Gave several examples and went over how to properly block a hook punch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXsjxU6E0-M
Gave several examples and went over how to properly block a hook punch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXsjxU6E0-M
Good work Ed. Thank you. Good stuff.
Would you be willing to put on head gear and have , I believe you said his name was Robert, put on a boxing glove, and take swipes at your head. Fast as he can when he is ready, no cues. He can just make it speed and take as much of the umph out of it as he is able. Test each of your demos and see which one works best for you ?
Maybe then shorten the range a little bit and see how well each work for you. I would say start hands up but also try hands down which generally is the case when people nail you. Or just try the ideal way.
For the first few 'wrong' examples, I can agree with the premise they are 'wrong' from WC principle POV.
The last way shown as the 'right way' is relying too-heavily on overcoming speed with speed and lucky time fighting (even if you are taking the shorter distance). Being that your opponent initiated the action, without also engaging & neutralizing the attack, you are still going to be a step behind. So, you might pull it off, or if they are faster and/or your timing is off even a little bit, you will most likely still get hit. And, this only works if you know a hook is being throw ahead of time. What if you got it wrong and it was a straight line cross?
Regarding WC principle, IMO this is still ignoring some pretty basic WC principles such as WC Gate Theories, Loi Lau Hoi Sung/Lut Sau Jeet Chun, as well as simultaneous offence/defense. So while this is a basic first step in the right directions compared to the other examples, it still has a way to go to being 'correct' as far as I understnad Wc Principle...
Good thing this one was for free lol
** But I do agree with B.Billy - would be a good contrast to see you gear up and have someone actually trying to take your head off with one of these punches (and that knows how to throw them) and see if this defense still holds up!
Last edited by JPinAZ; 09-25-2015 at 03:25 PM.
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
That is a point. Really find out. Is it working the way it should be right out the box ? I suggest not having your head taken off. Maybe after you are certain you have the right way for you , move to that. Till then fast as he can with as much force take off as he is able. This is just to see. You will know fairly quickly if something works, does not or is close. Then you may have to put in time to get it smoothed out. But as one stands today with the confidence they may have in something. You could go find out but make it as safe as you can. Also, some things may only work well if you are in a ready position of some type.
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
Well, I got an 'F' for my grade at Kirin university... hahaha
I have noticed that you like to mention "follow WC principle".
- Do you train any other MA system besides WC?
- Can you explain what are "don't follow WC principle"? It's easy to understand "follow WC principle". It's hard to understand "don't follow WC principle".
- Will you not do certain moves because it "doesn't follow WC principle"?
Last edited by YouKnowWho; 09-26-2015 at 03:02 PM.
http://johnswang.com
More opinion -> more argument
Less opinion -> less argument
No opinion -> no argument
John, I tried to pm you with some questions unrelated to WC. Your box is full.
Edit: I came across your email on your site. I emailed you.
Last edited by boxerbilly; 09-26-2015 at 04:32 PM.
Last edited by YouKnowWho; 09-26-2015 at 05:26 PM.
http://johnswang.com
More opinion -> more argument
Less opinion -> less argument
No opinion -> no argument
Last edited by boxerbilly; 09-26-2015 at 05:42 PM.
John,
Why are you questioning my background? I boxed before learning WC and have been in my share of 'street fights' when I was a lot younger. I've also trained basic CMA kicking/striking/chi na applications. While I feel this gave me a good background to compare/contrast what's efficient and what's not while learning WC, my past experience has little to do with my ability to discuss the WC system.
We all know you've studied a lot of different things, and that TCMA grappling (shuai jaio) is what you primarily do, which is most likely why you always steer the conversation in that non-WC direction. Some here in the past have questioned just how much WC you actually learned beyond the forms some 40 years ago. I for one don't care one way or the other what your background is, as it's our understanding today that matters - either we know the system or we don't.
I thought my answers were pretty clear in the examples I gave in my above post #3. Doesn't follow WC principle should be pretty simple for anyone that's studied WC beyond just the basics. One good example is "No Centerline, no Wing Chun". If someone doesn't understand/adhere to the most basic WC principle of centerline, then they are not 'doing WC'.
Back to my point, just because 'something works' doesn't make it WC. WC is more than just some techniques or 'what works'. A spinning backfist or roundhouse kick might 'work', but violates WC's most basic of centerline, gate thoery and efficiency/economy of motion ideas. Again, this should be pretty simple stuff for anyone that's studied WC.
Last edited by JPinAZ; 09-28-2015 at 03:12 PM.
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
You seem to be on a mission to move any discussion from wing chun to other arts and different approaches.
You have your current attack on JPinAZ backwards by the way: "don't follow wing chun principle" is very easy to understand by a process of falsification. "Follow wing chun principle" is much more difficult because you are attempting to verify
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
See, a lot of it is situational. I like what you are saying JP, but I also think Phil made a great point about handling a tight hook like an elbow. What I don't feel comfortable with are any of the solutions in Edward's video. You can't depend on "solution four" to stop a good hook. Even a loose haymaker may continue through and you end up trading. Edward posts like it's a sure thing. Heck, boxers train against hooks constantly, ...and constantly land them too!