What is Structure to you?

[couch]

How do you set yourself up for a 50m dash. How do you push a car. How do you cover someone while playing basketball.

I love this explanation. Practical and points to other functional types of training mirroring their outcomes.

[Graham H]

its interesting to read all of the different views on this subject. For what its worth, to me structure is the ability to use the shapes of the system (hand and legs including footwork) to deliver and dissipate force using the skeleton rather than the muscle groups and muscular tension. Lining up the bones allows the practitioner to relax muscles and therefore move more quickly whilst at the same time having the ability to dissipate far greater forces than if they were using their muscles.

I have read some stuff on your web page. WSLVT has a different approach than Ip Chun/Rawcliffe. Nice website though.

GH

[Lee Chiang Po]

Not in some lineages I have experienced mate!

GH

If it isn't, then it should be. I am only familiar with my own WC and this is pretty much how it was all explained to me. I was not aware of so many different so called lineages until I got to reading about it here. I always felt that WC was WC, but it clearly isn't.

[Graham H]

If it isn't, then it should be. I am only familiar with my own WC and this is pretty much how it was all explained to me. I was not aware of so many different so called lineages until I got to reading about it here. I always felt that WC was WC, but it clearly isn't.

Yup! That's just the way it is! "Wing Chun" is a generic term nowadays IMO. Most systems contain SLT, CK, MYJ, BJ, BJD & LDBK but the thinking can vary massively. Some forms can even look entirely different. That's what happens when you have a system that, commonly in the past, was kept in small circles and then suddenly in the early 70's exploded around the world. Many people invented there own style and sold it to people that knew no better. People who may have practiced only for a short time in HK then left and started schools around the world.

Some people are easily fooled when you dress things up, make no contact with their students and charge massive amounts of money for things! This gives the impression it must be good stuff!!

GH

[nasmedicine]

http://futsaowingchun.info/articles.html#section3

I concur with the general premise of the article mentioned by stonecrusher, it's a very good and short article that gets right to the heart of the subject matter without getting to deep or to confusing. Hendrik has also expressed some points in the past on this forum in regards to structure that I also agreed with at the time (however his explanations are sometime a bit circuitous). Furthermore, I also agree with Hawkins concept of what structure as well, however there are certain things conceptually I don't agree with. These are simply my opinions.

[Sean66]

I, too, ejoyed the article, but must admit that I didn't find a clear definition of "structure". It offers some insight into the various uses and/or effects of structure, but that's it.

We need a common definition before we can really talk about it and discuss it's different expressions. Otherwise it will continue to remain "ambiguous", to use the author's own term.

[trubblman]

One point I think the article raises but has not been addressed, to my understanding, is where did the idea of wing chun structure originate? Did Yip Man, or one of his original progeny( Leung Sheung, Wong Shun Lung, CST etc), explicitly set out what structure meant? Or was it the endless ( possibly wrong? )commentary by later sifu?

[nasmedicine]

I, too, ejoyed the article, but must admit that I didn't find a clear definition of "structure". It offers some insight into the various uses and/or effects of structure, but that's it.

We need a common definition before we can really talk about it and discuss it's different expressions. Otherwise it will continue to remain "ambiguous", to use the author's own term.

IMHO, I feel the problem is that there is no "one" definition of structure. Structure simply put is based purely on physics. If you open up a physics book and understand the concepts of statics, vector forces and trig...etc... and then learn how to apply it to YOUR anatomy/WC you will essentially be using structure.

[nasmedicine]

One point I think the article raises but has not been addressed, to my understanding, is where did the idea of wing chun structure originate? Did Yip Man, or one of his original progeny( Leung Sheung, Wong Shun Lung, CST etc), explicitly set out what structure meant? Or was it the endless ( possibly wrong? )commentary by later sifu?

Does it really matter? What came first the chicken or the egg (i know there was British study that was done that showed there is a protein needed to make the egg that can only undergo synthesis from within the chicken, but that's besides the point) The point is does your WC work? Can you fight with it? Does your structure hold up to your opponents force? If you can say Yes to all those then the answer to your question is that the idea of structure comes from YOUR wing chun.

[trubblman]

Well it does matter, otherwise why would I really ask? It's more than an academic question if one steps back and tries to understand why something works in a fight. It is a clear that many fighting styles, systems concept "work" without an idea of 'structure' such as VT understands. In addition I have seen and read about WSL using techniques that may break the idea of structure as I have heard it explained. Which raises a question - if one can be successful in a fight without using structure or by breaking structure perhaps the idea of structure is not necessary? My posting was more food for thought posting.

[nasmedicine]

Which raises a question - if one can be successful in a fight without using structure or by breaking structure perhaps the idea of structure is not necessary?

It is not. Thats why I said it doesn't matter. It is only one "tool" you have an your disposal. It is not the end all be all (though many would disagree)

[trubblman]

It is not. It is only one "tool" you have an your disposal. It is not the end all be all (though many would disagree)

All I can say is OK.

[nasmedicine]

All I can say is OK.

Sorry, but you can't really get the answer on a forum. You have to go find a good school. If you are already at one then ask your sifu for some help. (if he would be so kind). good luck!

[trubblman]

I have a "school" Thanks. My original posting was trying to get an opinion on the provenance of the idea of 'structure' - whether it is a concept that was taught by Yip Man to his original students or whether it was grafted on to Wing Chun by later sifu ( which seems to me many ideas concerning VT are). There are parallels to VT structure with tai chi. I was always curious about the parallels. So I was not curious at all about whether it works in a fight or not. Believe it or not sometimes people are interested in learning about something because of naked curiosity - knowledge for knowledge's sake.

[WC1277]

There are many different ways to look at structure. You could say that since most movements in WC are of a triangle "shape" then it's a triangle structure. Like with everything, and joy has said this many times on this forum, the devil is in the details. In my experience, the application of those "shapes" has to do with when to turn on/off power which in turn makes the "structure". I'll throw this out here simply because there's no way I'm capable of explaining it without being in person, but maybe someone here have heard it before.

You can't have active body and active hands. You can have active hands, passive body or vice versa. You can't have two active hands or two passive hands. You can only have one of each at any given time. If you use structure to deflect on the inside, the deflecting hand will always be active. If you use structure to deflect on the outside, the deflecting hand will always be passive.

If you violate any of those principles, you're not using structure in your triangle "shapes"....