In response to T.D.O.

[Hendrik]

Shape holding Structure is a transition a great intermediate step which is very important to learn, making shape structure as the core and ultimate becomes a hindrance.
The biu Jee set teaches one to abandon structure. Also, any trick for demo is not applicable in real life.

The control the body via mind is slower then the body response. Thus many of the demo power doesn't work in real time. Thus, structure carry too far become trying be a robot with mind or Central control. And we know, neuro is a distributive control, it is not a central control as most people who think their mind is the master central control which can control the structure or holding a structure.


Don't believe me?
Test out the best shape holding structure you have with a jujitsu or wrestle, see if you have a chance in close body range to handle his wrapping on you. Or just standing in a wrestling cushion mat with your best yjkym and see if that structure break apart when the cushion is rocking.

In the real of momentum, it is beyond any type of structure. It is a dynamic flow there hold no one shape .

[WC1277]

Shape holding Structure is a transition a great intermediate step which is very important to learn, making shape structure as the core and ultimate becomes a hindrance.
The biu Jee set teaches one to abandon structure. Also, any trick for demo is not applicable in real life.

The control the body via mind is slower then the body response. Thus many of the demo power doesn't work in real time. Thus, structure carry too far become trying be a robot with mind or Central control. And we know, neuro is a distributive control, it is not a central control as most people who think their mind is the master central control which can control the structure or holding a structure.


Don't believe me?
Test out the best shape holding structure you have with a jujitsu or wrestle, see if you have a chance in close body range to handle his wrapping on you. Or just standing in a wrestling cushion mat with your best yjkym and see if that structure break apart when the cushion is rocking.

In the real of momentum, it is beyond any type of structure. It is a dynamic flow there hold no one shape .

The response I gave you in the other thread also applies here...

"A logical fallacy.

What you don't seem to understand Hendrik is that WC has to be "taught" regardless of whatever description, true or untrue, you want to "define" it with..."

[WC1277]

Why did you remove your posts???

From the other thread:

This is you in a nutshell Hendrik.

"Circular reasoning (also known as paradoxical thinking or circular logic), is a logical fallacy in which "the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with". The individual components of a circular argument will sometimes be logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true, and will not lack relevance. Circular logic cannot prove a conclusion because, if the conclusion is doubted, the premise which leads to it will also be doubted. "Begging the question" is a form of circular reasoning.

Example:

"Wellington is in New Zealand. Therefore, Wellington is in New Zealand."

He notes that, although the argument is deductively valid, it cannot prove that Wellington is in New Zealand because it contains no evidence that is distinct from the conclusion. The context – that of an argument – means that the proposition does not meet the requirement of proving the statement, thus it is a fallacy."

If you can't teach it, you can't define it beyond this type of reasoning that you so often resort to...

[GlennR]

Yeah, ok Kevin...

Even your guys rotate their shoulders. Often against the principle. Not interested in arm power alone here...

Im actually with Kevin on this one (miracle), TST doesnt advocate a lot of turning either and, as Kevin does, turns to face more so than increase striking power

He hits like a mule without a turn

[KPM]

I think you got your answer within your own response. The punch won't be powerful. "Relatively weak", your words.

.

I didn't say it was a good thing! Just that it was possible!

[KPM]

I am very envious of you if it is the case you have seen those guys in person. There are lots of little gems in the viking shield segment; the 'tan sau' arm shape that utilizes the flat of the shield and disperses force to the ground for example.

I wish I had worked with Roland in person! Unfortunately, I've had to settle for his instructional DVD. He does more with I.33 Sword & Buckler than he does with Viking Sword & Shield. And his buckler work is probably more pertinent to Wing Chun interpretations than his Viking Shield. I.33 Sword & Buckler has a lot in common with Wing Chun. Its also the oldest documented European martial art.

[WC1277]

Im actually with Kevin on this one (miracle), TST doesnt advocate a lot of turning either and, as Kevin does, turns to face more so than increase striking power

He hits like a mule without a turn

Fair enough but can you give me one example, in any other system of fighting anywhere, where there's a power punch that involves no rotation of shoulder side?

[KPM]

Wc1277 is confirming a basic but HUGE difference in thinking. Same with LT.
SLT teaches FACING for a reason, we have to utilize the structural facing alignment and legs to power the facing arms. Using similar forces we use in the pole, we use the physics ( sorry tc101 ) of kinetic transfer of energy exactly like Newons Cradle.
Speed of parrying actions creates more force, the alignment or discharge point, is the centerline. We can angle and move this facing idea so we don't lose force in one arm rotating to defend or strike at the shoulders. We also don't open gates to be hit back ( if following vt thinking ) so attack and defense ARE without making the same rotational errors of 'humans'. We only turn to FACE the opponent. The MYJ ( dummy ) develops ging lik, facing, lateral attacking to cut the way....

I'm not sure I agree with everything that Kevin says here, but I do agree with the idea that Wc1277 has illustrated a basic difference in Wing Chun "thinking" or "strategy." There is one way of thinking that uses a lot pivoting and rotational force to deflect and strike. You definitely see this in the Ho Kam Ming lineage. In contrast is another way of thinking that uses more "Bik Ma" footwork to drive in like a wedge and doesn't use as much pivoting or rotational force. Its more of a translational force...driving in. You definitely see this in Wong Shun Leung lineage. This is not to say that the first way of thinking does not "drive in" with translational force, or that the second way of thinking does not use pivoting and rotational force. Its more of a matter of emphasis or preference.

[KPM]

Fair enough but can you give me one example, in any other system of fighting anywhere, where there's a power punch that involves no rotation of shoulder side?

Southern Praying Mantis, Pak Mei, and most of the "Hakka" styles.

[WC1277]

Southern Praying Mantis, Pak Mei, and most of the "Hakka" styles.

There's absolutely no rotation of their upper body? Are these "upright" attacks?

[guy b.]

There's absolutely no rotation of their upper body? Are these "upright" attacks?

There is a brief clip of spm from 1.33 here. SPM, Bak Mei, Lung Ying and other hakka styles don't tend to use rotational force generation. It is push off back foot and like a wave through the back and out the front, hence bowed back shape practiced a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w09eDqchnxU

[GlennR]

Fair enough but can you give me one example, in any other system of fighting anywhere, where there's a power punch that involves no rotation of shoulder side?

Pak Mei for one

[GlennR]

There's absolutely no rotation of their upper body? Are these "upright" attacks?

Not one but

I studied Pak Mei for 6 odd months about 10 years ago, really good style, very aggressive and very powerful. And Guy puts the power generation quite well in his last post

[WC1277]

There is a brief clip of spm from 1.33 here. SPM, Bak Mei, Lung Ying and other hakka styles don't tend to use rotational force generation. It is push off back foot and like a wave through the back and out the front, hence bowed back shape practiced a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w09eDqchnxU

Sorry, I still see a rotation and it's even more pronounced when he's doing "sparring" demos with the other guy. The few times when he doesn't I'd suffice to say they're not very powerful attacks but I may be wrong.

I've never argued the point that you can't hit someone without rotation. You can. But if you're even remotely in an upright WC position, you're most likely using arm power and not your body to do it. People do it all the time in their chi sao experimentation, but it doesn't translate to actual force in hitting. Throw in on top of that the idea of simultaneous attack and defend and you're losing even more force generation if you're relying on arm power without rotation, let alone not actually redirecting the incoming force. Next time you're in front of your wall bag place a sturdy object next to you and press/pull on it in multiple directions without rotating while hitting with the other arm simultaneously. Then do it with rotation. You notice how there's obvious exchanges of force while not rotating that feel weak? Notice how with rotating you ALWAYS exert more force? Notice how with rotating you ALWAYS facilitate the pushing/pulling hand to a passive roll?

I think sometimes people think that because they can get a hit in, in chi sao or even sparring, that it means they could knock the guy out or cause significant damage. But we all know that isn't true. One should be training their punch to maximize potential, not impress fellow classmates.

What I tried to explain in my "mad analogy" is that it's the rotation that facilitates the seeking of the target. If you push off center on one side, the other side comes forward, and vice versa. There is a realistic approach and bio mechanical structure involved that allows this. Some have alluded to this structure not being able to maintain facing but if you really think about it and you understand the balance of forces, this structure seeks to maintain facing.

And I'll say it again. No one wants to recognize that there's not a single "developmental" attack in ANY of the open hand forms and dummy that don't retain this balance.

[GlennR]

Sorry, I still see a rotation and it's even more pronounced when he's doing "sparring" demos with the other guy. The few times when he doesn't I'd suffice to say they're not very powerful attacks but I may be wrong.

I can only go by the PM ive done and there wasnt turning to increase the power.

I've never argued the point that you can't hit someone without rotation. You can. But if you're even remotely in an upright WC position, you're most likely using arm power and not your body to do it.

No, youre just wrong.
TST guys hit with a lot of power without turning, Barry Lee (WSL senior) hits with astonishing power and a couple of the guys i did PM with also hit like mules.

People do it all the time in their chi sao experimentation, but it doesn't translate to actual force in hitting. Throw in on top of that the idea of simultaneous attack and defend and you're losing even more force generation if you're relying on arm power without rotation, let alone not actually redirecting the incoming force. Next time you're in front of your wall bag place a sturdy object next to you and press/pull on it in multiple directions without rotating while hitting with the other arm simultaneously. Then do it with rotation. You notice how there's obvious exchanges of force while not rotating that feel weak? Notice how with rotating you ALWAYS exert more force? Notice how with rotating you ALWAYS facilitate the pushing/pulling hand to a passive roll?

One of the earlier posters hit it on the head, there si WC folks that turn a lot and some that dont.

I think sometimes people think that because they can get a hit in, in chi sao or even sparring, that it means they could knock the guy out or cause significant damage. But we all know that isn't true. One should be training their punch to maximize potential, not impress fellow classmates.

Sure, but turning wont guarantee success either

What I tried to explain in my "mad analogy" is that it's the rotation that facilitates the seeking of the target. If you push off center on one side, the other side comes forward, and vice versa. There is a realistic approach and bio mechanical structure involved that allows this. Some have alluded to this structure not being able to maintain facing but if you really think about it and you understand the balance of forces, this structure seeks to maintain facing.

And I'll say it again. No one wants to recognize that there's not a single "developmental" attack in ANY of the open hand forms and dummy that don't retain this balance.

Different interpretations thats all