Setting The Anchors

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

developing “rooting” power is a VERY difficult “little idea” to tackle, and can be a very “advanced” concept which also opens up whole new set of “questions”, and to be honest, most instructors don’t have a clear and concise way to teach this concept or don’t fully understand the concept or worse, they contradict themselves while trying to teach this concept.

instructors will say, “root” but when you ask “how”? they usually expain with such vague answers such as “just drop your stance” or “relax” or “get heavy” but how the heck does that really explain anything to the student other than just “skimming the surface”, and the real answer is usually because the instructors only understand the “tip of the iceburg” but don’t even “see” the “huge body of ice” that supports that “tip”.

this video will also help you realize “how i personally see things” from “my point of view”, especially when i get questions from all of you.

don’t take this video lightly, there are many “keys” to your questions here. and this will also help you understand why i say you can’t mix different “methods” of getting power. after seeing this video, hopefully you get why you can’t do this method of wing chun structure and try to incorporate it with a muay thai stance, or a boxers stance which has you light on your feet, heels off the ground, rotating your shoulders etc…

this video shares with you how i teach my students this “grounding” concept, which is the “heart” of Hawkins Cheung’s method of Wing Chun and IMO what makes him completely different than almost every other Wing Chun instructor in the world.

it is one of the “keys” to putting the “big picture” together, so i really hope everyone enjoys it, learns from it, grows from it and appreciates the information.

you can view the video… here

Jin

2

What is “rooting” and why do so many highly effective systems of combat never bother to address it specifically?
The two systems you mentioned, boxing and MT, develop excellent power in their strikes and never is one coached about “rooting”.

3

[QUOTE=ChinaBoxer;963371]

dont take this video lightly, there are many keys to your questions here. and this will also help you understand why i say you cant mix different methods of getting power. after seeing this video, hopefully you get why you cant do this method of wing chun structure and try to incorporate it with a muay thai stance, or a boxers stance which has you light on your feet, heels off the ground, rotating your shoulders etc[/QUOTE]

Why not? MMA guys mix a wrestling base with boxing and Muay Thai stances all the time. A good fighter should be able to switch his base depending on the circumstances.

Speaking of base (or rooting as it is calling in TMA’s), the best way to develop it is to actually do activities, such as takedowns and throws against resisting opponents, that require you to have a good base to defend. You won’t find anyone in the world who has better “rooting” than grapplers.

Lots of people think of rooting as sinking, lowering or somehow doing something to your body to make it more stable. Rooting is much more about your response to your opponent’s application of force than it is to your specific stance. You’ll never develop rooting without practicing against resisting opponents who are trying to “unroot” you and throw, push, or take you down.

BTW, I’m not sure why you would be teaching a triangle step, bringing the feet together when you are trying to teach rooting. The instant you bring your two feet together, you have no base at all.

4

[QUOTE=Knifefighter;963441]The instant you bring your two feet together, you have no base at all.[/QUOTE]

Granted, the base is very very small and difficult to maintain, but there IS a base. It’s not the optimal stance for fighting, but training with it can improve one’s fighting base: The level of relaxation, attention, and balance required to maintain a feet-together stance under pressure can be transferred to a more functional stance. Nevertheless, for anyone wanting to learn the functional side of their art, functional stance training is probably better to do first.

5

One of my old intructors used to talk about having the knees pointing towards the tip of the triangle. I don’t know if it’s coincidence but after practising the form with that visualisation I started to get “runner’s knee” in both of my legs which took a quite a while to go away. It could be because I have flat feet but now I just keep the knee over my toe.

6

[QUOTE=Xiao3 Meng4;963465]Granted, the base is very very small and difficult to maintain, but there IS a base. It’s not the optimal stance for fighting, but training with it can improve one’s fighting base: The level of relaxation, attention, and balance required to maintain a feet-together stance under pressure can be transferred to a more functional stance. Nevertheless, for anyone wanting to learn the functional side of their art, functional stance training is probably better to do first.[/QUOTE]

That is almost the least stable position you can be in and have both feet on the ground.

7

[QUOTE=IRONMONK;963466]One of my old intructors used to talk about having the knees pointing towards the tip of the triangle. I don’t know if it’s coincidence but after practising the form with that visualisation I started to get “runner’s knee” in both of my legs which took a quite a while to go away. It could be because I have flat feet but now I just keep the knee over my toe.[/QUOTE]

That’s because it causes extra stress on the knee joint and increases the chances of knee injury.

8

Too much talk for a basic concept: Rooting = To use footwork that does not compromise your balance while you’re delivering an attack.

9

Rooting/Anchoring with the triangle step is fine - once you’ve gained access (or a path) to enter into his space and you’re now working to eat up more of his space while using your arms/hands to either strike, bridge, or unbalance.

But this all begs the question: Have I gained access (ie.- bridged the gap) without getting hit, (ie.- round punched, overhanded, or hooked around my wing chun guard) - and without immediately facing a takedown by a skilled wrestler/grappler type?

Because the triangular stepping demoed here - and which is so prevalent within the wing chun arsenal throughout virtually (but not necessarily literally) every wing chun system…

has nothing to do with any range other than very close range STRIKING…and is basically useless against a good wrestler/grappler who is still in a position to take you down as you come in with this triangle footwork…or a good boxer, kickboxer, Thai boxer type who is timing your entry for a big punch - like those punches I described earlier.

In conclusion, the triangle step (and all the strong rooting/anchoring it can provide) can work well if, and only if, it’s too late for him to land the punch or the shoot.

And even when it’s too late for either of those things - there’s still the possibility of a clinch - which provides the same dilemma already described: Have I gained access to this range (and while using this footwork) that won’t result in a clinch?

Because if not, as knifefighter has already pointed out, I would prefer a more open stance to be “anchored/rooted” with than the close-legged triangular stepping pattern - as the wider base will provide much stronger rooting/anchoring stability against the attempt to clinch by the opponent.

So when is the triangle step efficient, then?

Imo, it’s when the opponent is in the process of making a committed move that allows you the time and the angle to get in with this as part of your counter, or you’ve already landed a punch or a kick from the outside that stunned him - and now this footwork can be used to follow up and possibly finish him with your continued striking and unbalancing.

10

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;963491]Rooting/Anchoring with the triangle step is fine - once you’ve gained access (or a path) to enter into his space and you’re now working to eat up more of his space while using your arms/hands to either strike, bridge, or unbalance.

But this all begs the question: Have I gained access (ie.- bridged the gap) without getting hit, (ie.- round punched, overhanded, or hooked around my wing chun guard) - and without immediately facing a takedown by a skilled wrestler/grappler type?

Because the triangular stepping demoed here - and which is so prevalent within the wing chun arsenal throughout virtually (but not necessarily literally) every wing chun system…

has nothing to do with any range other than very close range STRIKING…and is basically useless against a good wrestler/grappler who is still in a position to take you down as you come in with this triangle footwork…or a good boxer, kickboxer, Thai boxer type who is timing your entry for a big punch - like those punches I described earlier.

In conclusion, the triangle step (and all the strong rooting/anchoring it can provide) can work well if, and only if, it’s too late for him to land the punch or the shoot.

And even when it’s too late for either of those things - there’s still the possibility of a clinch - which provides the same dilemma already described: Have I gained access to this range (and while using this footwork) that won’t result in a clinch?

Because if not, as knifefighter has already pointed out, I would prefer a more open stance to be “anchored/rooted” with than the close-legged triangular stepping pattern - as the wider base will provide much stronger rooting/anchoring stability against the attempt to clinch by the opponent.

So when is the triangle step efficient, then?

Imo, it’s when the opponent is in the process of making a committed move that allows you the time and the angle to get in with this as part of your counter, or you’ve already landed a punch or a kick from the outside that stunned him - and now this footwork can be used to follow up and possibly finish him with your continued striking and unbalancing.[/QUOTE]

Great post Victor!

Triangle footwork is not the best tool for engagement. Against experienced opponents it is way to easy to crash, and overwhelm.

11

to be honest, most instructors don’t have a clear and concise way to teach this concept or don’t fully understand the concept or worse, they contradict themselves while trying to teach this concept

To be honest, posters basically lose credibility with me when they start berating “most instructors” like this. It happens regularly and often on this forum, and you sound just like the aforementioned “most instructors”, who do the same thing.

If you really have something good to say, you don’t need to drag others down to make yourself sound good.

12

An excellent point

[QUOTE=anerlich;963556]
If you really have something good to say, you don’t need to drag others down to make yourself sound good.[/QUOTE]

We would all benefit if we cut down on overgeneralizations and stereotypes.

It’s good that the videos were put out.

It’s so easy to be critical.

joy chaudhuri

13

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;963564]------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would all benefit if we cut down on overgeneralizations and stereotypes.

It’s good that the videos were put out.

It’s so easy to be critical.

joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE]

I think you missed the point. Anerlich was citing the point that he was putting down other instructors, while saying he did it better.

14

[QUOTE=anerlich;963556]To be honest, posters basically lose credibility with me when they start berating “most instructors” like this. It happens regularly and often on this forum, and you sound just like the aforementioned “most instructors”, who do the same thing.

If you really have something good to say, you don’t need to drag others down to make yourself sound good.[/QUOTE]

you make a good point, i didn’t mean to sound like that at all, but i do understand where you are coming from, i will definitely keep this in mind in the future. thanks!

Jin

15

Misreading the post

[QUOTE=Knifefighter;963570]I think you missed the point. Anerlich was citing the point that he was putting down other instructors, while saying he did it better.[/QUOTE]

I got the point- endorsed it and praised China Boxer for putting his video up.

joy chaudhuri

16

I didn’t actually watch the video and have no comment on it. I took issue with the post, which made me feel my time might be better spent doing something other than watching the video.

i didn’t mean to sound like that at all

Your words didn’t allow many alternative interpretations, I’m afraid.

17

[QUOTE=anerlich;963607]Your words didn’t allow many alternative interpretations, I’m afraid.[/QUOTE]

Maybe for you Andrew, not all.

JR

18

two things-

  1. you can indeed root from one leg, from higher stances, from heels up, etc. It is a matter of aligning your structure against pressure, not about lowering your horse.
  2. Dale-don’t you practice FMA? Do you use the triangle steps in your practice?
    I know when I studied FMA, we did many variations of the triangles’forward, reverse, attacking defending, etc.

Great stuff, CB-keep it up!

19

[QUOTE=TenTigers;963660]two things-

  1. you can indeed root from one leg, from higher stances, from heels up, etc. It is a matter of aligning your structure against pressure, not about lowering your horse.
  2. Dale-don’t you practice FMA? Do you use the triangle steps in your practice?
    I know when I studied FMA, we did many variations of the triangles’forward, reverse, attacking defending, etc.

Great stuff, CB-keep it up![/QUOTE]thanks for the words of encouragement, and just to clarify the “V” step is just a “transitional” movement, it’s not a static position. and any martial art that uses “triangle footwork” such as Kali/Escrima, JKD, Silat etc..all use the “V” step as well, to “transition” or use it to kick while in “transition”.

Jin

20

[QUOTE=TenTigers;963660]two things-

  1. you can indeed root from one leg, from higher stances, from heels up, etc. It is a matter of aligning your structure against pressure, not about lowering your horse.![/QUOTE]
    It always strikes me a funny when someone claims to be all about structure and then makes statements that show they don’t even know the basics of what constitutes structure.
  1. Dale-don’t you practice FMA? Do you use the triangle steps in your practice?
    I know when I studied FMA, we did many variations of the triangles’forward, reverse, attacking defending, etc.

Don’t use it because of the fact that it compromises one’s base and makes it significantly easier to be taken down.