Wing chun long, medium, or short range sparring?

[Faux Newbie]

Oops, my mistake. Fourteen forums where people don't let their need to bicker dominate things. I think the point you miss is that the entire rest of the forum is happily smug over this difference with you. It's not because someone's bridge isn't up to your standards that wing chun has the rep it has.

Far as I see it, I show more respect to wing chun than you do.

Now back to the topic at hand. Which is the difference I am happily smug over. I don't have to maintain the struggle.

[Faux Newbie]

A comment on the battle punch/pole punch. Although this appears long range, it is commonly not long range. It is medium and short range with penetration, as far as I can see. At least, percentage wise, that kind of strike is not going to happen nearly as much, and not without good setup, at longer range.

[Wayfaring]

So how is the term forward intent used, as I am getting the impression it is used for situations where it is not forward, and is not, despite your earlier statement, forward pressure through forward intent?

It still seems like a bad descriptor for a common thing.

Because you haven't learned it. And you won't over an internet discussion forum, because that is not the method for learning it.

As for your not liking my tone, I'll live with it. Considering that there are 11 forums on here that are not dominated by people who absolutely have to bicker over isolated sentences in avoidance of substantive points and overall context, I'm not too worried about the handful who don't get that.

I'm sure you feel entitled to have people you don't know teach you fully things you haven't learned in WCK over the internet by goading them into it via argument. And yes, I am among the handful that don't get how that works in reality.

[Faux Newbie]

As regards my previous comment about the pole punch, I would imagine then that closing and bridging and evasive footwork are the bulk of long range techniques. Given comments by others in relation to training to read people at this range, it seems this is a fair description.

I would say it would be very inaccurate to call it a long range style, if one were choosing to define styles that way. This, of course, is excluding the weapons work.

This is not meant as an attack on the style, just discussion on the topic. Since the footwork of wingchun for closing is not unique in kung fu, and since the main difference in bridging seems to have more to do with attacking with hands on the centerline, the same methods of footwork for keeping distance would be used by most kung fu opponents, and similar methods used in most other styles. Would this be an accurate statement?

[Wayfaring]

Just a reply to note that the person who started this thread, kung fu fighter, has just deleted the thread he started about HFY after it wasn't going his way.

I note that he is the thread starter on 3 of the discussions going on right now in the forum.

I'm just letting posters know I probably won't be conversing in any of kung fu fighter's threads as evidence shows he will delete them and I don't want to waste more of my time.

[Faux Newbie]

That thread consisted of you and others saying they were refusing to talk about it. If you feel that's a waste of your time, I think you're placing the blame on the wrong person. The mod who locked it seemed to place the blame on those who posted on it but never discussed the thread topic. Did you?

[Faux Newbie]

On topic, is there a wing chun kick readers would consider a long range kick?

[Wayfaring]

That thread consisted of you and others saying they were refusing to talk about it. If you feel that's a waste of your time, I think you're placing the blame on the wrong person. The mod who locked it seemed to place the blame on those who posted on it but never discussed the thread topic. Did you?

Ummm a mod didn't lock that thread, kff deleted it. Like he has done several other threads with HFY in the title, when people who actually practice HFY start conversing with him.

[kung fu fighter]

i probably won't be conversing in any of kung fu fighter's threads as evidence shows he will delete them and i don't want to waste more of my time.

thank god! If I knew that's all it took, I would have done so years ago. Lol there was nothing productive about that thread that anyone can learn from, it was just turning into a b!tchfest, that's why I deleted it, we have enough drama on here already, no need to add more.

[Faux Newbie]

Like he has done several other threads with HFY in the title, when people who actually practice HFY start conversing with him.

Which would be believable if I could find one thread on here where that wasn't a flame fest where any attempt to stick to the topic actually occurred. Since there was not one response on that thread that was on topic, why whine about it?

[Faux Newbie]

So, I think it more appropriate, if defining a style by range, to call wing chun a medium/short range style.

Which brings up an earlier question I had, which does sort of relate to the video posted on bridging and whether or not pressing should always be stressed. Throws and takedowns. My question, specifically, is does wing chun have a repertoire of throws that allow throwing and taking down in various directions?

[JPinAZ]

thank god! If I knew that's all it took, I would have done so years ago.

And yet you still create HFY threads asking for our opinions. You're so full of it.

Lol there was nothing productive about that thread that anyone can learn from, it was just turning into a b!tchfest, that's why I deleted it, we have enough of those on here already.

This is just more typical BS. You would have deleted the thread anyway, just like you deleted all the previous HFY threads you started - and some had some very good, positive discussions going on. Fact is, your history shows you had no real intent to keep anything written on that thread, just like the others, which is why no one felt like talking with on this last one. Cry, whine, beg, etc all you want - no one is interested in giving you what you want in regards to HFY.

Which would be believable if I could find one thread on here where that wasn't a flame fest where any attempt to stick to the topic actually occurred. Since there was not one response on that thread that was on topic, why whine about it?

There were several thread KFF started that had HFY in the title that were very productive. Yet there is no proof now as those are gone too.

[Wayfaring]

thank god! If I knew that's all it took, I would have done so years ago. Lol there was nothing productive about that thread that anyone can learn from, it was just turning into a b!tchfest, that's why I deleted it, we have enough of those on here already.

Actually, I still wanted to hear from you why it is that you delete all threads you create about HFY after you get responses? I don't buy your explanation of it becoming whatever you named it. Because I do know about 2 or 3 previous examples where people write a reasonable amount of explanation on HFY, then you end up deleting it. One very plausible reason is that you are doing reconnaissance on HFY - gathering a bunch of little write-ups for whatever purpose you have - maybe disproving it, maybe comparing to TWC. I don't really know what your purpose is I just know you are shady in your approach and won't answer direct questions about it. So that is why myself, JP and many others from HFY backgrounds are communicating with each other so we stop writing explanations of our art on your threads.

The only thing I've seen you do years ago is be a little mouse. Like you are now.

[Faux Newbie]

A new thread for it might be good. Unless you think the mods will appreciate the only thread that has stayed moderately on topic being crapped up as well.

I didn't read such patience in Sanjuro-Ronin's latest post here.

[kung fu fighter]

And yet you still create HFY threads asking for our opinions. You're so full of it.

I've never specificly asked you nor Wayfaring for your opinion, it was intended as a general HFY question.

I'm just letting posters know I probably won't be conversing in any of kung fu fighter's threads as evidence shows he will delete them and I don't want to waste more of my time.

One very plausible reason is that you are doing reconnaissance on HFY - gathering a bunch of little write-ups for whatever purpose you have - maybe disproving it, maybe comparing to TWC. I don't really know what your purpose is I just know you are shady in your approach and won't answer direct questions about it. So that is why myself, JP and many others from HFY backgrounds are communicating with each other so we stop writing explanations of our art on your threads.

The only thing I've seen you do years ago is be a little mouse. Like you are now.

Oh no, heee's back! lol, let the b!tchfest begin. Many great wck men have been called mouse as of late, so I am honored! lol
My intent behind the HFY thread was to make a comparrison between the man sau wu concept that I learnt in Yip Man wck with how HFY approaches it, nothing more. i was not trying to start any political issues nor reconnaissance on HFY to gather a bunch of little write-ups or to disproving HFY by comparing it to TWC. you guys seem to have a chip on your shoulders.