Hook

[imperialtaichi]

This is my take on it.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151625975522053

[GlennR]

This is my take on it.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151625975522053

Sound self defense John

[JPinAZ]

Not running away, but yeilding to the side as he receives the pressure of the attack. I have had very limited contact with HFY WC, but the one HFY student I met stressed a very solid stance, and did not yield much. The "WT" guys tend to favor much lighter, yielding footwork. They still maintain forward pressure and centerling orientation. Or at least if they're doing it right, they do!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying what is done in the video won't work. I just would never advocate giving up or 'yielding' your position before contact is made - which is exactly what I see in the video. He does move offline of the original A-to-B centerline to pull of the block, which imo violates WC centerline ideas, as well as putting him more in-line for an attack from the other hand.

While HFY does stress good stance & root to support proper wing chun structure (as I hope all WC does), it doesn't mean we never move. I'm just guessing here, but maybe the point that was being made at the time you experienced HFY was that we don't move 'just because'. If I can stand my ground and deal with the threat with minimal movement or footwork, that is just smart wing chun - if approaching fighting from an idea of economy of motion and maximal efficiency!

And. in HFY, having a set point of reference for your self is key to understanding wing chun A-to-B centerline concepts for engagement. Maybe it's just we have different ideas and understanding of wing chun centerline?
To help clarify, here's a quick blog entry on the subject by somoene you may know http://www.hungfablog.com/2013/04/18...ine-wing-chun/

[imperialtaichi]

Sound self defense John

Haha, I think like a girl ;-)

[Paddington]

I tend to use more of a biu sau / high fook sau shape so I can disengage my biceps. Structurally speaking I get my body mass behind it and have found it to be able to withstand big haymakers thrown with full body weight.

As for a 'proper hook' thrown tight and and fast, well, that is a different story.

[Grumblegeezer]

Here's Michael Casey of EBMAS, another WT branch, demonstrating essentially the same attack and defense as in the clip posted in the OP. I think this one is a little clearer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfCcpyqO4Io

What else can I say, except "Red pants!"

[hunt1]

Same problem but different example. In first vid haymaker is coming from back leg and Leung Ting guy moves right into the lead hand. In a real situation the other hand always comes and he would have surely been hit directly on side of face as he moved in. In second vid haymaker from lead leg but same problem leung ting person moves directly into the back power hand cross and would end up on his ass or worse if this is done in a real situation against anyone with any training at all.

The only reason either example looks good is because the attacker wildly commits with punch and allows their back hand to go dead just dropping out of the way.

The more interesting discussion and if I have time will come back to is the footwork,body positioning and usage.

Wing Chun fist saying's " receive what comes ", " My opponent moves but I move first", " Footwork is to be fast, nimble and ever changing". How do we combine all 3? JP goes with sound structure to receive but is critical of the footwork. Geezer seems to go with footwork and critical of the solid structure route. How do we combine both? Can we combine both? How do we receive?

[EternalSpring]

Okay. People are free to train whatever other arts they want

And in my experience, people from every art talk smack about every other art. Should I care? . Like I said, I have used this and it works.

But if you have a clip you prefer... go and watch it.

Well, to clarify, my comment was more based on the presentation. I know the concept(s) work, but I never really was a big fan of people proving their techniques or concepts by using them against half a$$ed attacks. In a way, it's almost as if people are training to learn how to fight untrained people.

And I agree that lots of people talk smack. But not all negative sounding comments are talking smack, imo.

[EternalSpring]

Wing Chun fist saying's " receive what comes ", " My opponent moves but I move first", " Footwork is to be fast, nimble and ever changing". How do we combine all 3? JP goes with sound structure to receive but is critical of the footwork. Geezer seems to go with footwork and critical of the solid structure route. How do we combine both? Can we combine both? How do we receive?

I think both can be combined, in fact, they should be combined and that's probably how it was always intended to be. Imo, it's no different in Ving Tsun than any other martial art or even any sport. Basketball players have to dribble, catch, throw, shoot all while moving and having people trying to stop them from scoring. Handball players have to move around and plant themselves to hit with accuracy and power and immediately move again. Boxers/Muay Thai Guys/Grapplers all have to move while being rooted while still being able to receive and respond to attacks.

How do we train it? I would say some form of contact sparring where there's enough intensity to test moving, receiving, attacking, etc. It'll force people to move naturally without a premade pattern, and this will naturally force the people training to deal with "moving while being rooted and attacking/defending/etc" because while moving naturally, attacks are bound to be made and both people will feel where their structure, movement, or other techniques are compromised. Once they feel this, they'll be able to work on it and refine it.

[Paddington]

Here's Michael Casey of EBMAS, another WT branch, demonstrating essentially the same attack and defense as in the clip posted in the OP. I think this one is a little clearer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfCcpyqO4Io

What else can I say, except "Red pants!"

I have an issue with this video. In the street role play the two gents are already very close. I think this is quite realistic as usually the gap is small when it kicks off on the street. However, with the 'training role play' both partners do not even start within kicking distance of one another! Anyway, I could take this point further but feel I have said enough.

[Sean66]

@Imperialtaichi
I like that. It reminds me of one of Rory Miller's reflex positions.
That elbow can not only protect, but can really hurt the aggressor when you really move in on him.
I use the same thing, but with the other arm and elbow low to protect the torso.

[Grumblegeezer]

Same problem but different example. In first vid haymaker is coming from back leg and Leung Ting guy moves right into the lead hand. In a real situation the other hand always comes...

Agreed. That's why I always prefer to go to the outside when possible. Sometimes it's not possible. A good angle and simultaneous defense/attack can beat that second punch. That's the objective here. Of course there are other options. Moving inside with an elbow like John does has a definite appeal.

The more interesting discussion and if I have time will come back to is the footwork,body positioning and usage.

Wing Chun fist saying's " receive what comes ", " My opponent moves but I move first", " Footwork is to be fast, nimble and ever changing". How do we combine all 3? JP goes with sound structure to receive but is critical of the footwork. Geezer seems to go with footwork and critical of the solid structure route. How do we combine both? Can we combine both? How do we receive?

These are very good questions. And for the record, I don't criticise those who favor a strongly rooted stance. There's a time and a place for that. There are already enough people on this forum with an extremely narrow concept of what constitues good WC without me joining in.

One problem I have with the very yieldng position is that if you give way too easily, you risk not controlling your opponent's center. If you maintain more pressure, it is easier to disrupt and turn your opponent aside and disrupt his power base. If you simply "float aside" there's nothing to control that "other hand" you talked about in the first quote above. Though for what it's worth, I don't think that's what Michael Casey was advocating in that clip.

[Wayfaring]

One-steps are worthless. If you want to show skill against a hook, show something that works in an alive setting like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l2jp1DCOaE

or this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07E4ps4mkXw

[GlennR]

One-steps are worthless. If you want to show skill against a hook, show something that works in an alive setting like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l2jp1DCOaE

or this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07E4ps4mkXw

You have to start somewhere.

FWIW, i like Johns clip (imperialtaichi), from a WC/self defense point of view, it covers well, goes straight in and , most importantly to me, creates a bridge with the opponent.

Get in, hurt the guy, get out.

[Wayfaring]

You have to start somewhere.

And you have to progress to somewhere. That somewhere is beyond a one-step response replete with verbosity of explanation.

FWIW, i like Johns clip (imperialtaichi), from a WC/self defense point of view, it covers well, goes straight in and , most importantly to me, creates a bridge with the opponent.

Yeah, the move is fundamentally sound there. But put that movement in the context of the two clips I posted, and it's not enough. It's a whole lot of covering up to deal with one punch, which will limit mobility and speed. The second or third punch in the combo is what you have to worry about there.

Also, wherever in the world did you get the idea that "creating a bridge with the opponent" is what you want to do? Why? So you can chi sau with him? If there is no bridge, you are completely free to punch the guy in the face. Attack and pursue. If there is a bridge, sink it.

Get in, hurt the guy, get out.

No, no, no. That's a boxer's jab. That's tag point fighting. In WCK, you get in, control centerline and space, sink a bridge if there, and strike and pursue.