What is Structure to you?

[YouKnowWho]

try walk into a boxer's middle door and see for yourself.

Are you saying that boxers have better "structure" than TCMA guys? How did they train their "structure"? Are there more than one path to obtain "structure"?

The issue is when one cant even have a clear handling the basic of the solo what to talk about combat situation?

How can you talk about something without being able to measure it?

train -> test -> train -> test -> ...

[Hendrik]

Are you saying that boxers have better "structure" than TCMA guys?

nope, I am saying one has to know how to play lively like a flow for real.

How can you talk about something without being able to measure it?

What is the reason do you think we keep bring up motion analysis and momentum analysis?

[YouKnowWho]

Do you know that 4.51 has an influence from Yi Chuan to WCK? go read WXZ's book.

No need to read any book. It's just common sense. 入馬(Ru Ma) - enter horse (move his front leg between his opponent's legs)" is the highest level of the TCMA training. The general TCMA term for that is "欺(Qi) - Take unfair advantage of", or "踏中宮直进(Ta Zhong Gong Zhi Jin) - walk right into your opponent's front door". You have to have excellent "structure" to be able to do that.

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/2...terfootswe.jpg

What is the reason do you think we keep bring up motion analysis and momentum analysis?

That's just not a good test IMO.

[Hendrik]

That's just not a good test IMO. By the way, 入馬(Ru Ma) - enter horse (move his front leg between his opponent's legs)" is the highest level of the TCMA training. The general TCMA term for that is "欺(Qi) - Take unfair advantage of" or "中宮直进(Zhong Gong Zhi Jin) - walk into his front door".

for me, There are lots of Chinese talk. and they all sound great.


the devil is in How? and what?

how to walk into the rapid firing area? and with what?
if one dont know how? and with what? then what to test?


raising an idea without the how and what is just an empty talk.

I personally love the multi-dimentional motion analysis or simulation because that give me a prediction of the boundary condition or strenght/limitation. Only with that one can know, can one walk in. otherwise, one is blind.

and as I keep saying center line is not something "fix" because anything "fix" in you will be the target to get fire. Dont expect your enermy is total moron.

thus, in WC Kuen kuit, it says Come accept, goes return, let go move forward, using silence to lead action. There is no saying about Center Line, no saying about fix structure. None at all.

it tells you keep flowing or moving. the biggest issue is if one needs to keep flowing and moving how do one generate the momentum needed at the instant needed? that is where the Fajing or WCK short power comes to play. Thus, this cannot be the Hung gar continous tensing core type. it is highly dynamic, and highly dynamic just cant come from staying fix and continous tensing because law of physics has to gorven.


So, you want to walk into the center door? in general, you must be able to seal him off before walk in. or you must be able to accelerate 5 X faster then him. Can one's solo body dynamic structure do that or meet that requirement? if yes, do it, if not can not be done.

[YouKnowWho]

for me, There are lots of Chinese talk. and they all sound great.

the devil is in How? and what?

how to walk into the rapid firing area? and with what?
if one dont know how? and with what? then what to test?

raising an idea without the how and what is just an empty talk.

I have presented 4 different ways to develop "structure" in this thread. Use body structure to

- stop incoming opponent with kick.
- block a full power hook punch.
- pull rubberband tied on a tree.
- enter your opponent's front door and run him down.

If you train with these 4 different drills 100 times daily with your opponent (or training equipment), you will develop good "structure" within 1 year.

So far you just talk about theory such as snake engine, 6DFV, or using some Taiji or XingYi guy's solo demo clip to make your point. I don't know who is "empty talk" here.

[WC1277]

I could be wrong, however, for me, the above are still Frame not dynamic structure fill with all kind of "fixed" part.


remember what Sean's friend said in her motion analysis description?

You seem to be one of those guys who only sees end movements.

Bong doesn't work as a position but in motion. One example of the motion being what's important is the jong to bong transition. Try this out. Have someone hold your arm down on your forearm. Try lifting with just your elbow. Doesn't work. Now try moving through jong to bong and it works with next to no effort.

The entire structure "aims" towards the opponents center. Remember that quote by ip man that says the opponent will show you how to hit him? That can only be by a structure that recoils back to the center. The motions that you call "fixed" enable this outcome and their strength is not in the stopping motion but in the active/passive that I've been trying to explain lately. How does that also work? With proper tension. You know how in the balloon Chi gung exercise you keep your fingers from touching each other? That's similar tension without muscle that's also in a good WC structure.

I don't know Hendrik. It seems like you're really trying to make WC something it is not

[Eric_H]

Who cares about Cho or Yik Kam?

If you don't even care about the Wing Chun you claim to practice then that about sums up the value of your opinion right there.

Sometime, I am amazed by how some WCners is similar to a cult follower that rather ignore the law of physics to believe their own cult stories.

The only one here with a cult mindset is you - you don't accept any questions to the "ultimate truth" you realized through sitting at a table and pretending to pet an imaginary dog.

Pretty much all WC outside of the one small branch (which was a later development) that you supposedly practice doesn't use that Emei stuff, yet somehow its the root of all WC? Please.

Take your nonsense somewhere else.

[anerlich]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hendrik
Sometime, I am amazed by how some WCners is similar to a cult follower that rather ignore the law of physics to believe their own cult stories.

I agree with Eric - Hendrik must therefore be amazed at his own wilful ignorance of physical reality.

Then again, as Bruce Sterling wrote, reality is a failed state these days.

[GlennR]

1, Snake in WCK is not my theories. it is all over WCK lineages since ancient time.

Its mentioned in a story about a Nun watch one fight a snake. Maybe it has some lost meaning but at the end of the day its a fable

2, it is not snake taichi but Emei.

I missed a comma.... but i think you got my drift

3, we are discussing dynamic structure here,
with motion analysis, All the three WCK form or set, has the Emei DNA. it is not Hung Gar or Shao Lin. That is a FACT.

The post is "what is structure to you", ive made my points as has everyone else in regards to that. Technical applicable points.
Youve dragged out your old "emei internal snake" wagon again, you belittle eveyone elses opnion, and try to get some loose association with Sean's friend after her insightful observation to boost your story.... again
Oh, Emei is NOT a fact.......... its your theory

If you dont buy it, go a head, get the motion analysis expert to do an analysis.

No, the best measurement of applied structure is from the guy i sparred last night.

Do you have anything to offer instead of keep posting off track to attack me?

You know what, i must admit i probabbly do hound you too much... but ill stop when you stop your condascending self serving attitude. Deal?

Just get this straight ; I notice from your posts against me, that started

since a few months ago, when Navin asking for my opinion, and I comment TST's clip is good for demo but not real internal art such as other TCMA IMA, you hold my technical view against me.

and since then you keep posting attack.

Im sure i criticised you before that. Incidentally, i said TST had structure which you said didnt meet your TCMA criteria, im interested in the result whilst you are interested in the way as is TST id say

If you dont like my comment, that is for Navin and not you any way.

If you like to invite TST here, I am not shy to tell him what my view is and let him and me have a friendly technically discussion.

or if you dont like it, go a head, send the TST clip and the CXW clip to a Motion analist and let them tell you what is TST clip shows compare with the CXW clip.

I could be right, I could be wrong. I am willing to be wrong if the motion analist tell me so. But if I am right, then could you accept you are wrong?

You dont have to agree with me, however, I dont see a point to keep attacking me just because I comment on TST's clip.

I appology if my technical view of TST make you feel hurt.

Once again, im interested in the result, the applicable result of good WC structure.
I dont give a rats **** what you or a "motion analyst" have to say about TST or any other regarded WC person. Its the result that matters within the confines of the WC structure. I dont care about lineage, stories... all that stuff, its interesting for a chat but thats it.

You, however, are obsessed with the way of getting there..... you cant show us a single result, not one, yet you are happy to tell everyone your way is the right/original way.
Youre lost


I hope this post of opening up the root cause put an end to this issue

[GlennR]

TST and William Cheung has their own system.

and that is might not be even be a complete WCK system of Ip Man lineage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blv7B...feature=relmfu

How can it be a complete WCK system?

Thats you argument for everything.... some guy on a youtube clip

Even Ip Man WCK system is not a complete Chan Wah WCK system.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IEej1FpJwo&feature=fvsr

And ofcourse you should believe everyting these 2 gentlemen say

[GlennR]

one doesnt have to seen WC guys. WC guys is not a reference of good structure.

I see, so you are saying that no one on this forum has good structure

[Hendrik]

You seem to be one of those guys who only sees end movements.

Bong doesn't work as a position but in motion. One example of the motion being what's important is the jong to bong transition. Try this out. Have someone hold your arm down on your forearm. Try lifting with just your elbow. Doesn't work. Now try moving through jong to bong and it works with next to no effort.

The entire structure "aims" towards the opponents center. Remember that quote by ip man that says the opponent will show you how to hit him? That can only be by a structure that recoils back to the center. The motions that you call "fixed" enable this outcome and their strength is not in the stopping motion but in the active/passive that I've been trying to explain lately. How does that also work? With proper tension. You know how in the balloon Chi gung exercise you keep your fingers from touching each other? That's similar tension without muscle that's also in a good WC structure.

I don't know Hendrik. It seems like you're really trying to make WC something it is not

For me, you are talking the power of a certain frame again.

Does those stuffs you train work in this type of situation?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Z8OlxazPM


perhaps it is me have a different WC view or may be you are trying to put the world in a frame you learn from a WC lineage.

[anerlich]

to a Motion analist

Better check that there spelling - I ain't sending nothing to no analist.

I guess now the seed has been planted, you'll be taking about motion analysts (or analists, up to you) from here to doomsday, despite being no more knowledgeable about them than any other layman.

Correction, perhaps you are more knowledgeable about analists than the rest of us, judging from where it sounds like your head is stuck much of the time...

[Hendrik]

Thats you argument for everything.... some guy on a youtube clip

And ofcourse you should believe everyting these 2 gentlemen say

1, he is not some guy. he is an elderly in Ip Man WCK lineage.

2, it got nothing to do with believe. it is an evidence which could be back up and trace in the area of Canton.

[WC1277]

For me, you are talking the power of a certain frame again.

Does those stuffs you train work in this type of situation?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Z8OlxazPM


perhaps it is me have a different WC view or may be you are trying to put the world in a frame you learn from a WC lineage.

In some of those situations, yes, I think a good WC structure would do just fine. In others distance would be better.

I don't quite get your point. Are you saying your theory would deal with all of those situations?

On another note, Hendrik, since you love to keep playing schematics. Fine, I guess I'm talking frame then, but an engine is useless without a frame and if you're going to preach power development, then try to keep it within the frame(no pun intended) of WC movement. And whether you like it or not, that includes a centerline intent. Just a imagine a vehicle with all four tires moving the "same" direction if that helps you put it into context....