Some of the WC forms are done head on. Do WC guys fight their opponent head on? The stances look like this, but I’ve never seen WC used in a fight.
By “head on” I mean your shoulders squared to him, and your toes facing forward (generally forward don’t whine about toes pointed in or out in a stance), like how you would look in a mirror.
Thanks,
Iron
facing:
SLT Stance:
turn your torso to one side (left or right)
basically thats a wing chun ‘battle stance’.
remeber stances are fluid, so thats just your ‘perfect battle stance’ in a ‘perfect battle’
etc, etc. Different lineages distribute the weight differently.
strike!
Yes, like Yen Hoi said - if you stand in the yi ji kim yeung ma (pigeon-toed stance), to get into the basic fighting stance, turn your upper body 90 degrees to the left or the right to face an imaginary opponent and let the feet pivot so you’re facing your opponent squarely with one foot forward.
However, you’re not necessarily facing your opponent square-on at any one instant during a fight, due to footwork, as well as pivotting while striking and deflecting.
The general idea in WC is that you can use either arm or leg quicker by facing square-on, and you also have your whole structure behind each strike or deflection, so can put maximum power into it. You could be facing his side or his back, depending on how the fight evolves and what tactics you employ. One lineage concentrates on getting to the outside to put the opponent at a disadvantage by isolating one side of his body. Other lineages mainly go through the inside. Either way, you’re facing your opponent’s centreline square-on, whether he’s facing you or not.
I think there’s a mainland branch that routinely faces side-on though (Pien San?).
Max
If you face the opponent square on; all your weapons (2 hands,2 feet) are equal distance from your opponent… this is quite benificial. The idea in WC is to not let your opponent see you telegraph your movement, the idea is to move from where your are, to where you need to be with out pulling back or tensing up, or giving ANY clues about the fact that you are about to strike.
When this can be done effectively, having all 4 weapons with this attribute is statisticaclly better than standing side on. (distance wise - shortest way from point A to point B; all 4 weapons are in an equally advantageous position as the other)
Does that make sence?
S.Teebas
I face them so I can reach with both. But I try to work my way to their sides or back. Nothing like kicking someone in the back.
Head on
Doi Yeng also allows for, and encourages, fon sau.
=bp=
square to your opponent…
Never.
Seems to be some disagreement about what is right.
Either way, thanks for the replies, guys!
Iron
PS. Just cuz I replied again, don’t stop explaining your positions. I’m just being curtious 
facing is a critical part of wing chun & is taught from the very begining of the first form.
whippinghand i have been trying to decide whether or not you had any real knowledge of wc or if you just liked regurgitating sayings you have heard & now by means of your your last post you don’t even have a basic knowledge of some of your most basic concepts.
what has been said earlier is true- if you don’t face sqare on you are limiting your use of all your weapons you have at your disposal.
vts
ironic
The irony is that, contrary to what you believe, it is YOU who lack “basic knowledge of the most basic concepts”. I guess the whole point of SLT went over your head?
You’re stuck in SLT. Sooner or later you’ll have to snap out of it, if you want to progress.
That’s ok. Your username explains a lot.
Bong Sao often opens the side and back doors to your opponent.
Don’t fight with your back turned to your opponent. 
Don’t go toe to toe, smashing away at someone while they smash away at you.
be mobile, then root and strike hard.
peace
Kung Lek
“strike hard” as opposed to …?
How does one “strike hard”?
“square to your opponent… never”
square to his centerline.
nope
heh.
My sifu definitely emphasizes a square on position, but he also reminds that you have to be ready for anything in a real fight. I think adaptation is the key.
Yes… adaptability is the key. That’s why square on is not favorable.
I’ll go for “square on” with a couple of qualifications.
You want to be square on to your opponent, facing his body directly with your upper body as far as possible (taking the next qualification into account), for the reasons other posters including S Teebas and not including Mr Whippy mention - but you do not want him to be facing you. you want to be coming at him from his side, or ideally, behind.
You also want one foot behing the other when facing him in most situations, so that you cannot be unbalanced by a push directly back or a pull directly forward. Not to say you can’t be unbalanced (with only two points of contact you always have some directions of instability), but it is less trivial.
Yes, you have to be adaptable. But you also need some basic strategies. Centre/central line theme seems pretty basic to nearly all styles of WC. You still want to have as many weapons in the game as possible and be in a position which will allow you to hit with any of them in the minimum possible time. There are other styles which prefer to attack with alternate sides, believing that facing exposes the cetreline and too many targets. Which is right? It depends on who you’re fighting.
Adaptability is not as much a strategy as the ability to change strategies and tactics.