Wing chun long, medium, or short range sparring?

[YouKnowWho]

The thing with long range is that reach is vital.

A single "hook (not hook punch but hook principle)" may do most of the job too.

[Faux Newbie]

Interesting. I'll have to think about what I think of that in reference to dealing with long range attacks.

[YouKnowWho]

You only use this when you move in toward your opponent. If your opponent moves in toward you, you can by pass the 1st gate (wrist area) and enter direct into the 2nd gate (elbow area), or even the 3rd gate (shoulder/head area). In the single hook clip, you move from the 1st gate and jump directly into the 3rd gate. If your opponent is experienced, it's safer to just move from the 1st gate to the 2nd gate, and then to the 3rd gate. The reason is simple, if you jump from the 1st gate to the 3rd gate, you may give your opponent enough time to escape.

[kung fu fighter]

If you can use roundhouse kick and haymaker effectively, you have a long range kicking tool as well as a long range punching tool.

Some tools are just so easy to be integrated into your style. You don't even need to learn

- MT to use roundhouse kick, or
- CLF to use haymaker.

Depend on your engine you develop.

I agree! generally these two types of techniques from MT and CLF use the body type engine, not the close range wck force line type short power generation

[Hendrik]

To the topic, and out of general interest.

The thing with close range is that one needs a fairly comprehensive system of take downs, throws, strikes, and holds/seizing in that range.

The thing with long range is that reach is vital.

Where I am curious on how to view wing chun in this is that, in the close category, I am perhaps not familiar with the throwing and takedown repertoire, but the impression I had is that it was not a focus, and not seeking to be comprehensive.

On the long range, because of the center line thing, I was perhaps under the assumption that this requires that line to be on the opponent often in attacks, which reduces the overall range while for others one may face, they retain that range.

On the reach issue, stepping is only an answer if your opponent lacks the skill to also step in order to maintain a reach advantage.

I am curious what inaccuracies people others may think rest in these assumptions.

IMHO, there are different style strategy, range, and specialty. So that is the beauty of different arts.


In my Wck lineage if the type of technology and level as in the following video are not develop. It will be not likely to carry out or implement the strategy. The body and force handling just can't do it properly.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=jji2LOBAHHU

[tc101]

IMHO, there are different style strategy, range, and specialty. So that is the beauty of different arts.


In my Wck lineage if the type of technology and level as in the following video are not develop. It will be not likely to carry out or implement the strategy. The body and force handling just can't do it properly.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=jji2LOBAHHU

I love people who do not fight and have no fighting skills telling us all about fighting and strategy and ranges and so forth like they know what they are talking about. Put on some gloves until you do you have absolutely no idea.

[Faux Newbie]

I love people who do not fight and have no fighting skills telling us all about fighting and strategy and ranges and so forth like they know what they are talking about. Put on some gloves until you do you have absolutely no idea.

Frankly, there is nothing in that video that I, as someone who spars and tries to train realistically with my kung fu, and people I know who fight mma using kung fu and other things, would really spend a lot of time disagreeing with.

I've had plenty of things I disagree with Hendrick on, this isn't really one such thing.

For instance, my style has some common ground with wing chun from a Southern kung fu influence. But it also has a lot in common with Chen style. Changes in range, especially during contact, require subtle changes in posture that come from a particular, as Hendrick would put it, engine, and those are determined by the conditions. Nothing really controversial there.

[Hendrik]

You only use this when you move in toward your opponent. If your opponent moves in toward you, you can by pass the 1st gate (wrist area) and enter direct into the 2nd gate (elbow area), or even the 3rd gate (shoulder/head area). In the single hook clip, you move from the 1st gate and jump directly into the 3rd gate. If your opponent is experienced, it's safer to just move from the 1st gate to the 2nd gate, and then to the 3rd gate. The reason is simple, if you jump from the 1st gate to the 3rd gate, you may give your opponent enough time to escape.

Great point!

[Wayfaring]

A single "hook (not hook punch but hook principle)" may do most of the job too.

Because a "jump head lock" is a 1)preferred 2)possible 3)plausible way to close distance?

[YouKnowWho]

Because a "jump head lock" is a 1)preferred 2)possible 3)plausible way to close distance?

It doesn't have to end with a "head lock". You can pull your opponent into your punch, or use the counter force to pull yourself into your opponent.

[Wayfaring]

It doesn't have to end with a "head lock". You can pull your opponent into your punch, or use the counter force to pull yourself into your opponent.

So I guess your answer would be 2) Possible. And yes, I'm aware of "you can pull your opponent into your punch...". Lap sau is a very basic move in wing chun.

All I got to say regarding that first video with the jump head lock would be the same things my kids say when I dance in front of them "don't ever do that again......"

[YouKnowWho]

Do you think the "jump head lock" is

- impossible?
- low successful rate?
- too risky to apply?
- ...

If you have concern about your opponent right free arm, when you enter, you do have to jam it and then wrap it. You have 2 arms and your opponent also has 2 arms. You can't ignore your opponent's free arm when you enter. The arm jamming and arm wrapping just wasn't shown in that clip.

[Faux Newbie]

So, discussing the long range aspect, I understand from your perspective, John, that a major goal is getting in close as soon as possible and throwing.

Let's say from a perspective of someone in a situation with a reach advantage who wishes to prolong time in long range striking and maximizing that advantage before moving in for the finish. It does not seem to me that Wing Chun is a long range art in this sense, though I certainly could be mistaken. This is not saying incomplete, just saying that that option seems limited to me.

Likewise in very close range, I will do a little background research, but it seems to me that in close, strikes or take downs both play a huge role. In regards to the types of strikes, I do not see this as an issue, but I again was under the impression that on throws and take downs, it is not a focus.

How do Wing Chun fighters deal with these issues, or, in what ways are these aspects included?

For instance, not are there throws, but is there sufficient throws to be considered well prepared for the realities of throwing and attempts at counter throws? Are there strikes that are sufficiently long range to deal with the opponent who keeps distance and uses reach using a system that does not adhere to center line approaches to striking, systems whose strikes enable more reach?

[JPinAZ]

In regards to longer range fighting, the WC I practice has long range bridging strategies. It is part of our Cheurn Kiu Sau engagement tools. This can be used to bridge with an opponent as a means of keeping them out of mid-to-close range striking. Of course, it also would keep me from reaching my opponent with WC's short range strikes, but that's the point.

In a general sense, it's intent is to intercept & engage with an opponent and fend them off to prior to closing the range into WC's short range striking. This may be done as a means to feel the guy out a little before going into committing to striking, and generally works best against longer range attacks (jab/cross). When introducing these ideas to students, I use the analogy 'touch the stone, cross the river'.

Of course fights are chaotic and the opponent might have other ideas about the range they want to fight at So while like anything else, it doesn't always work out, but the idea is you've made contact sooner than later and have bought some time to react to their next move while covering centerline and getting a bead on their COG if bridge correctly.

[Faux Newbie]

The WC I practice has long range bridging strategies. It is part of our Cheurn Kiu Sau engagement tools. This can be used to bridge with an opponent as a means of keeping them out of mid-to-close range striking. Of course, it also would keep me out of that same range, but in a general sense, it's intent is to intercept & engage with an opponent and fend them off to prior to closing the range into WC's short range striking. This may be done as a means to feel the guy out a little before commiting to striking. When introducing these ideas to students, I use the analogy 'touch the stone, cross the river'.
Of course, the opponent might have other ideas, so it doesn't always work out and the range may be lost before it's of any use.

This was what I understood to be the case. I guess I view it, in that sense, of being a style that has methods of dealing with long range, but not oriented towards long range offenses. Would this be accurate?