Enterthewhip wrote:
Perhaps. Perhaps those who do them think they know how to use them. ETW
That’s a fair point. And that’s why I have repeatedly said we have to test these things against uncoopertative, resisting opponents to know. TN
Terence
Once again, focus seems to be too much on the “choi/punch”, not enough on the “lien wan/linked chain”… If you’re looking at the fists, your missing most of the goodness.
Techniques
Parts vs Whole:
I’m of the mind that a technique is never any singular part of the body whether it be a hand, an arm, a leg, or whatever. I feel that once the practitioner understands [both physically and mentally] what Body Unity is, then the technique is really addressing the body as a whole, from head to toe.
That said, to me, a tan sau is incorrect if the horse does not support it. ANY hand application without proper body and horse support is invalid. But this is just my opinion…
Lin Wan Kuen:
Chain punching, personally I would not do as the only contact to my enemy would be my fists. I would much prefer a second point of contact accompanying each punch, whether it be a leg bridge to their horse, or a gum sau to the arm, or a pak sau to the shoulder, etc…
What that would mean then is that rather than keep my opponent at my perimeter which is bridging/long striking range, I personally feel more comfortable in the trapping range of combat, which would of course require ‘two-hand’ applications.
WRT chain punching, should my first reaction be to connect with a fist and it is successful, then my second response (faan sau) would most definitely be another punch to exact same location should the hole in their defense still be open. How effective the punch is would be determined if:
Of course you do not think about all these things at the given moment. You can only capitalize on a person’s self-awareness when it is failing to overcome yours.
-Savi.
Re: Techniques
Originally posted by Savi
That said, to me, a tan sau is incorrect if the horse does not support it. ANY hand application without proper body and horse support is invalid. But this is just my opinion…
I share that opinion.
Regards,
Re: Techniques
Originally posted by Savi
[B]Parts vs Whole:
I’m of the mind that a technique is never any singular part of the body whether it be a hand, an arm, a leg, or whatever. I feel that once the practitioner understands [both physically and mentally] what Body Unity is, then the technique is really addressing the body as a whole, from head to toe.
That said, to me, a tan sau is incorrect if the horse does not support it. ANY hand application without proper body and horse support is invalid. But this is just my opinion…[/B]
I share that opinion.
Regards,
Same page!
Originally posted by kj
[B] I share that opinion.
Regards,
Cool 
!
Keep training, thanks.
-Savi.
HOW FAR WILL THEY TAKE YOU?
Chain punches are not useless and don’t look stupid.
They have their place in your wing chun arsenal of moves and strategies…
…Especially AFTER you’ve gained an "opening line " to attack on…
BUT DON’T GET HUNG UP ON CHAIN PUNCHES…!!
The whole idea of using them is.. WAY.. overdone!
There’s a lot more to learn than this one move.
Are chain punches meant to be like ‘shock and awe’?
Originally posted by Stevo
Are chain punches meant to be like ‘shock and awe’?
No, more like “aw, shucks,” as in, “Aw, shucks, this isn’t working. I should’a studied the details of Wing Chun more.”
Originally posted by Grendel
No, more like “aw, shucks,” as in, “Aw, shucks, this isn’t working. I should’a studied the details of Wing Chun more.”
LOL!!! Good one Grendel!
Stevo
Renee stop giving away the secrets!