got bored, did a video on how to develop chain punching…
This video helps to explain how Wing Chun chain punching is actually done and the proper way to develop it. All to often, people try to use pure speed and muscle and just simply blitz the non-confrontational opponent. But realistically people do fight back. Attacking done right is not a numbers game where you throw 10 attacks and hope 2 to 3 will land. The right mentality for a Wing Chun fighter is not being wasteful like a solider with a gatling gun who simply has fire power but waste rounds of ammunition. Instead you are a sniper, where almost every attack is almost guaranteed to hit and where you don’t fire to waste bullets. The first drill is called freeze frame drill, in this simple concept drill, one attacks the other blocks, but only after the hit, giving the blocker the development of seeing how to regain the line, and the attacker time to also figure out where the nearest line of attack is. Once the drill can be done properly you take it to the next level, once you attack, the blocker once again tries to block, but by the time he initiates the block, you takeover his motion and throw your next attack. You then continue this process over and over again. In the end, you want to develop the skill, were you throw out an attack and can just rain it upon your opponent, who will never have the ability to block your attack, since your always one step ahead of him. In the end, this is what chain punching is really like in Wing Chun and one of the ways to develop it. And a closer glimpse as to how to apply your sticky hand skills in real fighting situations
wrong thinking, your “partner” should be striking you back with “chain punches” the drills show unaligned counter striking. NOT doing kwan sao 
guys who use kwan sao havent really gotten the whole idea…sorry. A few seconds trying to punch me in th face will prove the ‘idea’
try to angle your selves with movement and striking to create a flanking attacking angle with a striking arm alone, then if contact is made , like a X’ing wrists as each partner strikes, then the more experienced/faster reacting partner will jut sao and remove the jutting hand as the following hand strikes and takes the lead line of attack , while the jutting hand cycles back to wu sao to make the next attack, etc… depending on the angles each of you make trying to vie for a position in a face off using side stances and mobility to feint with movement etc…prior to striking.
-
There’s no such thing as chain punching–there is Chun punching..
-
Fan sao with various strikes and techniques is not “chain punching” either.
-
If you’re going to do Chun attacks and chun counters might as well do ChiSao..a real opponent will never react like that.
4.. If you’re going to do ChiSao, Chun techniques, punching, etc breaking structure and body power is key..not “blocking”…
- And as usual too many choppy chop chops…
[QUOTE=YungChun;1026367]1. There’s no such thing as chain punching–there is Chun punching…[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=kgledhill;1026367]wrong thinking, your “partner” should be striking you back with “chain punches” the drills show unaligned counter striking.[/QUOTE]
You guys really don’t give anyone a chance do you??! :rolleyes: I’m sure we’re all masters of ourselves, but how about more constructive assistance?
Firstly, YungChun, there is ‘chain’ punching in what I do, although the term I would use is ‘linked’ or ‘continuous’. It’s called ‘Lien Wan Chun Kuen’.
I like Kevs proposal, as this sounds like one of my first partner drills for chunkuen, forearm to forearm, left to right contact. BUT I would also suggest developing your chunkuen on the wooden man.
All this negativity towards quansau is silly imo. For me, quansau rocks!
**** k_g… your like a kwan sau killer… LOL:)
the 'chain punch" isnt a fist after fist, its arms aligned with elbows to develop a forearm angled enough to create a defensive line AS you each strike at one another…if you make contact while striking along the centerline , then you jut , pak etc…
Kwan sao is a low bong done on the dummy for ballistic displacement, tan sao is a punching energy ..each is cycling into and out of attacks or defensive partnerships on the dummy. Dont think of ‘snap shot’ poses . kwan sao is bad
- turning inside the opponents range of fire to chase an arm with 2
- using 2 arms to fight a simple punch
- tan sao strikes using the elbow to spread off the line as it strikes forwards not a lateral block.
- we only turn to face the opponents positions as they move, not to redirect force.
- each partner should be helping the other to make attacking actions in every move at each other.
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1026376]You guys really don’t give anyone a chance do you??! :rolleyes: I’m sure we’re all masters of ourselves, but how about more constructive assistance?
Firstly, YungChun, there is ‘chain’ punching in what I do, although the term I would use is ‘linked’ or ‘continuous’. It’s called ‘Lien Wan Chun Kuen’.
I like Kevs proposal, as this sounds like one of my first partner drills for chunkuen, forearm to forearm, left to right contact. BUT I would also suggest developing your chunkuen on the wooden man.
All this negativity towards quansau is silly imo. For me, quansau rocks! :D[/QUOTE]
'nuff said about kwan sao. if I can occupy you with one arm and you have to use 2 to fight my one …well
we do continuous punching but with the VT idea about elbows etc… low elbows make good bridging forearm angles to attack with and create natural barriers to our OWN centerline as we enter to attack one another…like creating an intersection of potential lines of force to connect with, our arms maintain center to strike along the invisible line we train along in forms etc…
the forearms left to right are , outside fore arm = tan sao strike / inside fore arm jum sao strike
dan chi-sao is this introduction to opposite energy of vt striking drill. Each strikes to the center but first adopting the starting point of the elbows …strike versus strike tan elbow tries to displace the jums forearm/elbow, the jum sao tries to deflect the tan strike by simply holding the elbow inwards, while pointing the fingers at the guys center…redundant due to the fact that once you learn the striking of each energy, you dont punch in the same 1-2 sequence, you simply use striking attacks with ‘inbuilt’ unseen energy capable of maintaining line defense integrity while blasting into the opponent at tactical angles etc…very subtle angling is done.
once this idea is used you wont ever leave the center line to chase or over turn, because your giving the striker the next opening by your movement alone from the line to chase the incoming attacking action and responding with defensive actions alone or moving to much [turning] to avoid the attack rather than …attack the attack.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1026390]Kwan sao is a low bong done on the dummy for ballistic displacement, tan sao is a punching energy ..each is cycling into and out of attacks or defensive partnerships on the dummy. Dont think of ‘snap shot’ poses . kwan sao is bad.[/QUOTE]
I guess it is when you have such a narrow viewpoint of what it is! :rolleyes:
Seriously, is this your interpretation of quansau and what iti is used for?? It’s correct in a very basic way, but there is so much more to it imo. The postures of Wing Chun (two handed postures that is) are very precise and without training or drilling them correctly you have a chance of missing what the signature of our style actually is…
Just food for thought. 
It’s funny seeing everyone argue what is or isn’t wing chun…seems that everyone knows the “right” way. :rolleyes:
Chain punching in it’s purest form–is linked punches is it not? Isn’t that what the translation is from Chinese? So how is it that all of you have such different ideas as to what it “truly” is and what it should be? They are punches done in succession, one after the other, in a broad sense.
That’s why the wing chun system as a whole will NEVER progress to an elite and proven form of fighting…too many people who are too big for their britches.
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1026440]It’s funny seeing everyone argue what is or isn’t wing chun…seems that everyone knows the “right” way. :rolleyes:
Chain punching in it’s purest form–is linked punches is it not? Isn’t that what the translation is from Chinese? So how is it that all of you have such different ideas as to what it “truly” is and what it should be?
That’s why the wing chun system as a whole will NEVER progress to an elite and proven form of fighting…too many people who are too big for their britches.[/QUOTE]
Hyperbolic nonsense.
So disagreement is at the root of what’s wrong with the Chun world? Yeah lmfao.
Yes we should all be singing the same song and folks need to get their core straight..
There are after all certain basic things all Chun must have.. When most of that core is not there it probably should be addressed.. (ya think) If it isn’t then there’s no chance of ever having your choir of agreement, that you say is required for Chun to be an “elite and proven” art.. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1026440]
They are punches done in succession, one after the other, in a broad sense.
[/QUOTE]
Yes however “Chain punching” seems to infer in action and thought that CPing is “a thing to do” like the “crazy eggbeater attack” or some kind of fixed method or how Chun fights…it is not, it’s just more than one fist (strike) following .
ah the internet is so entertaining
So disagreement is at the root of what’s wrong with the Chun world?
May not be the root cause, but it’s a symptom that’s hard to ignore.
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1026432]I guess it is when you have such a narrow viewpoint of what it is! :rolleyes:
Seriously, is this your interpretation of quansau and what iti is used for?? It’s correct in a very basic way, but there is so much more to it imo. The postures of Wing Chun (two handed postures that is) are very precise and without training or drilling them correctly you have a chance of missing what the signature of our style actually is…
Just food for thought. ;)[/QUOTE]
in your opinion…you can do what you like with ‘kwan sao’ < im just opening your mind to a simple idea many seem to have lost for ‘signature’ poses…not a pose dude
try it on desmond kwan sao him
Its the fact that guys still think the chain punch/eggbeater is VT that amuses me…ed’s vid is another to the list of :o works against your friends
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1026440]It’s funny seeing everyone argue what is or isn’t wing chun…seems that everyone knows the “right” way. :rolleyes:
Chain punching in it’s purest form–is linked punches is it not? Isn’t that what the translation is from Chinese? So how is it that all of you have such different ideas as to what it “truly” is and what it should be? They are punches done in succession, one after the other, in a broad sense.
That’s why the wing chun system as a whole will NEVER progress to an elite and proven form of fighting…too many people who are too big for their britches.[/QUOTE]
chain punching in its purest form its root is based on what two basic striking energy’s ?
the most basic thing we do, we start the SLT with them, we do dan chi-sao with them, we do chi-sao with them, we do the dummy with them together for alignment…
still think its fists on a straight line …A to B really fast ! take that ! eggbeater from hell comin at ya …too funny.
[QUOTE=edward;1026462]ah the internet is so entertaining[/QUOTE]
Keep watching you may learn something to teach your students…really,… making your student/partner do a kwan sao as a counter attacking action…which part of kwan is attacking me ?..you wouldnt last 1 second of a sparring match…serious. All I would have to do is feint a punch and you would turn with 2 hands…no ? you dont think so ? too funny. VT proving is EVIL !
Tan sao never leaves the centerline because its a punch…jum sao never leaves the centerline. because its apunch..these are the 2 striking forces that control the alignment of our strikes. We spend our whole training lives perfecting their alignment drilling, for sparring for fighting…the dummy alignment, cycling rotation of attacking actions … We do the same energy tan/jum for each arm so we can ‘face’ and fire at either angle to the opponent…seamless punching energy transfers to become either tan ‘elbow spreads’ or jum elbow inwards…each striking as they use the elbow idea…attacking simultaneously. Efficiency , directness, blah blah blah
Hey Edward,
Good on you for putting your thoughts out and creating material for discussion.
No one is 100 percent right, nor 100 percent wrong. Discussions should really be more scientific and objective instead of “I’m better than you!” or “I’m right, you are wrong.” Unfortunately we get plenty of that.
One question, what if the opponent decides to grab both your arms instead of blocking you one arm at a time?
Cheers,
John
[QUOTE=imperialtaichi;1026613]Hey Edward,
Good on you for putting your thoughts out and creating material for discussion.
No one is 100 percent right, nor 100 percent wrong. Discussions should really be more scientific and objective instead of “I’m better than you!” or “I’m right, you are wrong.” Unfortunately we get plenty of that.
One question, what if the opponent decides to grab both your arms instead of blocking you one arm at a time?
Cheers,
John[/QUOTE]
as s kisser :rolleyes:
wrong John , somebody has to make a stand for VT…Edward is misinformed. If you or he disagree come and see me and prove me wrong. fist to my jaw…