Wing chun long, medium, or short range sparring?

[Hendrik]

Hendrick, do you mean to say that you reject the use of a deep horse-stance in Wing Chun pole training (including battle punches) in favor of YGKYM?

1.
No.

The momentum or the move of mass of the two photo do not seems follow the law of physics. Look at the strike, body mass, timing, and foot work of the two pics. It doesn't seem to add up.


2. Deep horse stance is actually violating ancient Wck concept of others walk bow I walk string mobility. Wide stance is slow in mobility in General, pole can afford to use that for its reason but arm strike timing is a different game. But today's evolution everyone is free to have their version of Wck. No comment.


3.
For me , Pole is pole. Short strike art is short strike art. Type don't mix due to different engine.
But, no comment on today's evolution since it is a free creation world.

[Hendrik]

No matter which style that you train, your back foot should always point to the direction that you are going to move into (or the direction that you are going to punch). To me, this is the body unification 101.

I even have problem with this picture.

Attachment 8695

When things violate simple biomechanics and law of physic , we know it doesn't likely to work

[Faux Newbie]

The deep version of it, if approached as a technique for striking (so I'm circumventing for this thread whether or not it is a spear practice), is in many styles, and is comparable to in boxing when one ducks and jabs at the mid section, only, in ideal circumstances, may involve a grab. I think the power generation on this is often more from dropping in and the expectation that you are ducking something, so that the opponent's body is moving in as the strike comes in, so I don't see the rear footing as a crucial issue, but I could be wrong.

This is generally done in medium to close range.

The first is pretty much comparable to a jab, it leans in, has the rear heal lifted, all the things that give the jab extra length.

[JPinAZ]

If a wing chun fighter has varied ways of bridging when confronted with the same attack, and can use them routinely, then they are less predictable...

....Therefore, to be protected from the possibility of feints drawing a response that the opponent can use, the wing chun player needs to use varied bridging techniques against the more common attacks.

Are you assuming WC only has a few techniques at any given range? Or that Wc fighters try to match technique vs technique? Either way, I have never agreed with this line of thinking, as, for me, WC isn't about how many or what techniques it has. This would be a very limiting view of WCK IMO.

To give an example of what I mean, last night I taught a san sau class (san sau meaning more geared toward sparring applications vs. straight system training/drilling) that had a range of skill levels between the students. There were several guys that have been training for 2-4 years, some 1-2 year students, 2 beginners of only a few weeks, and 1 first-timer doing a trial class that came in with a decent amount of MMA training. I chose this exact topic of feints and long range attackes to train the more seasoned guys, as well as introduce WC's principle-based fighting concepts to the newer people.

Besides showing and labeling the attacks we would be defending against (single straight lead/jab, jab/cross and Jab/hook), I didn't mention one WC technique they would use to defend against them. I had them first get comfortable with the long range attacks so they had some familiarity with them by hitting pads. Most have already done this type of training, but it was a good warm up and essential for the 2 newbies due to their low coordination and having never really thrown a punch in their lives.

Then, I started them into defending against just the single lead/jab. The motion they were using was a biu-type shape engaging the jab from the outside-to-in while maintaining good fwd structure & pressure on center. I didn't label the shape as it wasn't necessary. Instead I focused on the concepts of centerline and space occupation, how do dominate that center space which drives the initial attack offline, and the body mechanics necessary to make it work - moving out to in with the arm, proper 6-gate footwork with the arm extended but elbow still sunken slightly so it can connect with the same side hip & knee, proper arm contact & fwd energy to connect with opponent's COG, etc. At no time did I give the 'technique' a name, even when asked. I also had the punchers vary the attack from feints, touch-and-go probing, as well as more committed punches.

Each time I had them do the same motion regardless of the commitment:
1. If it was a feint, cover the space and then move in if proper range to do so. Or, just stand your ground if little to no contact was made or the range was too far out (I explained you don't move, I don't move - you move I get there first here)
2. For the touch-and-go probing-type jabs, same thing - cover the space and then, if proper range is there, follow the withdraw of the punch with footwork and what some might call trapping & hitting (I explained the general idea of loi lau hoi sung here)
3. For committed attacks, this gave them more test to their overall body structure, elbow/knee/hip connection and fwd intent/pressure. From there, they were more in range to sink and hit.

Some were better at this than others of course, but everyone was able to demonstrate an ability to pull it off and feel comfortable with the safety in the action without have to reply mainly on strength and size, as well as the offensive options you have afterwards. While the newer people just worked on that, I then had the more seasoned guys defend against more random 1-2 attacks I listed before and learned that the follow up punches weren't as much of a threat when done properly.
At the end, everyone seemed to understand what I meant form a principle-based WC POV and weren't focused on what tools they used or how amny/few I had given them. The seniors had a better appreciation for the ideas they already knew, and the new people were left with a good appreciationg with how simple it worked once you learned the mechanics and were successful at applying the idea. And the new MMA guy was a bit surprised how well it worked for being something so foreign to him and was excited to try it out against his training partners at the MMA gym. Very cool

Anyway, the point is - WC isn't about having 1 or 5 or 10 different response for a given attack, it's about being able to apply the same principle-based concepts and ideas physically against a variety of attacks. Regardless the shape you used to get there, the focus and intended outcome should be the same. (of course, skill levels and luck of the day always plays a part!).

[Hendrik]

The deep version of it, if approached as a technique for striking (so I'm circumventing for this thread whether or not it is a spear practice), is in many styles, and is comparable to in boxing when one ducks and jabs at the mid section, only, in ideal circumstances, may involve a grab. I think the power generation on this is often more from dropping in and the expectation that you are ducking something, so that the opponent's body is moving in as the strike comes in, so I don't see the rear footing as a crucial issue, but I could be wrong.

This is generally done in medium to close range.

The first is pretty much comparable to a jab, it leans in, has the rear heal lifted, all the things that give the jab extra length.

Imho,

These are what in general name as the body type of power generation , the yang type, the action force type , of hitting.

Close strike art has force line type of power generation or issuing instead of hitting typ which is moving the body or limbs to accelerate which needs that 40cm clearance to play.


There are many different technology comes with different ancient arts

[KPM]

Simpler version:

If a wing chun fighter has varied ways of bridging when confronted with the same attack, and can use them routinely, then they are less predictable.

Feints require some predictability.

At outside range these methods of getting in and bridging are almost the entirety of options of wing chun player has.

Therefore, to be protected from the possibility of feints drawing a response that the opponent can use, the wing chun player needs to use varied bridging techniques against the more common attacks.

I can agree with those statements Faux. There ARE multiple ways to bridge in Wing Chun. One should never be predictable. The problem is, to me, this is still a "sparring" mentality to some extent. Talk of "routine use" of something implies that the attacker then knows and can predict what you are going to do. Unless he is a regular sparring partner, or an opponent that has studied you fighting in the ring in the past, how is he going to be familiar with your "routine" techniques? An attacker on the street won't know you do Wing Chun and will have no idea what your "routine" techniques are at all!

[KPM]

Now I'm actually very curious how the pole punch fits in all this. What stance is it executed in?

From my learning and training experience, this "pole punch" was meant to be a training and conditioning exercise that is used in preparation for learning the pole. It is not a fighting technique used when empty hand. It is done in a deep horse stance, just as the pole is done in a horse stance. So to reference it as a long range punch in Wing Chun is not accurate for the Wing Chun I have learned. Just look at the video of this that was posted. There is no way that is an example of a realistic punching method for fighting.

The Pin Sun Da that I noted earlier, is similar to the picture that Hendrik posted, but done from a pivoted stance rather than straight out to the side. Imagine someone standing in their YGKYM stance with the fists up by the sides of the chest, and then doing a large pivot or shift with an extended punch straight out in front of them so that the line of the arm and shoulders is a straight line and the rear arm stays at the side of the chest but is angled back so that it forms a 90 angle with the punching arm. This is an exaggerated Wing Chun straight punch that is meant to be used from a longer range and more as a finishing move. Obviously it is a very committed punch and is used sparingly.

[KPM]

If your opponent moves in toward you, or stay stationary, when you block his punch, you may be able to punch him back at the same time. If he is moving side way, you may be able to block his punch, but your other hand may not be able to reach his body. To assume that you can "always" block and strike at the same time may not be realistic. This is why the TCMA divides the hand skill into the following categories.

1. Block first, strike after.
2. Block and strike at the same time.
3. Block and punch back with the same hand (this is called Ha Chuan).
4. Block, take over your block with the other hand, strike back with the same hand (this is called switch hands).
5. Dodge (without block) and strike back.

Good summary John. This applies to my Wing Chun as well.

[Hendrik]

From my learning and training experience, this "pole punch" was meant to be a training and conditioning exercise that is used in preparation for learning the pole. It is not a fighting technique used when empty hand. It is done in a deep horse stance, just as the pole is done in a horse stance. So to reference it as a long range punch in Wing Chun is not accurate for the Wing Chun I have learned. Just look at the video of this that was posted. There is no way that is an example of a realistic punching method for fighting.

The Pin Sun Da that I noted earlier, is similar to the picture that Hendrik posted, but done from a pivoted stance rather than straight out to the side. Imagine someone standing in their YGKYM stance with the fists up by the sides of the chest, and then doing a large pivot or shift with an extended punch straight out in front of them so that the line of the arm and shoulders is a straight line and the rear arm stays at the side of the chest but is angled back so that it forms a 90 angle with the punching arm. This is an exaggerated Wing Chun straight punch that is meant to be used from a longer range and more as a finishing move. Obviously it is a very committed punch and is used sparingly.

Imho,

I agree on the pole punch. Also, i dont think that type of conditioning will aid short strike but get one evolve into hung gar type of long fist art. It is just slow and too extreme. If one strike is missed, one is open and difficult to recover. Look at biu jee set. See does it offer a solution for these type of punch as in the above picture and video? If not, then one knows what is the deal.

[YouKnowWho]

If one strike is missed, one is open and difficult to recover. ...

All long fist guys will share the same concern as you have described. This is why the praying mantis system had evolved from the long fist system in order to fix this issue. This is also why most of the long fist guys cross train the PM system. When a PM guy punches, his back hand is always next to his front arm elbow area. This way, he can switch both hands easily. This is the same principle as WC guys would like both hands to have the same reach.

The long fist is like the riffle. The PM is like the machine gun.

The following drills was the PM master Brendan Lai's most favor combo. He didn't teach this drill to me but I stole this from him. In this clip, it's easy to see that the difference between long fist and short fist are no longer black and white but grey.

[Hendrik]

All long fist guys will share the same concern as you have described. This is why the praying mantis system had evolved from the long fist system in order to fix this issue. This is also why most of the long fist guys cross train the PM system. When a PM guy punches, his back hand is always next to his front arm elbow area. This way, he can switch both hands easily. This is the same principle as WC guys would like both hands to have the same reach.

The long fist is like the riffle. The PM is like the machine gun.

The following drills was the PM master Brendan Lai's most favor combo. He didn't teach this drill to me but I stole this from him. In this clip, it's easy to see that the difference between long fist and short fist are no longer black and white but grey.

Imho

1. That is why i dont want to say much on the pole punch add in to wck. It is classical trouble . Enough people dont like me.

2. The clip still a long fist because it needs to keep a 40cm clearance for acceleration.

3. This pm technic can be broken by rhino.destroy the center axis. And split the center axis

[KPM]

Imho,

I agree on the pole punch. Also, i dont think that type of conditioning will aid short strike but get one evolve into hung gar type of long fist art..

I agree that it won't help develop "short power." But I don't think that is the intent. I think it may have been more a way to get students started working on some of the dynamics for using the long pole in a group setting where there wasn't a pole available for everyone to use.

Not to stray off topic, but maybe some will find this an interesting data point. In Pin Sun WCK we do not use a long heavy pole and do not use a deep horse stance. We use a shorter lighter pole and work from the YGKYM, just as in the empty hand methods. This leads to "snappier" waste movements with a little smaller amplitude. In my experience, this DOES help develop "short power" better than the typical version of the pole. To me, this represents the pole better adapted to Wing Chun mechanics than the way most do the longer heavier pole....which is still very "Hung Ga-like" with its deep stances. Just my opinion, for what its worth.

[kung fu fighter]

I agree that it won't help develop "short power." But I don't think that is the intent. I think it may have been more a way to get students started working on some of the dynamics for using the long pole in a group setting where there wasn't a pole available for everyone to use.

Not to stray off topic, but maybe some will find this an interesting data point. In Pin Sun WCK we do not use a long heavy pole and do not use a deep horse stance. We use a shorter lighter pole and work from the YGKYM, just as in the empty hand methods. This leads to "snappier" waste movements with a little smaller amplitude. In my experience, this DOES help develop "short power" better than the typical version of the pole. To me, this represents the pole better adapted to Wing Chun mechanics than the way most do the longer heavier pole....which is still very "Hung Ga-like" with its deep stances. Just my opinion, for what its worth.

Here is footage of Eddie Chong Performing the pole form from Leung sheung linage, they also use a higher stance as in PSWC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaSqWhYjVMk

[kung fu fighter]

The importance of hidden concepts within wing chun symbols such as the Plum blossom and bagua in relation to long medium and close range sparring https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN5jtY_BcXU

[tc101]

While I appreciate your offer, I'm not interested in tracking down a video of a 'WC fighter' doing what I say to prove my case. I've proven it to myself thru years of training, hard work and proving what works/doesn't work with live pressure testing. But if you think someone like that Obasi is an example of a 'wing chun fighter' we should all watch and learn from, well then nothing I show you is going to make much sense since that guy has nothing to do with wing chun IMO.

Can we just be honest? There is no wing chun fighter including you or any one you know who can use simultaneous blocking and punching like you say. The reason is how fights really work. It's rare when you can do it. That's why we rarely see it. You see whatever it is I want to do like use simultaneous block and punch the reality is it only works if my opponent gives me repeat gives me the right conditions that allow me to pull it off. They rarely do so I can rarely use it. We can see this for ourselves just by looking at fights.

I do not know what this so called live pressure testing is but I do know what sparring and fighting is.

Obasi has nothing to do with wing chun,Kev? Well he's a wing chun guy and could beat the snot out of you right? So he is better at wing chun than you. If he is better at wing chun then doesn't he have a better understanding than you or do you think your understanding doesn't translate into skill?

And yes, in a lot of cases the defense sets up the offense. And no, if looking at something like tan da, simultaneous offense/defense doesn't actually happen exactly simultaneously, but the timing is so closely connected together that the term is safe to apply. Anyone that argues the they aren't simultaneous is just arguing semantics.

But there are different actions that do both at once in one single motion/move, like a 2-line punch/wu sau cutting into an attackers punch. That's one beat, one move, and simultaneous offense defense at the exact same time!

Can you point me to a wing chun person fighting that is using this 2 line punch? Or is this another case of I know it works only I've never seen it really happen?

I only speak from my own personal experience that I've gained thru years of trial and error and seeing what works or doesn't work for me. I don't speculate and I don't need to look at other 'wing chun fighters' to validate what I do. I actually go and do the work myself.

You know that's fine but any one can say they can do anything. I can beat bjj bb's by biting them. I know it works. Trust me. I have lots of experience. Any one can use that line to defend whatever they say. Hendrik can argue that. I am just asking if this is so true why is there no evidence? It's always secret evidence that no one will share lol.

So what do I believe? Do I believe my own eyes and look at what real and we know they are real wing chun fighters can do by seeing the fights of Orr Obasi Spain and so forth or do I listen to the secret pressure testers saying the real fighters can't do it but I can? Why is it that when ever the camera is running no one can do these things but when you switch it off every one can?