Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 167

Thread: Blast From the Past

  1. #106

    Trying to get back on topic...

    ..and away from the publicity seeking one-note-Charlie thread hijackers...

    what do you guys think of this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c661I...eature=related

  2. #107

    Now if you believe...

    as I do, that one of the biggest problems the wing chun guy had in that clip stemmed from him trying to use a short range arsenal of weapons (and strategy) against someone using longer range weaponry...when they are not at close range (and he ate a lot of punches from longer range)...

    then look at this vid - which I find very interesting, and the ideas/concepts expressed here move somewhat in the direction that I've been following for some 3-4 years now. Not exactly, but a close cousin.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q74ox...eature=related
    Last edited by Ultimatewingchun; 06-18-2009 at 07:31 PM.

  3. #108

    And in this vid...

    I would contend that the single biggest reason why the wing chun guy did much better than the wing chun guy in the first vid did...is because he had a much longer reach - so his wing chun infight weaponry and strategy was enough.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h4wa...eature=related
    Last edited by Ultimatewingchun; 06-18-2009 at 08:12 PM.

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    159
    Interesting clips! so here's my concern - does that mean the shorter/smaller guy has no chance with his wing chun? If so,what's the point of wing chun altogether then - isn't it supposed to give us small guys a "fighting" chance?

    That boxing/wing chun clip is really cool. For me, i find it interesting that he separates boxing from wing chun, whereas wing chun really is boxing. I think over the years, wing chun has gotten lost in its chi-sao and chain punches, where really it is a boxing form - chinese boxing. The idea of short-range/long-range does not exist..you just want to hit, and to get your punch from A to B is where chi-sao comes in. And i don't mean trapping or sticking, i mean that chi-sao training lets your punch snake through to the target..in a sense (no bong sao, tan sao, etc needed).
    Grasshopper 2.0

    Compact, portable home gym system perfect for martial artists!
    Maximize your STRIKING POWER!

    www.mightygrasshopper.com
    Health, wellness, fitness and nutritional product reviews!

    Check out my Wing Tsun Kung Fu Blog
    It's kung fu but with an honest perspective!
    Updated Mondays and Wednesdays

    "This ain't Hollywood's kung fu!"


    www.functionalwingtsun.com

    Want to try? Hit up
    www.wingtsunkungfu.com

  5. #110
    "The idea of short-range/long-range does not exist..you just want to hit, and to get your punch from A to B is where where chi-sao comes in. And i don't mean trapping or sticking, i mean that chi-sao training lets your punch snake through to the target..in a sense (no bong sao, tan sao, etc needed)." (Grasshopper)


    ***FIRST of all, welcome to the forum.

    But let me tell you why I believe that short-range/long-range does exist. And for now, I'll just throw basically one thing out there for you to think about in this regard.

    Wing Chun requires that your shoulders be pretty much squared up with each other, so that the basic vertical fist straight punch used most often in wing chun can travel along (or very close to) your centerline.

    And so that you can always use two arms simultaneously, and extend them to basically the same exact distance in order to block-and-strike with maximum (and near simultaneous) efficiency....

    without even having to move (turn) a shoulder very much.

    So this maximizes quickness - but at the expense of reach. And requires that you be very close to the opponent to make this strategy work.

    Whereas, on the other hand, a boxing position, for example, does not usually have the shoulders squared up to each other, and will therefore allow a longer reach for each individual punch thrown...

    also helped by the fact that in boxing you will torque/turn your shoulder much more so than when throwing a punch in wing chun.

    And then there's the footwork, but that's another matter....

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    159
    First off - thanks!

    I see ur point and its quite valid! So is short range defined by the positioning of the shoulders?

    Take, for instance, that ur 6'5 fighting a boxer at a height of 5'5. Ur "short range" is now his long range. And his "long range" is now ur short range.

    With the reverse scenario, no matter how u position urself against a really tall opponent, none of ur weapons are long range.

    Let's say a boxer wants to get in with a jab and close with a hook. Is that hook short range? Or long range? Does it still even matter?

    Even with that said, who says.a wing xhun guy HAS to keep his shoulder square? Wing chun, imo,(and all arts) should have a functional role - if u can replicate the function of a move while deviating from its boundaries, u r still performing wing chun.

    Are there not punches that torque the shoulder in the wing chun curriculum? If u had the opportunity to punch someone at the expense of torqing ur torso/shoulder, would u not take it?

    We get trapped, IMO, into the chain punch/trapping mentality cuz that's what we do (chi sao) and that, in a sense "shortens" our range...
    Last edited by grasshopper 2.0; 06-18-2009 at 11:36 PM.
    Grasshopper 2.0

    Compact, portable home gym system perfect for martial artists!
    Maximize your STRIKING POWER!

    www.mightygrasshopper.com
    Health, wellness, fitness and nutritional product reviews!

    Check out my Wing Tsun Kung Fu Blog
    It's kung fu but with an honest perspective!
    Updated Mondays and Wednesdays

    "This ain't Hollywood's kung fu!"


    www.functionalwingtsun.com

    Want to try? Hit up
    www.wingtsunkungfu.com

  7. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by grasshopper 2.0 View Post
    First off - thanks!

    I see ur point and its quite valid! So is short range defined by the positioning of the shoulders?

    Take, for instance, that ur 6'5 fighting a boxer at a height of 5'5. Ur "short range" is now his long range. And his "long range" is now ur short range.

    With the reverse scenario, no matter how u position urself against a really tall opponent, none of ur weapons are long range.

    Let's say a boxer wants to get in with a jab and close with a hook. Is that hook short range? Or long range? Does it still even matter?

    Even with that said, who says.a wing xhun guy HAS to keep his shoulder square? Wing chun, imo,(and all arts) should have a functional role - if u can replicate the function of a move while deviating from its boundaries, u r still performing wing chun.

    Are there not punches that torque the shoulder in the wing chun curriculum? If u had the opportunity to punch someone at the expense of torqing ur torso/shoulder, would u not take it?

    We get trapped, IMO, into the chain punch/trapping mentality cuz that's what we do (chi sao) and that, in a sense "shortens" our range...

    ***THIS is a good post. Yeah, of course I believe that you should torque the shoulder if it means that your punch will connect - and to some extent you will almost always torgue the shoulders (even when doing "pure" wing chun) - it's just a matter of how much. And yes, the chain punch/trapping mentality is a very narrow street to work on (literally and figuratively)...

    But the devil is always in the details. And I believe it's possible to use wing chun principles and still use what looks like a boxing position (including horizontally-thrown boxing straight leads and rear crosses)...as well as some boxing-type footwork...to get to a close range...wherein you can pretty much square up the shoulders and do a more "conventional-looking" wing chun.
    Last edited by Ultimatewingchun; 06-19-2009 at 08:27 AM.

  8. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by grasshopper 2.0 View Post
    Interesting clips! so here's my concern - does that mean the shorter/smaller guy has no chance with his wing chun?
    Bingo! You are exactly right.

  9. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun View Post
    So this maximizes quickness - but at the expense of reach and power.
    Fixed to add the other parameter that is compromised.

  10. #115
    True. Although it is possible to generate some power from the wing chun position - it is clearly not the same amount of power that a punch thrown with more body torque...the kind of torque used when you're not in a shoulder-squared-up position.

    The idea in wing chun is to take up that slack with multiple punches - and to some extent that's true too.

    But the real truth is, imo, you need all of the above. Long range punching (and kicking) power...and short range multiple striking that can have a cumulative effect and perhaps also set up other moves (like knees, elbows, takedowns, etc.)

  11. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun View Post
    True. Although it is possible to generate some power from the wing chun position - it is clearly not the same amount of power that a punch thrown with more body torque...the kind of torque used when you're not in a shoulder-squared-up position.

    The idea in wing chun is to take up that slack with multiple punches - and to some extent that's true too.

    But the real truth is, imo, you need all of the above. Long range punching (and kicking) power...and short range multiple striking that can have a cumulative effect and perhaps also set up other moves (like knees, elbows, takedowns, etc.)
    Interesting how your views are changing over the years as you put yourself into more full-contact situations with more kinds of fighters.

    Better watch out... pretty soon you'll be over on the dark side with Terrance and myself!

  12. #117
    Ha! Ha! Ha!

    Yeah, I'll tell ya, the guy I wanted to make the wing chun vs. boxing vid with (and I believe it will still happen - as he always returns sooner or later)...but anyway...

    that guy - along with a few other guys (all of whom are taller than me and with a longer reach) - really have had an influence on my thinking. And needless to say, the fact that we've been doing some serious contact sparring (and not just chi sao and light contact sparring)...changes everything.

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Huntington, NY, USA website: TenTigers.com
    Posts
    7,718
    Hey Victor,
    doesn't the inverted punch in chum kiu utilize the torquing of the waist and shoulder? If it's in the form, then it's in the system. If a concept is brought up, then it can be expanded upon and extrapolated, thus being applied to different circumstances, strikes, etc. I am I correct here, or am I misunderstanding the strike, or delving too deep? (is there such a thing?)
    "My Gung-Fu may not be Your Gung-Fu.
    Gwok-Si, Gwok-Faht"

    "I will not be part of the generation
    that killed Kung-Fu."

    ....step.

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun View Post
    Ha! Ha! Ha!

    Yeah, I'll tell ya, the guy I wanted to make the wing chun vs. boxing vid with (and I believe it will still happen - as he always returns sooner or later)...but anyway...

    that guy - along with a few other guys (all of whom are taller than me and with a longer reach) - really have had an influence on my thinking. And needless to say, the fact that we've been doing some serious contact sparring (and not just chi sao and light contact sparring)...changes everything.
    I can tell you this, the ability to generate enough force to damage and incapacitate with strikes is far more crucial for a smaller/lighter fighter than for a bigger one, for obvious reasons.
    I recall Mas Oyama once saying, I would rather get hit by a dozen "slaps" than one punch.
    For bigger people that carry more weight in their strikes "naturally", systems that advocate multiple "machine gun" strikes are a fine fit ( think kenpo), but for those that must generate far more mass/force behind their strikes, well, lets just say that power is at a premium.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Huntington, NY, USA website: TenTigers.com
    Posts
    7,718
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    I can tell you this, the ability to generate enough force to damage and incapacitate with strikes is far more crucial for a smaller/lighter fighter than for a bigger one, for obvious reasons.
    I recall Mas Oyama once saying, I would rather get hit by a dozen "slaps" than one punch.
    For bigger people that carry more weight in their strikes "naturally", systems that advocate multiple "machine gun" strikes are a fine fit ( think kenpo), but for those that must generate far more mass/force behind their strikes, well, lets just say that power is at a premium.
    Probably why Lam Wing-Fei's Jook Lum favored elusive movement, and rapid-fire, multiple strikes utilizing the fung-an choy to nerve clusters.

    BTW-to people who are ready to go off and troll about "all that phoenix-eye, etc is bull****, Jook Lum also has heavier strikes, elbows, hammerfists, etc. It's not all "deadly dim-mak."

    And...look at it this way-if I have a ballpien hammer, and I pop you in the face, you will be in a world of hurt, (even if momentarily) and I can follow up. It's not magic, or mysticism. It's just pain and the shock that accompanies it. It's not meant to be a coup de gras, but more of a set-up. Like a jab, but causing a heckuvalot more sharp pain. It's only one tool out of many.
    "My Gung-Fu may not be Your Gung-Fu.
    Gwok-Si, Gwok-Faht"

    "I will not be part of the generation
    that killed Kung-Fu."

    ....step.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •