Thinking outside the box

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

It seems as though alot of WCers aproach sparring/fighting in the same sorta ways. What I mean is-When one is sparring an apponent, why does one more times than not, charge forward and chain-punch when one is attacked?
Of course this is ONE basic way to handle an attack, but there are many more ways to counter/attack/defend. And charging forward is often times over commiting(especially when chain punching).

Wing Chun is conceptually based. Its contents within the forms and train methodologies are to be expanded upon and to be interprited in many more ways other than what is literally “shown” within these methodologies. Example: In the Siu Nin Tao form we perform the tan in a very slow, diliberate, and presise mannor. This is how the form is comprised, however in actual combat/sparring you will probably never perform the tan in this manner. There are many ways to execute the tan sao but we are merly shown this one way to understand the concept of it.

The same can be said with just about every “move” within the system.

It appears as though many WCers dont understand this concept of thinking in regards to Wing Chun practice- to not take what is in the forms as the absolute.

Rushing forward and chain punching is a prime example of this. The practitioner has taken from the forms the literal, and has made it the absolute.

A great way to over-come this dilemma is Visualization/Meditation. When you visualize a fight senario think of the moves you will perform. Concentrate on why the tan should be one way and not another. Experiment on what is more direct/effecient/simple and why. After you have visualized a senario, try it.
Understand why the forms are the way they are and why you perform them the way you do.
This sorta approach to Wing Chun is necessary in interpreting the “way” and will bring you one step closer to understanding the depth of our wonderful art.

2

Airdrawndagger:

I just resurrected a thread that I started about a year and a half ago for you to take a look at - since it’s almost the same exact title (and subject matter) as this one. Perhaps you’ll find it interesting.

3

Victor,

Sorry it took me so long to write back, but when you work a professional job are married with 2 kids… nevermind :stuck_out_tongue:

I read most of what your original tread was about and although the heading is almost the same, the rest is dramatically different from the point I was trying to make.

Your point is by thinking out side of the “wing chun” box, you explore other arts to find the “answers” to questions that may not be solved using wing chun in regards to fighting/training.

My point is totally different.

The point I was trying to make was that the forms/drills that are taught are only the surface of a vast tunnel of knowlege within the wing chun system itself.

For example the forms are only a guidline to follow, a blue print or foundation in which to build from.

I was reading a post by someone who calls himself Mannie stating that he trains boxers and allows people to come in and spar with his boxers on occasion. He says what he sees time and again is when the Wing Chun guy is attacked, he sees what is in my opinion, the vary typical, basic, and redamentary fight response of rushing forward and chain punching towards an attacker.

I can only believe that these practiconers are missing the point of what they are being taught, are amatur, or simply are not looking deeper within the system for anwers to these questions. Of course you can make the argument that they are being taught wrong but Wing Chun has much to learn as far as inner interpretation.

This system has so many “hidden” secrets to it that many do not find/discover them and will result in a lack of understanding and poor understanding of the system or seek to find answers from outside influences. i.e.-- other systems of martial arts simply because they did not dig deep enough.

Now when I say “hidden” secrets I dont mean secret one touch death moves, or secrets that can only be revealled to you if you Mop up William Chungs floors for 10 years in order to prove you are worthy enough to accept them. I mean things that are apparent within the system only after you have put some real deep thought into “WHY” you are doing the moves you are doing. “WHY” does a tan sau work this way and not that way? “WHY” is the 2nd part of Chum kiu performed that way and not this way?
What I mean by thinking out side of the box is to not take the forms/drills as litteral but only as a “way” to easily communicate what is a very complicated martial art in the most efficent and efficent “way”.

4

chain punches

chain punches are preconditioned motions…not sensitivity. thus making one a slave to the system…how is change apparent if one goes through the motions mechanically…i attack with a chain punch because the system says so…not the best choice. fighting has to be natural…sparring should acquaint an individual with timing, distance, speed and changing so one can become relaxed during a real battle…otherwise you become a rigid handle throwing chain punches that your opponent can then manipulate…sparring in wc usually becomes force on force…until one experiences change and relaxation.

my humble experience…

best
>C

5

Interesting

Clutchpan says “chain punches are preconditioned motions”
this is true for me…
“not sensitivity” this is not true for me.
My running punch can have sensitivity also, if someone either punches at the same time as me or puts their hands up i then have the touch…or…chi Sao…Sticking hands…i dont just keep punching i change my action all the time…
If you just punched non stop without reacting to whats going on in a fight hoping to hit the target this is “making one a slave to the system” as you say.
So really it depends on how and when you’ve been taught to use it.
Thats my experience.

6

I can only believe that these practiconers are missing the point of what they are being taught,

that’s possible, though arguably that is the fault of the teacher or teaching method.

are amatur,

Are YOU a pro?

or simply are not looking deeper within the system for anwers to these questions. Of course you can make the argument that they are being taught wrong but Wing Chun has much to learn as far as inner interpretation.

At least a significant, if not major, part of this is the responsibility of the teacher or teaching method. I’d argue that in many ways the traditional teaching method discourages people from enquiry and criticism. The stereotypical picture of the teacher cuffing the student who asked a “stupid” question, per Enter the Dragon, signifies to me all that is wrong with the traditional way of teaching MA. Too often people are DISCOURAGED from rhinking for themselves, because the only true interpretation was allegedly set by some “master” who croaked centuries ago.

seek to find answers from outside influences. i.e.-- other systems of martial arts simply because they did not dig deep enough.

But an inquiring mind would seek out as many sources of knowledge as possible. As for digging deep, not every hole contains buried treasure. Digging further may uncover something valuable, or may just get you mired deeper in worthless dirt. Some of the “treasures” of WC are IMO things that are fairly basic to other arts or disciplines. TCMA practitioners IMO are notorious for making mountains out of molehills.

I laugh at the condescending attitude of people who assume that because I train in several arts I’ve given up inquiring and exploring any single one of them. I could turn it around and say that you’re intellectually and physically lazy, or fell victim to the propaganda, if one art is all you have time for or interest in.

7

I believe it was a generalized statement aimed at making a point about teaching boxing not a criticism of WC guys. Mannie’s teaching people how to box not how to do WC. He’s not concerned with how well they apply WC.

Wouldn’t you expect WC guys to practice their chain punching and try to apply chain punching during sparring? (If that’s what they were taught.) Sparring is meant to help them practice and improve their techniques. Probably the best place to learn stuff, right? If they can move forward and hit their target with nice chain punches, you would be praising their abilities. So how are they supposed to gain those skills if they never practice them during sparring?

It’s just a case of “anyone can do it, but can they make it work?”.
Chain punching is one of many basic WC techniques. Anyone can do them in the air but applying it in sparring is another matter.

I can only believe that these practiconers are missing the point of what they are being taught, are amatur, or simply are not looking deeper within the system for anwers to these questions. Of course you can make the argument that they are being taught wrong but Wing Chun has much to learn as far as inner interpretation.

This system has so many “hidden” secrets to it that many do not find/discover them and will result in a lack of understanding and poor understanding of the system or seek to find answers from outside influences. i.e.-- other systems of martial arts simply because they did not dig deep enough.

I guess that would be true of any system. If all that was needed was performance of forms and drills and your own contemplations, the role of the teacher would be quite minor.

Actually teaching a student some applicable skill is where the hands-on interactive instruction becomes valuable. Otherwise a master could just tape it all and sit on their butts.

Regardless of the number of secrets WC has, it doesn’t mean that every secret found is going to be the best answer in a fight. WC has it’s strengths and weaknesses as does every art.

8

The "box " is an artificial construct. There is no box - no need to think outside of it. Let things be what they are - don’t try to fit them into any preconceptions.

Just my two cents worth…

9

We are now both laughing, but for apposing reasons…

10

True, every fight is different, ever response is different. As a cumlative whole, you should be able to handle most situations in a fight if you properly prepare yourself mentally to except defeat.

11

You would sermise “that all is wrong with the traditional way of teaching MA.” based on Enter the Dragon? Hmm…

I used ETD as a sterotypical example, not the sole basis of my POV. As would be obvious to those not looking for a cheap shot because they lack the intellectual capacity to address the actual point I made.

We are now both laughing, but for apposing reasons…

And now I’m laughing because, unlike you, I can spell “opposing” … :smiley: “Apposing” means in proximity, juxtaposed … in which case you would be agreeing with me.

12

Well Im glad to see you know what Apposing means, and yes I did spell it correct because that is what I meant to say. You see we are laughting at the same thing only im laughing at you. :stuck_out_tongue:

13

Then you aren’t thinking outside the box since you can’t see how to apply the basic chain punch in any other way than what you have witnessed (i.e a technique for those with “nothing left”).

If that’s the only way you’ve been taught how to use it, you will need to think outside the box to find a better use.

14

Even a good fighter might be taken by surprise, if they’ve never seen the move before - so a chain punching blitz might work once…

but the only time, imo, when it’s a high percentage move on a consistent basis is AFTER you’ve already opened up a line with a hit on your opponent, and you’re close enough to continue striking on that same line.

This takes work. Work that has nothing to do with chain punching. Chain punching comes after the initial work is done.

15

Thanks for the reply edmund but I do believe your missing the point…

If I am to face off with a boxer for example, I already know the following:

  1. He has fast hands
  2. He will not be kicking
  3. He will test my defense using a jab
  4. He will be looking to set up a combo.
  5. He can time a prolonged offensive to counter relativly quick- such as a chain punch.
  6. If he had his way, he would probably prefer that I do open with chain punches so he can easily counter it.

Personally, I don’t like to use the chain punch to much in an all out offensive, its a great weapon to have at your disposal but more times than not im not going to open a fight with only chain punches.

Now thinking outside the box in regards to the chain punch- There are several ways change the chain punch into a more effective offensive move.
Instead of just chain punching from the center in a full charge, I might throw a couple of straight punches-to lap da, switching my angle of attack and proceed with more chain punches.
Or straight punch a few times and feel what kind of energy im getting and react accordingly.
Or straight punch a few times with more forward energy and wait for a counter-to react to it using sticking hands-than perhaps a pak da opens him up then I proceed to chain punch to finish.

A boxer is most likely to be conditioned, fast, ducking and weaving, and timing an attack so why would I just launch 10 consecutive chain punches straight down the middle on a boxer? Your basically giving him a great reason to clock you with a hook.

These are a few examples of different approaches using a chain punch set up and is more of what I was getting at when talking about thinking outside the box with Wing Chun. Does anyone have any other examples of how to take something in wing chun at face value and apply it effectivly in a fight/sparring?

16

Seems like you’ve already come up with a lame application of the chain punch as a strawman argument to demonstrate why you don’t like it.

Liddel probably stated it best when he said you would be a slave to the system if you just punched as quick as you could without taking into account what was going on. Doing that would be misinterpreting the system.

By it’s nature, the basic chain punch is demonstrating the concept of the asking hand and guarding hand. The attacking hand is probing and the rear hand protecting you from the opponent’s attack and in a position to attack next. If you just flailed away, you would be doing none of those things.

In Wing Chun, there is the simple concept of linking techniques into combinations based on reacting to the opponent not ignoring what the opponent does and punching like crazy and running forward.

17

You see we are laughting at the same thing only im laughing at you.

Dude, that was a pretty lame comeback, and what’s this “laughting” crap? Laugh away, though you’d probably laugh much harder in front of a mirror.

however my opinon is that if you put all that extra time into something you owe yourself the peice of mind to eplore and understand as much as possible. To not do everything you can in this regard is in my opinion, a waste of valuable time.

LOL at the absurdity of being lectured to about “wasting valuable time” on that Mt Everest of timewasters, an internet forum.

“opinon”? “piece of mind to eplore”? Where will it end? :rolleyes:

18

Really? No kidding? Why that seems to be exactly what im talking about. Thank you for pointing out the obvious genius.

19

Don’t worry about it, just keep getting owned in class and maybe eventually you might be humbled with a little bit of knowledge.

20

Anerlich is far from being a troll, Airdrawndagger…

he’s contributed some very valuable information and insights on this forum time and again. And as for constantly getting owned by the others in his school - I doubt it.

Why don’t you guys trade punches (snide remarks) like men :stuck_out_tongue: …and stop the little boy routine!

What exactly is your point about chain punches, anyway?