To clarify a bit, I mean a style that applies a long range defense intended to facilitate offenses on closing.
To clarify a bit, I mean a style that applies a long range defense intended to facilitate offenses on closing.
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
You previous video, not this one, shows using body to enter while jaming . That is the third arm. That is a good one.
Those who has no close strike training has not much defense in that 2 to 3 gate range.
For my lineage, one needs develop snake engine wigh SLT to do something similar to 4.38 in the following video. Seven bows handling is the beginner basic for thess type of close body handling. One needs the seventh bow to do the job. Thus, itis seven bows, not six joints as mention generaly.
http://youtu.be/nf12hKWEby8
Last edited by Hendrik; 06-11-2014 at 04:37 PM.
The Chen style teacher I studied under in China trained the local sanshou champ, and he used that exact comparison to explain how power generation works in fighting with Chen style. Getting the waist involved is hugely important in old Chen style, not pivoting on a point like in boxing (because of the throwing element, among other things, in Chen), but pivoting around that point, in order to have power generation while doing this you have to always use certain practices that are basically analogous to an engine in that the abs and lower back muscles facilitate power in specific ways, and knowing how posture allows different expressions of it is comparable to axles and wheels. Without these practices, by pivoting around a point without knowing when to open and close the spine, you will tend to lean forward or back, and the spin will become unstable, stay upright without proper transition in the spine and you tend to dig in your stance instead of being mobile.
They used it in full contact fighting. An engine is just a metaphor, but it is a good one.
Last edited by Faux Newbie; 06-11-2014 at 04:38 PM.
Boxing or long fist has longer reach punches for outside range than wing chun. I don't see any practitioner changing this without simply adopting the same practices. This is not to say that wing chun does not address the long range, but I don't see any techs in it that would allow staying at long range without simply being defensive.
No it is a terrible metaphor. The body uses lots lots lots of different mechanics in martial arts. In boxing every single punch uses a different mechanic and often you can do the same punch many different ways.
Talking about getting the waist involved is academic talk. You show someone how to do it then they practice. Talk doesn't help you do it.
Sort of like a different engine perhaps?No it is a terrible metaphor. The body uses lots lots lots of different mechanics in martial arts. In boxing every single punch uses a different mechanic and often you can do the same punch many different ways.
Sign language perhaps?Talking about getting the waist involved is academic talk. You show someone how to do it then they practice. Talk doesn't help you do it.
For older Chen style, it is an excellent metaphor. Your argument is that if it has more parts, it's not an engine. I don't think that's a strong argument.
Chen tends to seek to create a burst of kinetic energy from the torso in relation to leg motions. From there, the other mechanics are more about delivery(not constricting or stopping that energy by bad body position) than adding power, though they contribute some, but the bulk is from the initial burst. The criterion for how one produces this burst includes not preventing mobility, so seeking a balance of power generation and mobility in order to benefit from positioning and speedily respond to conditions.The body uses lots lots lots of different mechanics in martial arts.
I've not seen any coaches or major fighters say a substantially different way to do a jab or cross or hook or shovel hook or overhand. They are fairly consistent. Could you provide an example?In boxing every single punch uses a different mechanic and often you can do the same punch many different ways.
I've seen a coach explaining it to a full contact fighter, who was using it thereafter, so I beg to differ.Talking about getting the waist involved is academic talk.
I've yet to meet a mute coach.You show someone how to do it then they practice. Talk doesn't help you do it.
I was under the impression that wing chun sought to keep a punch in your own center line. Is this mistaken?
In other words, using boxing as an example, fully turning the shoulder, posturing forward, having the strike well out of your own center line, and having the rear heel raised all contribute extra reach that the arm alone cannot. I was not aware that wing chun did this. Same with a cross or a straight right.
This is not even considering systems with long range kicks, which I was not aware were present in Wing Chun.
Last edited by Faux Newbie; 06-11-2014 at 05:10 PM.
I can agree with this. While yes, WC is mostly a shorter range striking style, I wouldn't say wing chun is only a short range art as that is limiting. As I see WC being a principle-based art (lol, T will like that), not technique based, it has strategies/tactics/tools for all 'ranges', with different mechanics for the various 'ranges'. It's just that it mainly employs short range striking, so tends to get categorized as such.
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
From an outside(of Wing Chun, not outside range) perspective, this sounds pretty accurate.
And of course, range is a momentary thing at times, but being able to determine the range at the moment is a definite skill. Distance (as in timing and distance) is probably a better description, I suppose.