Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 103

Thread: Throws you often find useful in your wing chun

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    It always goes back to this:
    What is WC?
    Is it a technique based system?
    That means that what is done is what makes it WC.
    Is it a principle/concept based system?
    That means that what is done is relevant to the core principles of the system, IE: HOW they are done.
    The difference?
    Well, in regards to this thread, if a throw does NOT violate the core principles of WC then it is WC ( whether the technique is in the original repatriate of techniques is irrelevant since WC, like any other MA, is/should be constantly evolving/improving which means techniques may be add OR removed at any given time).

    So, where does that leave us?

    It leaves us with the understanding that in a PRINCIPLE/CONCEPT based system ANY technique that does NOT violate those principles is a valid one and is/becomes WC.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Dahlonega, GA USA
    Posts
    1,592
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    My question for folks is where they think "throws" are found in their forms. Like the hip toss in the first clip. That guy made a point to say his arm wrap came from the CK form. So what about the hip toss then?
    Fair enough, would you consider that when one steps behind an opponents leg and uses that as a brace for him to "trip or fall" over while unbalancing them with hand movements to be a throw?? The hand movements can be an elbow strike or some sort of grab etc.

    If you can accept that the above scenario meets the criteria for a throw then you can find examples of such in Wing Chun.

    Since I like to think in terms of concepts and not specific techniques, to me you could find the "energy" for throws in many instances. When you grab the dummy head and pull towards you, with the proper foot position that could be a throw. When you do the turning movements within the CK where you are using Lan Sau or some may see elbow strikes, the very act of using your body as a single entity while turning could, in the right circumstances, present the opportunity to throw someone.

    To my thinking, throws in Wing Chun are not like Hip or Shoulder throws, I think I said that already , rather they are more like sweeps or foot throws. Utilizing that concept I can find throws all throughout my Wing Chun. Of course, one must have good balance and footwork for this to work. When I "throw" someone it is more like I put my leg in the way and allow them to fall over it, very little effort on my part, or so I strive for little effort. Then again, perhaps these are not throws as they certainly lack the appeal of Hip and Shoulder throws which are a bit more flashy.

    So if you are looking for throws which look like Hip and Shoulder throws then no, I do not have those in my Wing Chun. However, if you accept Foot Throws and Sweeps then yes I do have those in my Wing Chun.

    However, it is not enough to simply throw someone with a sweep or trip, one must also have the proper follow up to insure the throw does what is needed. I believe Wing Chun has the answer for that as well, though not a ground fighting art.
    Last edited by Sihing73; 07-15-2014 at 06:06 AM.
    Peace,

    Dave

    http://www.sifuchowwingchun.com
    Wherever my opponent stands--they are in my space

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    It always goes back to this:
    What is WC?
    Is it a technique based system?
    That means that what is done is what makes it WC.
    Is it a principle/concept based system?
    That means that what is done is relevant to the core principles of the system, IE: HOW they are done.
    The difference?
    Well, in regards to this thread, if a throw does NOT violate the core principles of WC then it is WC ( whether the technique is in the original repatriate of techniques is irrelevant since WC, like any other MA, is/should be constantly evolving/improving which means techniques may be add OR removed at any given time).

    So, where does that leave us?

    It leaves us with the understanding that in a PRINCIPLE/CONCEPT based system ANY technique that does NOT violate those principles is a valid one and is/becomes WC.
    Hmm...

    Ving Tsun is a principle/concept based Chinese boxing method built around specific strategies and body mechanics. Ving Tsun techniques are a result of these body mechanics and strategies.

    Does that mean that you cannot learn and use during a fight the skills that you learned from other martial arts? No, especially if their use didn't put you at jeopardy and they were the right tool for the situation. They can greatly enhance your arsenal.

    Does this then mean that everything that does not violate the core principles of Ving Tsun is Ving Tsun? No, these other techniques simply are what they are (BJJ, Luta Livre, etc.). They are part of your fighting skill set, sure. But they are not in the Ving Tsun forms no matter how much imagination you use, and their most realistic and efficient practice is not through the Ving Tsun forms as these forms were created to support the Ving Tsun specific boxing framework and strategies.

    The problem I personally see with the attitude of "anything can be Ving Tsun" is that many stop learning and training what Ving Tsun is really teaching, and start taking their training in too many directions with no specific simple blueprint. Then, when you see these people sparring, it looks like a bad version of Kickboxing or like a school fight between 6 year olds. Ving Tsun is extremely simple and direct in what it teaches to avoid this crap, as only the most simple things that got engrained into you will stick when the $hit hits the fan.

    Now, JKD folks are a great example of people who recognized that not everything is Ving Tsun, not having a problem with calling the techniques by where they took them from. Given what they do is only in minor part Ving Tsun, they don't insist in calling non-Ving Tsun techniques Ving Tsun, but put it under the umbrella of JKD. There is no confusion in what they do, and you can see it their game.
    Last edited by Buddha_Fist; 07-15-2014 at 07:19 AM.
    Dio perdona... Io no!

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    @Sihing73

    No, I can't consider tripping or otherwise knocking someone down to be a "throw" if no one is actually being thrown. But I agree, certain types of leg sweeps work well and are uncompromising to one's Wing Chun as they aren't in violation of the principles... at least the simple type of leg sweeps I'm thinking of, like those in the PB clips posted earlier. A throw, on the other hand, wouldn't fit in my system.

    Quote Originally Posted by HybridWarrior View Post
    3rd form.....
    So an arm wrap from CK and a bend at the waist from BJ... That's what I mean by forcibly contrived. I think people try to look for things in the forms that might look like something done in a throwing technique and then claim it to be WC so they can say they have a well-rounded style. There's no reason to reinvent the wheel with WC forms. One would be much better off learning an actual grappling style of some sort if they are that insecure about not being well-rounded.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Dahlonega, GA USA
    Posts
    1,592
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    @Sihing73
    No, I can't consider tripping or otherwise knocking someone down to be a "throw" if no one is actually being thrown. But I agree, certain types of leg sweeps work well and are uncompromising to one's Wing Chun as they aren't in violation of the principles... at least the simple type of leg sweeps I'm thinking of, like those in the PB clips posted earlier. A throw, on the other hand, wouldn't fit in my system.
    Hmm, I understand where you are coming from but having done Judo many years ago I would have to say sweeps and the like are categorized as "throws". In Judo the category for Foot Throws is referred to as Ashi-waza or "Foot Throwing Techniques". While many in this category would not fit within the "accepted" framework of Wing Chun many others would. My point being that a foot sweep or where one has the opponent "trip" over ones leg is accepted as a "throw" in Judo.
    Peace,

    Dave

    http://www.sifuchowwingchun.com
    Wherever my opponent stands--they are in my space

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    and here we get to the crux of the matter:
    But they are not in the Ving Tsun forms no matter how much imagination you use, and their most realistic and efficient practice is not through the Ving Tsun forms as these forms were created to support the Ving Tsun specific boxing framework and strategies.
    So, unless it is in a WC form, then it isn't WC?
    So, WC is a technique based system.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  7. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Sihing73 View Post
    Fair enough, would you consider that when one steps behind an opponents leg and uses that as a brace for him to "trip or fall" over while unbalancing them with hand movements to be a throw?? The hand movements can be an elbow strike or some sort of grab etc.

    If you can accept that the above scenario meets the criteria for a throw then you can find examples of such in Wing Chun.
    I'm not overly anal about what consists of a throw or trip. judo has plenty of both. In a fight, getting someone off their feet to the ground where you are on your feet has strategic advantage.

    Since I like to think in terms of concepts and not specific techniques, to me you could find the "energy" for throws in many instances. When you grab the dummy head and pull towards you, with the proper foot position that could be a throw. When you do the turning movements within the CK where you are using Lan Sau or some may see elbow strikes, the very act of using your body as a single entity while turning could, in the right circumstances, present the opportunity to throw someone.
    Absolutely. And since wing chun has a main effectiveness area in a close striking range the combination of close range strikes and body weight manipulation including pushing people over a leg or hip is very viable for a strategy. Whatever you want to name it. My sifu was particularly adept at stepping on people's feet - meaning the lead foot just by manipulating range. That always affected my balance and gave him an advantage.

    To my thinking, throws in Wing Chun are not like Hip or Shoulder throws, I think I said that already , rather they are more like sweeps or foot throws. Utilizing that concept I can find throws all throughout my Wing Chun. Of course, one must have good balance and footwork for this to work. When I "throw" someone it is more like I put my leg in the way and allow them to fall over it, very little effort on my part, or so I strive for little effort. Then again, perhaps these are not throws as they certainly lack the appeal of Hip and Shoulder throws which are a bit more flashy.

    So if you are looking for throws which look like Hip and Shoulder throws then no, I do not have those in my Wing Chun. However, if you accept Foot Throws and Sweeps then yes I do have those in my Wing Chun.
    No certainly the sacrifice throws and turning throws in judo where you expose your back violates WCK principles. But actually, they also violate BJJ principles. However, BJJ practitioners train them for competition because they work. In general WCK practitioners would avoid training anything at all that violates principles.

    However, it is not enough to simply throw someone with a sweep or trip, one must also have the proper follow up to insure the throw does what is needed. I believe Wing Chun has the answer for that as well, though not a ground fighting art.
    Very simply, whatever art it originates in, the answer here is once your opponent is on the ground, pursue them with footwork so they can't gain the distance to stand up. Work on stepping with your lead leg as close to the waist fold or bend of your opponent as you can. Stepping so your toes are touching the waist bend is awesome. From there once the opponent wears down a bit you can just sink your weight from the foot to knee on belly and continue striking. That to me is probably the position of control for WCK practitioners they want with an opponent on the ground.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    and here we get to the crux of the matter:


    So, unless it is in a WC form, then it isn't WC?
    So, WC is a technique based system.
    Never wrote this. Re-read my post.

    Trying to fit things into the forms that are not there is in most cases a waste of time. Train those things the way that it is most efficient. Whether they are Ving Tsun or not is yet another story.

    Ving Tsun is based on body mechanics that allow for the implementation of certain strategies. One can see these body mechanics in the Ving Tsun techniques/actions, they are an outcome of them.
    Dio perdona... Io no!

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    No certainly the sacrifice throws and turning throws in judo where you expose your back violates WCK principles. But actually, they also violate BJJ principles. However, BJJ practitioners train them for competition because they work. In general WCK practitioners would avoid training anything at all that violates principles.
    One can argue that it isn't the principles BUT THEIR INTERPRETATION that they don't want to violate.
    One can argue that no throw "exposes" your back because, when done correctly, the back is in a position that the opponent can't attack.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Buddha_Fist View Post
    Never wrote this. Re-read my post.

    Trying to fit things into the forms that are not there is in most cases a waste of time. Train those things the way that it is most efficient. Whether they are Ving Tsun or not is yet another story.

    Ving Tsun is based on body mechanics that allow for the implementation of certain strategies. One can see these body mechanics in the Ving Tsun techniques/actions, they are an outcome of them.
    You wrote this:
    But they are not in the Ving Tsun forms no matter how much imagination you use, and their most realistic and efficient practice is not through the Ving Tsun forms as these forms were created to support the Ving Tsun specific boxing framework and strategies.
    Can you explain it better then?
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  11. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by trubblman View Post
    "Wing chun requires that the mental be ahead of the physical. It is a system to develop skill, not a style.
    ...When wing chun is trained to a high level, there are no techniques." - Hawkins Cheung.

    So who can say what is and what is not in VT? If you know throws ( and I dont see why anyone who calls himself a Kung Fu practitioner does not know at least one throw ) then you can use throws.
    What is and is not in VT. Well if you look at the forms as an organized collection of techniques with a sequence to help catalog and remember an art, then technically I can see the perspective of people who say "they are not in VT". Why? Because they are not in the collection of moves named in the form. I don't know if EVERY lineage catalogs every single move in their forms, but mine does.

    If you look at chi sau though, and yes everybody does it different but one core tenet is manipulating the opponents balance by getting their weight forward and back on their toes or heels from bridge pressure then chaining techniques to score when your opponent is unbalanced. The unbalancing of the weight of an opponent is a core tenet of throwing arts also. That is the entry into a throw or takedown.

    What else? many of the wing chun masters also trained in other kung fu arts. so they could blend them in sparring or fighting if they wanted, and probably practiced that. however, to maintain integrity in their version of wing chun, they would limit their students to learn the VT art first and perfect the
    techniques without blending them. then add a different art later after obtaining a certain mastery first. right now mma fighters struggle with this type of thing in getting really good at one core art first then blending. that's the best approach. but mma training is pretty piecemeal now - a bjj class, a MT class, etc.

  12. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    One can argue that it isn't the principles BUT THEIR INTERPRETATION that they don't want to violate.
    One can argue that no throw "exposes" your back because, when done correctly, the back is in a position that the opponent can't attack.
    Very valid points.

    In my view when I think of exposing my back or not, it's not so much when I do the technique correctly, it's what position I'm in if I miss the technique. I'm more specifically thinking of all those drop seoi nage throws where I didn't get enough bite on the arm and end up in a turtle position with someone on my back. However, it's all of those that have helped me with the timing and situations where I should go for it.

    I guess some of this is discussing knowing principles well enough that you know where and how to violate them.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayfaring View Post
    Very valid points.

    In my view when I think of exposing my back or not, it's not so much when I do the technique correctly, it's what position I'm in if I miss the technique. I'm more specifically thinking of all those drop seoi nage throws where I didn't get enough bite on the arm and end up in a turtle position with someone on my back. However, it's all of those that have helped me with the timing and situations where I should go for it.

    I guess some of this is discussing knowing principles well enough that you know where and how to violate them.
    I have never been a fan of principles and concepts "set in stone", especially since all we are going on is someone else view of what they mean.
    Heck, for all we know the developer of WC may have thought that the center line principle was simply a place to start.
    Every system needs a core BUT to what extend one must remain fixed and rigid to that core is, IMO, dependent on many things.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by sanjuro_ronin View Post
    You wrote this:


    Can you explain it better then?
    That portion followed up on the point raised earlier on the thread about things that are or are not in the forms. I guess I should have put that in a separate paragraph so as to not confuse you. The ideas still stand though and are relatively simple to follow.
    Dio perdona... Io no!

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by Sihing73 View Post
    Being that Wing Chun Forms are conceptual in nature, one can argue for there being throws within the system.
    We have different understandings of what it means for the system to be conceptual. For a single action to be interpreted into several possible applications is considered conceptual to some. To me that is basically taking an action and saying let's try to imagine what it could be, rather than the system clearly teaching something. Not very useful or efficient, in my opinion, especially for beginners. In the end, you're still dealing with various applications, making it technique-based. You just have a creative license.

    Rather, in the system I train, the actions in the forms introduce specific fighting concepts and principles that form the system, or they help to train one's body to properly ingrain those as habits, which of course requires stress through partner training. That's why the whole system is coherent from start to finish. The forms, the drills, the sparring- they are all part of a development system with clear concepts and principles for combat behind it. For example, the elbow behavior is the "young idea" from the first form and remains a main idea in the other forms, in the beginning stages of partner training with daan-chi-sau, and through everything else in the system. Of course then BJ and BJD differ conceptually, but for a necessary reason.

    In the former point of view, Wing Chun could be almost anything you want it to be. In the latter, it is a specific conceptual approach to combat that must be kept simple, direct and efficient. Two different understandings of what concept-based means. So we may be talking past each other even on the most basic point where it seems we should agree.

Posting Permissions

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