well, he did."

Of course I couldn't exactly provide proof at the time, but the truth was it went over their heads and they had selective hearing going on.

I am open-minded enough to admit if I am wrong, but I must understand why. I can present everything I've learned through my independant studies, and what my sifu teaches me.

I have a few questions I wanted to ask with regards to H.Cheung's article above, in particular to validate everything I know about human reaction times in different fields from getting my head bashed in boxing (while applying certain tests to see how people respond, I'll elaborate later), video games and military tactics or strategy as understood in something called the "O.O.D.A. Loop" or "OODA Loop," to actual Wing Chun application when fists are being thrown on or sleightly around the line.

I've been up a while though so I'll compose my questions later and reserve another post after this one. Perhaps someone will "intercept" where I am going with everything and answer my unasked questions with a single post. Either way I am glad to be able to contribute to discussions on this forum.

-T.Bowman

[Kenshiro]

My Question(s)--(if you can call it (or these) that)
Regarding the article on the Wing Chun Mind.
It seems that the basic philosophy of Wing Chun across all sorts of media that I have reviewed,
whether it is human interaction, scrying sources on the internet, reading my books, or
enjoying the movies, is to attack.
A lot of the threads I see on this forum run have questions that run contrary to what I understand
of some of the "kuen kuit," that "I" have been exposed to. Ideas that should run equally true
for practically "all" lineages of Wing Chun. Ideas such as "you do not meet force with force," or
to "deflect 1000 lbs with 5 ounces," "receive what comes---" etc, are to me all guides not to be
dismissed, but embraced if you are to understand the system in its entirety.
The idea of standing static and receiving numerous blows from a Muay Thai guy or a boxer or
MMA fighter, in my opinion based on what I've trained, what I've observed, what I've studied,
all run contrary to what I think I know and they definitely run contrary to all the ideas in these
Wing Chun sayings.

If Wing Chun was designed by a woman, or even if it wasn't, it is really immaterial. The
story, if true, and even if it isn't, signals that a smaller, weaker person can use structurally
sound shapes to disperse force from a stronger opponent with application of correct
positioning, angles, training (discipline and dilligence, all that jazz), and the will to make it all
come together. If my understanding of how to generate power with the wing chun structures
is correct, it can only be done in a "close range" manner, which by default meshes correctly
with the idea that wing chun is a system designed to create a delivery method that benefits
a weaker individual, yet does not compromise the weaker individual. If they are smaller,
then by default they must work to get in range anyway. The further reduced range of wing
chun punches plays into that idea well.

--On the punches (or whatever else), many people seem reluctant or even unwilling to
"get in there" and land the punches the way they were meant to, hitting with maximum range,
maximum extension wing chun punches which rely only on speed, and as a result have no
support from the structural union from their fist, through their elbow and hip to the knees and
ankle. Many people also seem to think that sensitivity drills such as chi sao are just drills,
not meant for actual application. To me, this does not make too much sense. If you fight like
you train, train like you fight, it just does not make sense.

Being open minded and objective to the system, if you are to truly understand and apply it,
it seems that you must learn the whole thing, and only through dilligent practice with another
can you learn to apply everything.

[Kenshiro]

What I understand of chi sao, is expressed clearly through those such as Kenneth Cheung or
Augustine Fong, that while there are no substitutes for sparring, if you factor in the damage
dealt to the body over time, specifically to the brain, and the time lost from good training
due to possible injury, the idea of diminishing returns becomes all to apparent a reality.
What I understand of chi sao, is that you are learning how to drill through your opponent's
defenses, if active (engaged, with forward intent, etc.) and if they, too walk the string. Any
deviation from the wing chun path leads to your elbow stabbing out on that line like a dart,
and your body should follow, compressed as it already should be, and thus supplying your
fist with that power that it should have. Upon a hit to their "center," the center of gravity,
etc., you disrupt their balance, and without that balance, they cannot harm you, at least not
with a strike. Any strike without balance has no body behind it, and unless it is with a weapon
or hits a sensitive spot such as grazing the eyes with fingernails (not too pleasant an experience,
as many pals of mine have experienced playing football.)

Also on Chi sao, if you follow the sayings (no I do not know them all yet), it seems you are to
"stick" to them and make them play your game, whether you like it or not. You seek the bridge
first, but you are not chasing hands... Sorta tells me that you only attack when they do, that
if they do nothing you give them something to prompt a response. While Augustine Fong
sorta says there are no "feints" in WC, the "asking hand" is just as much "our feint" as it is a
"dare," to me anyway. You can stand there forever and so long as your hand is on the center,
poised to strike if they dare move in on you, so long as their hands are not on that line it stands
to reason that to hit you their hands must move around yours. If there is a bridge you bridge,
but you do not deviate and they retract you go in... Of course it also seems WC is not stuck
on a single strategy to get in and there are other "entries," but as fast as a fight could be,
it seems to me that overall, you want to be set in your stance, be mobile and proficient with
the footwork while maintaining that stance, because once you do, and if you do get in, you
will not have time to set that stance to project your body weight into your opponent with
your fists.

Further, regarding chi sao, it also seems to be a method of "jamming" your opponent's limbs
with your own, supported by your body if aligned properly the way we are taught,
structure and all that, so if they punch fast, with your forward intent and body frame behind
your hands their fists are forced to come to a halt, and suddently you are playing chi sao
again whether they like it or not. Maybe not "rolling," with the opponent, but you are stuck
at that moment before the roll, seeking that opening to blast through and hit like the ocean
wave analogy so often mentioned everywhere.

I've seen this applied by Lui Ming Fai in that Kung Fu Quest episode, and his story, as well
as the rest of Ho Kam Ming's students are intriguing to me as he trained a handfull of fighters
to head to Thailand and fight the Thai's. Reportedly, most of them did well in those fights,
and reportedly Lui Ming Fai and another won, undefeated. It seems to me if power and
hard core training was everything, there is no excuse for the Thai's to have let this happen.
Perhaps someone can enlighten me on this point.
I feel this is an important one, because the Thai's, and those who emulate their stuff in the UFC, feel their techniques are clearly superior to that of at least Wing Chun.
Of course, Ho Kam Ming trained this particular group to go out there and fight.
I do not have the whole story, and it sounds like a good one.

Combine all I've written above, with my own personal tests against certain tactics people
do regarding the takedowns and everything, leads me to conclude that everything in the
system is valid, that the system's structures and methodologies are all sound. The power
generation is certainly a truth seldom realized in the MMA world, where the general idea
is muscle and endurance are key to power in a punch. The stance is a strong one, with a
low center of gravity and a driving forward footwork and focus, square on, with angle steps
that are still forward, makes it hard for one to apply their clinches with their knees, their
judo style takedowns, their shooting for the legs or the hips.

Like I said before, I am in the military. Currently doing a stint with the MSRON squadrons
and no one above my paygrade or even the officer level truly understands our boat tactics.
I've read the material, asked my questions, studied our failures in exercises, applied
reason in understanding the strategies and tactics used rather than taking everything taught
to me on faith, and as a result I stand as a Patrol Leader alone with a somewhat higher level
of understanding than my peers. In an attempt to not alienate them, I use Socrates'
question and answer method to scry understanding out of those I converse with or train to
get them to my level.
-I submit that this analogy of seeing the whole picture, the process of getting to where I am,
is not to dissimilar to that of "getting there" in Wing Chun.

Many people on the boards seem to ask a question about certain techniques or strategies
that are, to me, the wrong questions to ask because, if I understand my own analogy,
they do not understand the correct focus of the system to drill into an opponent's center
and disrupt their structure, and to have your delivery system setup already, the hard part
is just maneuvering this delivery system into position to launch into them and hammer
your foe into oblivion.

Hawking's Cheung's article easily outlined much of what I have posted here, and
what I understand of human reactions times (as dictated by my experiences with regards
to boxing, some video games, and military drills, and military strategies "OODA Loop" in
particular). While I understand that most people would probably say you cannot expect
to take out a person with just punches, a video posted recently on this board
showed Chuck hammering Tito to nothing with his fists, and Tito staying in the line of fire
with his guard up, taking it. This is totally contrary to how Wing Chun is supposed to
function, so far as I understand, and as a result questions about how to deal with them are
not quite moot, but you can say "you've already lost," if you let the opponent get that far.
You've been checkmated if you let them get that far---Checkmated in so far as if you let
someone's bare knuckles hammer away at your skull you get shocked repeatedly and
for a split second you cannot do anything, and it is even possible to get hammered to
the ground in such a manner if they have enough steam to continue hammering away.

Keep in mind this last paragraph I do not fully understand Chum Kiu's wide ranges of
motion, have not learned much of the third form beyond an elbow swinging drill and
a bit of "sticky legs," not the form itself, and know very little of the dummy. My overall
"view," might be skewed a little. I have fought in the "street," and it sucked. I have
boxed (not professionally mind you, just to do it), and get hit around for fun, more for
psychological re-wiring reasons and to experiment with reaction times a bit. I have
sparred with a bit of WC against my better judgement, it was something suggested by
a hothead and we all did it and our untrained structures easily fell apart--In my defense,
in that engagement, I saw how maintaining my focus on starting and walking the line
was faster than the guy who started on the line--or with his hand on his chin, and opted
to follow the bow. I see the value in the slow portion of SLT's muscle memory building
section in chi sao, where I formed a shape without thinking when correct intent was
applied by both sides. ---etc. etc.

Regarding the kicks, a lot of people seem to regard them as useful but not the end all
be all because some people are just "tough" like that. I have watched too many people
have their knee's bend "the wrong way," in sports first hand, and watch too many
wannabe stand up fighters swing "thai" kicks with a fully locked and straight leg, to know
that just charging forward with our style of kick and body mass would easily end a fight,
or at least make even those who are "tough" like that think twice.
It really depends on where their body weight is when you kick their knee, I would surmise.
A chunner I've conversed with once on youtube claimed some validity to these lines of
reasoning in a sparring match--obviously not too much a friendly one.

Watching Carl Cestari's vids on youtube (I think that was his name) he advocated strikes similar
to wing chun's such as his drop step... And another where you "straighten out both legs" before
going into the drop step so you could strike with the same fist twice in rapid succession, once
to the face, then again with a full body drop step. I understand the idea, but it is a slower method
than ours, and I definitely do not like any idea that has you straighten out the knees this way.
Still I am open minded about the idea enough to not completely trash it without understanding
it, as it is possible, like many do with Wing Chun's techniques, structures, or strategies, that I
am taking Mr. Cestari's technique here out of context.

[Kenshiro]

There are a lot of my current thoughts on these matters, and I've been trying to engage in these boards for some days now but have not been able to. I do not know exactly how to phrase any of my questions,
but I suppose maybe someone can clarify my misconceptions as I am sure I may have lots. I do not want to engage in any flame wars or anything. I am not some red blooded jock type out for blood or out for a fight. I am just just trying to get better as I try to understand and train while on a deployment, and I enjoy talking about this as much as I do training in it.

-T.Bowman

[Hardwork108]

My Question(s)--(if you can call it (or these) that)
Regarding the article on the Wing Chun Mind.
It seems that the basic philosophy of Wing Chun across all sorts of media that I have reviewed,
whether it is human interaction, scrying sources on the internet, reading my books, or
enjoying the movies, is to attack.

I believe that attacking is the core of any martial arts system, as without attacking any other aspect becomes meaningless.

Of course in Wing Chun, as in many other kung fu styles, the attacking aspect is very pronounced and direct ("in your face"), specially in view of the fact that many of these system discourage you from going back during combat, unless in an emergency.

A lot of the threads I see on this forum run have questions that run contrary to what I understand
of some of the "kuen kuit," that "I" have been exposed to. Ideas that should run equally true
for practically "all" lineages of Wing Chun.

I would take a lot of the threads regarding Wing Chun in this forum with a pinch of salt.

That is because many who post here, do not really practice this art (and/or any given other kung fu style), at least not as it was meant to be practiced. For many here, Wing Chun is just one more MA in their cross training, "jack of all trades", if you will, collection, but I am sure that you have guessed that already.

Ideas such as "you do not meet force with force," or
to "deflect 1000 lbs with 5 ounces," "receive what comes---" etc, are to me all guides not to be
dismissed, but embraced if you are to understand the system in its entirety.
The idea of standing static and receiving numerous blows from a Muay Thai guy or a boxer or
MMA fighter, in my opinion based on what I've trained, what I've observed, what I've studied,
all run contrary to what I think I know and they definitely run contrary to all the ideas in these
Wing Chun sayings.

Very true. Also, true for some other Kung Fu styles as well.

Unfortunately, mastering such aspects is more complicated than going at it and exchanging blows in the sparring sense. Hence the misunderstandings and false conclusions drawn regarding WC in many of the threads in this forum.

If Wing Chun was designed by a woman, or even if it wasn't, it is really immaterial. The
story, if true, and even if it isn't, signals that a smaller, weaker person can use structurally
sound shapes to disperse force from a stronger opponent with application of correct
positioning, angles, training (discipline and dilligence, all that jazz), and the will to make it all
come together. If my understanding of how to generate power with the wing chun structures
is correct, it can only be done in a "close range" manner, which by default meshes correctly
with the idea that wing chun is a system designed to create a delivery method that benefits
a weaker individual, yet does not compromise the weaker individual. If they are smaller,
then by default they must work to get in range anyway. The further reduced range of wing
chun punches plays into that idea well.

I believe that the wisdom of Wing Chun and other Internal emphasising styles, go further than "the weak against the strong" paradigm, when you take into consideration that no matter how strong one is, there is usually someone stronger, which makes one the "weaker". So this is where WC is for everyone, not just the "weak".

--On the punches (or whatever else), many people seem reluctant or even unwilling to
"get in there" and land the punches the way they were meant to, hitting with maximum range,
maximum extension wing chun punches which rely only on speed, and as a result have no
support from the structural union from their fist, through their elbow and hip to the knees and
ankle.

That is a very valid observation. When one sees some of the sparring/fighting videos posted here by "Wing Chun" practitioners, one has to try hard to recognize any WC principles or structures there. So usually we end up with some king of Glorified Kickboxing, that may be effective for the street, but it definitely is not Wing Chun.

Many people also seem to think that sensitivity drills such as chi sao are just drills,
not meant for actual application. To me, this does not make too much sense. If you fight like
you train, train like you fight, it just does not make sense.

We must blame the Mcdojo phenomenon for this kind of cluelessness.

I have mentioned time and again that chi sao training, the way it was taught to me was to develop, softeness, "listening" abilities", help maintain structure and roots while under pressure, while drilling in many concepts and principles of the style, while under pressure. Once, enough skills are developed then the chi sao, including leg and grappling techniques are taken one step further into full sparring. This is when the person uses Wing Chun and does not, among other irrelevant things, hop around in and out of range like kickboxer,.

Being open minded and objective to the system, if you are to truly understand and apply it,
it seems that you must learn the whole thing, and only through dilligent practice with another
can you learn to apply everything.

Well said and welcome to the forum.

[ntc]

Kenshiro,

I am writing in reference to your comments on Lui Ming Fai and training in the Ho Kam Ming family. First of all, you have good observations. I studied under Sifu Ho in Macao before I moved to the US, and also spent quite a bit of time working with Lui Ming Fai (he was much younger then, but just as good). His WC hands and sensitivity are excellent, by the way.

The majority of our time training would be on sticky hands, and focused more on sensitivity and controlling your opponent. Many, many hours are spent on perfecting the footwork, combining it with the hands, sensing the energy fluctuations in your opponent, building/developing your own structure, and trapping your opponent as they try to attack you. All of this was covered by the different levels of sticky hands each level focused on something different. At the same time, we had entirely different sets of rigorous drills/exercises, most of it physical, cardiovascular, and strength conditioning, that complimented the traditional WC exercises. These sets were to prepare us as fighters, teaching us how to deliver power into our punches and kicks, and to get us ready for tournaments / full contact fights. The two were very different types of training, but complimented one another.

Just thought I'd share.

[Kenshiro]

Thank you both for the replies.

I am glad then that my understanding/reasoning of the system at my current state is not so far off the mark. Thanks for the validation and the insights for everything.

-
I do not like arguing but if we took a more philosophical outlook on things, maybe that would cure some of the misconceptions? A lot of Wing Chun seems to be "relative," in that everyone's "opinions" are "valid," and that if a technique doesn't work for one guy, then it must not work period.

Obviously this is not true, but for that one guy who trains 1 or 2 hours a day, twice a week, there's no way around it, WC doesn't work without splicing in something else.

While no plan survives contact with the enemy, it only makes sense that with something as complicated as Wing Chun to first learn all of it before you begin to spar. It's like handing the keys of your car to your 10 year old without giving him adequate instruction. "Here's how you turn the wheel, make sure you look ahead, left right, etc. Don't forget to release the brake, buckle up, adjust your seat and mirriors, do not forget to remain between the lines in the road, know the right of way, try to think about what the other driver is thinking, it'll save your life.... Remember to 'focus.' Congratulations son, you're driving!"

It only makes sense to train everything and to train harder if something doesn't work to figure out why it doesn't work. To commit wholly to this system. While I do not believe it is just for the "weak," my analogy is that if the weak can use it to fight the strong, the strong can definitely use it to fight those who are stronger still.

Here's another analogy, those old school watches, with all those gears. Precise. If one is not adequately made, the whole watch doesn't necessarily work properly, if at all. The gear needs to be redone, or the entire watch modified, at which point it is no longer the same watch.
On the other hand, if the gear was made correctly to begin with, you'd have found that the watch would have worked fine to begin with.

I would like to commit to more discussion... These few days are going to be rough but I'll try to have actual questions or observations down here for people to read. I only hope the questions help out, that they are questions they couldn't quite articulate.

T.Bowman

[LoneTiger108]

http://www.thechinaboxer.com/forum/p...-true-fighter/

Hello,

I've been training on and off for about a year now, with breaks interjected due to military service.

I haven't read the article yet but will do.

Welcome to the forum Kenshiro. It's good to see someone so keen after such a small amount of time training! There is a vast amount of good posts and information on these boards and I do hope you continue to contribute.

[Hardwork108]

I haven't read the article yet but will do.

Welcome to the forum Kenshiro. It's good to see someone so keen after such a small amount of time training! There is a vast amount of good posts and information on these noards and I do hope you continue to contribute.

Same here LoneTiger. I am very pleasantly surprised by Kenshiro.

[anerlich]

While no plan survives contact with the enemy, it only makes sense that with something as complicated as Wing Chun to first learn all of it before you begin to spar. It's like handing the keys of your car to your 10 year old without giving him adequate instruction. "Here's how you turn the wheel, make sure you look ahead, left right, etc. Don't forget to release the brake, buckle up, adjust your seat and mirriors, do not forget to remain between the lines in the road, know the right of way, try to think about what the other driver is thinking, it'll save your life.... Remember to 'focus.' Congratulations son, you're driving!"

There's merit to that argument ... the question is when you have learned enough of the system to be able to spar. Most people are regarded as roadworthy after a few months of driving instruction. How long would you say you have to go before you start trying your WC skills out against a resisting opponent?

The converse argument is that mentioned regularly on the forum but still of merit, learning to swim. At some stage, and not too far down the track, you have to get in the water and try it. Good swimmers aren't made on dry land.

[CFT]

Driving a car is one of the most complex mechanical and mental activities that one is likely to encounter in every day life.

But when I first started learning to drive at 17, I was actually behind the wheel in the very first lesson and driving to a busy part of London (the 'West End").

I was of course surprised at the time that I wasn't even given an overview of the car and controls, all the theory, etc.

Now I look back and think that it is a perfectly fine approach to teaching and learning.

It should never be either/or with regard to learning and sparring. They should go hand in hand. You need the pressure from sparring to test your body, mind and spirit. Skill cannot emerge in a vacuum.

[Kenshiro]

Driving a car is one of the most complex mechanical and mental activities that one is likely to encounter in every day life.

But when I first started learning to drive at 17, I was actually behind the wheel in the very first lesson and driving to a busy part of London (the 'West End").

I was of course surprised at the time that I wasn't even given an overview of the car and controls, all the theory, etc.

Now I look back and think that it is a perfectly fine approach to teaching and learning.

The difference is at the age of 17, you might have had many years of careful, and not so much so, observation of the art of driving, compared to the 10 year old in my analogy. With a careful, calculating brain, and a body developed to a sufficient point to handle the vehicle with the potential ease of that of a fully accustomed adult. You "grew" into it, or have a body capable of handling that vehicle's various "pressure" requirements.

With regards to driving a car, it might be a perfectly fine approach to teaching and learning. With regards to fighting, injuries suffered take time away from the practioner. This includes time to heal, time to train. Wing Chun seems to be a very internal style, lots of inner workings going on in there, and biomechanics that may or may not really have to be learned, but clarified. A lot of throwing a punch seems instinctive, but knowing how to throw a punch as everyone does and how it should be in Wing Chun, and being able to throw one as everyone should and as it should be in Wing Chun, are clearly not.

To me, anyway.

Describing for instance to my peers in the service why I punch with the bottom three knuckles, or more specificially perhaps the sun fist, when I had only just begun training, is challenging, but I like a challenge. The wrist for one feels more sturdy, when intent is to deliver with the middle of the bottom three (for now, that is sort of an "unadjusted" facet I came to a logical conclusion to based on other sources as well as hitting things). When I use "perfect pushups," if I try to focus on doing pushups with the first two knuckles as a boxer would, my wrist cannot support my weight without tensing heavily, not to mention it is difficult to maintain control on the perfect pushup, especially with both hands. Injury feels more likely a possibility as if I were to slip at time or loose that tension at any time (as is likely to happen when tensing muscles, you must untense after a while), at which point I would slip anyway and likely hurt my hand or my wrist.

It only serves to justify why boxers wrap their wrists like concrete before a fight, and the idea of "tensing" your arms before impact to minimize injury upon said impact is to provide protection. Unfortunately then the matter seems to be one of "timing." If you time wrong and tense at the wrong time you not only loose power from improper alignment but you risk injury. If you tense moments before impact you now slow the punch down, at which point you loose power delivered from the body's snap. Additionally, with all this tensing and untensing as the body twists and turns, fatigue builds up, hence the rounds in the ring. Without the breakup, fatigue takes away the snapping and it becomes a slop fest.

I guess looking at that you can argue that western boxing is very much an internal style too.

Conversely, doing the "perfect pushup" the proper way, you see that your hand supports your weight more in alignment with how the sun fist is delivered, and you can even do this with a somewhat more relaxed grip. Arguably, you'd last longer or at least not get as tired. Further your punches remain faster and so long as the rest of the cogs of the machine are good to go, you retain power. Of course to deliver you need that timing and strategy to get in the position, and you need to "see" when to get in.

Some people got the idea, some didn't. The point is that is just a sort of... I do not know the word. Something along the lines of ergonomics, fitting the workplace to the worker, but in this case fitting our every day stuff, to the art?? There is more to throwing the punch but I feel I don't have to explain I sorta did in the previous posts and I'm sure we all here know how it should be done.

It should never be either/or with regard to learning and sparring. They should go hand in hand. You need the pressure from sparring to test your body, mind and spirit. Skill cannot emerge in a vacuum.

There's merit to that argument ... the question is when you have learned enough of the system to be able to spar. Most people are regarded as roadworthy after a few months of driving instruction. How long would you say you have to go before you start trying your WC skills out against a resisting opponent?

I know enough about WC to know I cannot and must not spar with it yet. I remember a former training partner who came to class, dismissed SLT as being something that "you can do 'till you're blue in the face, but it won't help you fight," and effectively all he did when he sparred the bigger guys in the class was hold his hands up but walked circular from his target like perhaps a Ba Gua stylist would do, crossing his legs, standing a few points away from totally upright, unsunken. Cross-Stepping.
It almost looked like Ba Gua if I didn't know better.

I know that chi-sao is supposed to help you move with the structures and be fluid, flowing, able to move and attack without compromising either yourself or your balance. It is supposed to help you with the pressure from multiple angles, and presumes pressure coming from an opponent that also attacks along the line, for what I can guess to be only one reason, but I already said this above.

I know SLT works more than just brainwashing your elbows to maintain positive shapes, and know it is supposed to work in a special kind of focus ahead and with your peripherials.--among many other things.

I know that some people understand a punch must hit "mid range," and they pull their punches way before it gets to that range, even if the opponent was not close enough for them to have hit in the first place, and I further know that this takes away the true intent of the fists if they were properly aligned with the appropriate distances, structures, and focus. Intent seems to matter a lot with that punch. It's the difference between a tap and a shock.

I know that Wong Shun Leung reportedly trained 4 to 6 hours a day for 6 months straight before taking it to the streets. I also know that reportedly he boxed before he took Wing Chun, so therefore he was somewhat exposed to the rigors of sparring before hand, but found something to appreciate in Wing Chun and fully committed to the program.

There is a danger in "parroting" information like a mindless robot, and "knowing" the information, discovering it for yourself or truly understanding why, and only after serious exhaustion of your faculties then do you approach the observant teacher for guidance towards your own attainment of that understanding.

I further know that while executing, I must be relaxed, give nothing away that compromises my balance, while at the same time retaining sufficient control to project power from the center. That is quite a bit of control, and in a way the pressure building sensitivity drills prepare your structures to deal with increased pressures of actual fighting, without just getting in there and getting hurt and having to delay your training to recover, or just quit altogether.

These concepts just cannot be learned without dilligent practice in a few months. Unfortunately that is exactly what a lot of people are guilty of, and hence they quit the system and exclaim that it does not work, when they should consider why it did not work for them, if people before them made it work, in the street and the ring.

These are just my own opinions, and many would probably call it all just b.s. But these are my own opinions and observations.

---
Anyway, that is a lot of knowing.
Just because "I" know it does not mean my body does.

To each his own though, I fully agree though that upon full understanding or shall I say "attainment" of the system, upon you and the body fully "getting it," you should go out there and spar, but there has to be some sort of mutual understanding as to the goals of the exercise and the limitations upon both parties as you just cannot go about "kick-stomping" people's knees in a friendly sparring session. To me that just feels more like a real fight. Also, the sense of continuity is different, because doing that "potentially" can end one, but without sufficient drive, focus, power, whatever there's no way to tell the effectiveness.

Still, I like speaking of that group that went to Thailand, because they defied most of what I said, if I understood the episode regarding Lui Ming Fai. I think they sparred daily. NTC says they did a lot of training that seems possibly much more demanding than most other schools. It seems they did many many hours of training a day. For competitive fighting in the ring, effectively to build warriors. Maybe there's a biography or something I should read on this because it is really something.

It somewhat tells me you can't dive in too early with sparring.
Perhaps the difference then from my classmate with the 1950's fighters is consistent guidance.

[anerlich]

It should never be either/or with regard to learning and sparring. They should go hand in hand. You need the pressure from sparring to test your body, mind and spirit. Skill cannot emerge in a vacuum.

I agree 100%.

if I try to focus on doing pushups with the first two knuckles as a boxer would,

Not all boxers do this. Some use vertical fists, some punch through the bottom three knuckles.

I guess looking at that you can argue that western boxing is very much an internal style too.

For what purpose? Most boxers would regard such discussion as mental masturbation.

There is a danger in "parroting" information like a mindless robot, and "knowing" the information, discovering it for yourself or truly understanding why, and only after serious exhaustion of your faculties then do you approach the observant teacher for guidance towards your own attainment of that understanding.

There is also danger in making generalizations about boxing or other styles and setting them up as straw men in your own mind, analyzing everything to the nth degree ... and dare I say, convincing yourself you are way smarter than all your workmates.

as you just cannot go about "kick-stomping" people's knees in a friendly sparring session.

Well, duh, no one is suggesting that. There are drills and a progressive process. Even the boxers you seem keen to differentiate yourself from do not spend every session bashing the bejesus out of each other.

[Kenshiro]

Not all boxers do this. Some use vertical fists, some punch through the bottom three knuckles.

For what purpose? Most boxers would regard such discussion as mental masturbation.

There is also danger in making generalizations about boxing or other styles and setting them up as straw men in your own mind, analyzing everything to the nth degree ... and dare I say, convincing yourself you are way smarter than all your workmates.

Well, duh, no one is suggesting that. There are drills and a progressive process. Even the boxers you seem keen to differentiate yourself from do not spend every session bashing the bejesus out of each other.

I somehow feel that we are getting off on the wrong foot.
I am generalizing nothing. While I am writing a lot of words on here, honestly to demonstrate in person it's a rather simple matter as I'm sure you'd agree. A lot of stuff I do in person with those around me to show what I know of the system works, where many of them write it off because if it did work, people would be using it, people they imply (and I infer) in the UFC.

Regarding the analyzing of everything, wouldn't you say you have to regarding the system's postures in order to understand how to apply it?

I am aware that Jack Dempsey as an example, advocated punching with the bottom three knuckles, and wrote a book about his "power-line." Not many boxers here at work follow this philosophy.

I do not differentiate from myself and boxers. Rather they, here, at my work space, differentiate from me, and I reciprocate likewise. Further, I am dealing with MMA guys or amateur boxer types that are built like supermen, many of them in my command are Navy Seal drop outs or Navy Diver hopefulls. What drew me to this system in the first place was curiosity at Bruce Lee's reported power in his punching. As I stated once before, I took boxing for a few, as well as some MMA thai kickboxing. Hardly good at it but I gave it my all and they even said I had alright delivery.

Further, to take something basically alien like WC and apply it against other systems requires this "progressive" stuff to avoid getting hurt, and learning nothing.

Regarding the kick stomping thing, my point applies to other techniques as well not just that. Intent is everything in the system from what I gather. If you don't follow through like in fencing where it's obvious you got the other guy even with all the protective gear you end up trading blows. My teacher says you can't expect to avoid getting hit, but the point is to drive through the center and if they do hit you there's nothing there if they get through.

Have I convinced myself that I am smarter than my workmates?
Dunno, maybe.

I tried to show a buddy who "self-taught" himself Wing Chun some differences from actually learning from a teacher vs learning from movies and youtube videos. His arms were tense beyond belief. Didn't really understand chi-sao so I had him simulate a boxer's guard, whatever he wanted, and for the sake of the chi-sao thing told him to throw two punches and shot in and applied the whole forward pressure thing with the stance and footwork. For a brief moment he had no idea what I was doing, while I was focused on staying in and maintaining what I had going.

So he had his fists up, and my arms were I guess in a sort of outside/outside posture, and I told him to go for any punch to beat what I was doing.

I expected some sort of "driving through" motion, clearing the way of my hands and blasting through. He opted for a retracting, raising hand to go for a hook.

So my elbow shot through and I pulled it before it nailed him in the neck, and it happened in the span of time he was retracting for the hook to both clear my hands as well as perhaps to start it up.

In the spirit of it, that's what my teacher I guess wants of us.
However I believe I messed up by actually "thinking" he was going to do some sort of "Wing Chun" thing to regain control and bypass my hands and blast through. I figured I'd "Jut" or whatever like in Dan Chi Sao. My "elbow" went forward, I believe it should've been my hand.

Either way the action stunned him and he stopped his hook, as I had actually nailed his neck but pulled it instead of driving through.

He snuck in some sort of one-inch punch on me earlier and his delivery was pretty fast for the hook as well he wasn't pulling anything back.

While the above was a somewhat typical example of a "punch this way, and I'll block it this way type of thing," I gave him the freedom to do whatever punch he wanted, but within reason, as I said before, I do not know the whole system yet. My arms are loose enough but I'm still stiff most everywhere else. I get struck, "yet I move," as another instructor of mine says.

Would I "learn" anything if I just let him do whatever, and I had to work to get in there and learn to "apply" the technique as I go?
The idea is to learn the whole thing, then adapt it to others as you spar. My sifu says you are trying to learn a skill. If the whole thing is "progressive," you can learn to deal with the others, but first you must acquire whatever "skill" it is they're trying to convey.

That makes sense.
How many people show up at the class and begin chain punching, and do it right?
Not many. They pop their elbows, focus in the fists instead of the elbows, their shoulders are "floaty," and they don't "sink." Often they aren't balanced and lean forward. They get exhausted fast.
Some people show up, conditioned, and do not get tired, but then again they're not snapping their punches out either. It's more of a controlled, slow speed, not fully extended (and therefore the intent isn't there) exercise.

Ultimately its just an element of the whole "way" you punch with it.

So at this Kuwait Naval Base in the boathouse I pound a few dents into the aluminum wall, knuckles about a foot away, no retraction. 8 inches, no retraction. Working my way down to just the fingers length.

I'm using all the elements outlined in previous posts to do all that.
It is impossible without
-the focus or intent from snapping your hand out as if it were full extension, when you're in that ideal close range.
-correct driving snapping, hip + elbow driven structure as outlined in my second post.

I try again with the punching, at maximum extension. What happens? I knock myself off balance. Even when I earnestly attempt to maintain it. The stance is not designed to do that. If you do, it requires muscle to prevent the shock away from the wall. Further, I leave no dents in the wall.

That signals loss of power at that range.

Is there anything wrong with testing out the elements of the system in isolation to understand the mechanics of it? Is it wrong, to have focused "labs" with a resisting human opponent to get the "hang" of it? Is there anything "wrong" with the whole "baby steps" idea, or "walk before you run" approach to Wing Chun? It seems you advocate just jumping in with both feet.

So here is the questions asked of me... someone who's only done this a year, and asked for opinions on Robert Chu's article, as well as for help or clarification on what I know.

-The question is how long do you train before you can spar?
I could only give observations and opinions.

Then a statement
-hand in hand learning and sparring are good to go, skill cannot emerge in a vacuum.
The system teaches you a "skill," it does not emerge in a vacuum. This much I understand even within my limits. It is this skill, that you bring to the table to acquire another skill, to spar and to fight. "I" know this much, even if most of my body does not.

So those are questions asked of me, or statements/answers to stuff I've said or insinuated. Here are a few of my own...

-A question is how do you "force" yourself to relax under pressure?
-If you use wing chun at all, do you fight force with force? Or do you flow with it?
-If a technique does not work for you, it must not work at all correct? Have you ever stated such about any aspect of this system? Why?
-Are there any aspects of the system you believe do not work in application, period? If so why?
-The thread's initial post was about Robert Chu's Article. Have you read it? Do you have any comments?

A lot of people I talk to that "box," cringe at the idea of attacking when the other guy does.

I enjoy a good argument, and while I am getting maybe we might not much like each other hopefully you enjoy this argument too. Let's just agree to keep it civil please.

If I fail to, let me know.

T.Bowman

[anerlich]

I somehow feel that we are getting off on the wrong foot.

Indeed.

FRAT, but:

-A question is how do you "force" yourself to relax under pressure?

You acclimatise yourself to the pressure through incremental exposure. Geoff Thompson among others has a good deal of excellent advice on the subject in his books. "Fear - The Friend of Exceptional People", etc.

-If you use wing chun at all, do you fight force with force? Or do you flow with it?

Ideally, you flow with it and do not fight force with force. In reality, you may occasionally (or frequently) fail to live up to the ideal and may have to react with lesser efficiency and more force) to avoid damage. Better IMO to be lampooned as inefficient by various internet pundits on this forum than have "that guy flowed really well until the other guy smashed him" said instead.

-If a technique does not work for you, it must not work at all correct? Have you ever stated such about any aspect of this system? Why?

No and no (well, maybe a couple of times, but I was lying. Really)

If I answer all these questions correctly, what do I win?

-Are there any aspects of the system you believe do not work in application, period? If so why?

TWC works well in the aspects of fighting for which it was designed. It is not suited to clinch fighting or ground fighting IMO. Most of the problems are not with the system but the way some people train to use it, allegedly for defence. Some parts of it suit some people better than others, sme teachers' approaches suit some students better than others. "Can you do it?", says Hawkins. Very few, if any, can do all of it all the time.

-The thread's initial post was about Robert Chu's Article. Have you read it? Do you have any comments?

Yes. It gives a good insight into Hawkins Cheung and his approach to Wing Chun. Should it be a new Sutra, extra book in the New Testament or addition to the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus? No.

He's bang on about needing to develop visual as well as contact sensitivity and the overreliance on the latter by some.

I notice the parts about SLT teaching the student not to think too much, and:

"Wing chun is a trap, too, because many practitioners get hung up thinking wing chun is the only way to fight".

A lot of people I talk to that "box," cringe at the idea of attacking when the other guy does.

You need to talk to a few more boxers - counterpunching is a highly esteemed and much practised boxing skill.

I enjoy a good argument, and while I am getting maybe we might not much like each other hopefully you enjoy this argument too. Let's just agree to keep it civil please.

This is an informal forum of frank exchanges. I have no interest in being counselled on how I should behave by a new poster, thanks all the same. If you expect genteel academic discussion between faux Zen masters in a virtual Shaolin Temple with background Pan pipes playing and incense burning 24/7, you are definitely in the wrong place.