Hello,
I was wondering how people interpret the following statement, and whether it is a common saying in their kwoons.
“when striking, the limbs do not vibrate”. Taken from 'Complete Wing Chun by Robert Chu, Rene Ritchie and Y.Wu.
Thankyou
Could the author be speaking about the directness of the strike? Maybe he is expressing that, the striking movements of the style are practiced over and over, muscle, memory, and muscle memory evolve and create a more direct focused hit. Maybe he is trying to explain how, say, like how the degree of improvement of one’s directness of hit from beginner to a mid level karate who can break a board, so should it be improved from a learning practicioner to an expert like himself.
Just thought I would give it a shot.
-WATZUN
Punch w/ localized muscle and with locking the arm all the way out… It Vibrates
Stay relaxed and push your punch out. Keep the shoulders out of it and thrust from the ground up… No Vibration, instead you have steady, powerful energy.
David
“When striking, the limbs do not vibrate.”
I understand this quote as referencing energy use, whether it be a punch or kick.
A. Striking is a complete release of energy: to go from a state of emptiness, to a state of fullness, and back to a state of emptiness. To be either full or empty at the moment; continuously changing - no more, no less.
B. To me, ‘vibrate’ means to stay in the state of fullness. Constant tension in your muscles and being rigid/stagnate causes them to shake - to vibrate. If your strike vibrates, you have held on to more energy than you should have. Also, the full potential of the strike was not given to the receiver. ‘Pushing’ the punch/kick forward (as I interpret it) drags/forces the energy to become; as if fighting yourself and trying to slow Time down. But striking should have full force whip, thrust, and snap; to move as Time and Space move.
In the VTM family’s Yip Man Curriculum there are six basic principles at the SNT level:
- Go to and occupy center.
- Continuous forward energy
- Inside and Outside Gates
- Hand replacement
- Two parts work as one
- Body unity; sinking the horse to the root
Punching should involve the entire body. Body Unity is the driving factor. There is no body part EVER working in isolation. One hand works with the other hand, the hands work with the feet, the limbs work with the torso, you work with your opponent. From your root to the tip of your fist (or any other striking surface), all 6 of the above should unify in the moment to effectively illustrate these Wing Chun principles. There is always a Yin and Yang.
So to me the above quote holds true.
Just my understanding 
…
-Savi.
Hello,
A lot of interesting thoughts being presented, all making sense, and I thought I would give mine which is;
The punch should not rebound at its end. Basically it should not bounce back or shake.
This of course may be a kind of simple answer but I look at WC as simple genious!
Any thoughts?
Regards,
The way I meant it (not sure if Robert or Yewmun would agree) was that the power should be quiet (focused purely in the direction of its expression, not left to bounce around in all directions).
Jim - You can retract after you punch. IMHO that’s an application question (eg. if you need to use the hand somewhere else immediately thereafter or you want to put power into rather than through a specific target).
RR
Hey Rene,
Point one: Totally agree. When sending out energy it has to go direct and smooth (yau ging) to and thru the point of direction. Hence, releasing like an arrow. If the fist vibrates it is not doing the proper job.
Point two: Totally agree again. This of course is “after” you punch. This concept is enhanced (or further developed) thru our Lin Wan Fai Jeung practice in PSWC.
Thanks,
Hey Rene,
alright, I’m confused. Do you mean power when expressed on a body or in air? In a punch from character two (goat clamping) into air, when force is expressed, as I understand it, the fist has a slight forward ‘shake’ to it.
In relation to a striking a body, I can relate to a smooth application of force going through, and proving useful for projections, throwing, and uprooting. Shocking forces seem to favor the use of contraction and sinking, either on their own, as the contrary of the uprooting force, or as a conclusion to the smooth flow of force (application time of either type of force seems to be one of the important modulatory components of force expression), producing the penetrating thing you describe.
The maintence of body unity against the momentum of the forward impulse of a punch in the air will always produce this effect to a degree when done at speed, as the connective tissue and muscle of the elbow, shoulder, shoulder girdle, rib cage, serratus anterior, black box which seems to be spinal flexion, abdominal wall, adductors, hip flexors, and anterior compartment of the lower leg act to decellerate the forward impulse of the punch from elbow extensors, arm elevators at the shoulder, posterior shoulder girdle, spine extensors, psoas, hams, gluts, and calves.
Ummm- agree, disagree?
These are a couple of ideas, I’ve been toying with. Thoughts?
Andrew
Hey Andrew,
In the air, and I’m referring to shaking in directions perpendicular to the expression of power (shaking in a circle up, down, and around, for example). To help with this, we train Da Yeung Juk (punching at the candle), but not always to extinguish as some do, but to get as clean an effect on the flame as possible (make it move straight back, not just jump around chaoticaly).
I agree with you on striking the body. I’m currently playing with both the Chum (Sink) and Yiu (Waist) methods of doing this, trying to get my body and brain on the same page.
I think maybe we’re playing in similar sand boxes 8)
RR
Hi Rene,
thanks for mentioning the candle punching. I’ve never worked that before, but in this context it seems like a useful tool. I’ll play with it.
On similar sandboxes- to me, the nastiest bit of non-target dependant power evolution I can do single-handed, is a waist turn and weight drop (with or without switching weighting, though the switch makes things bigger and more obvious, and hence easier). This seems to produce the greatest ‘bite’. Is this your experience?
An observation- it seems to me that punching with short power at extension in the air allows much more relaxed expression, than punching with short power with the fist just off the body (and without significant forward travel). This seems to hold true when striking a body but to a much lesser degree, as you can use the body to provide a good bit of decelleration, which, midair, must be entirely provided by the architecture of the body.
Dunno where this leads, but it seems a number of traditions Wing Chun and otherwise, seem to claim to develop power primarily from striking air. The one’s I believe generally seem to hit the air with something pretty heavy, but I’m generally of such a mind that I have great difficulty believing in power that doesn’t come strongly linked to hitting stuff.
I think only bits can be trained without a target, and some bits are less suited to that training than others (i.e. hitting short at positions less than extended).
Agree, disagree. . .
Anyone. . . anyone. . . anyone. . . Bueller. . .?
Andrew
Originally posted by AndrewS
[B]Agree, disagree. . .
Anyone. . . anyone. . . anyone. . . Bueller. . .?[/B]
Wish I could contribute something useful, but I’m not even sure I understand the question let alone the ensuing discussion.
My inclination is pretty simplistic, much as David’s (McKind13).
As for short power/long power, etc. I pretty much avoid that in general discussions, and rarely if ever assume we’re talking the same language (the general “we”). I have often wondered if different groups use same words for opposing things.
From my perspective, a relaxed, non-muscular, fully extended strike (in the way I train) should have what is referred to in our circles as “long bridge energy.” (The kind of power which is fully and completely transmitted through long bridges, in a “long and lasting” manner for full and maximum expression and impact, and relies on relaxation with proper structure and positioning, rather than muscular strength.)
I would agree that it is more difficult to apply and rely on [the same degree of] muscular strength with long bridges, so this seems somewhat consistent with what you (AndrewS) describe as “short power,” no? (E.g., Long bridges travel short distances to strike.)
I don’t know if or how this relates to what others are describing, but toss it in the hat, FWIW. And mainly to let you know someone is out here paying attention, even if feeling a bit useless, and in hopes to keep the thread alive awhile longer. 
Regards,
- Kathy Jo
Originally posted by AndrewS
An observation- it seems to me that punching with short power at extension in the air allows much more relaxed expression, than punching with short power with the fist just off the body (and without significant forward travel).
Perhaps something to do with the vector’s angle to the ground?
Kathy,
our branches of the family seem to use fairly different terminology for long/short bridge, as I understand things. For me, working with a long bridge means working at the outer limit of ‘good’ for my positions (which has some tactical advantages, and refines one’s pressure exquistely). Pressure expressed from the body in this extended position is referred to as ‘long-bridge force’. From what I’ve heard, y’all like to keep the arms way tight to the body and work what I’d consider a very short bridge (near the inner tolerance of good position, and aren’t fans of positions further out than that.
I’ve heard the same term used by other lines to describe segmental power from the arm, so, yeah, I think we (Wing Chun in general) often talk about different things here under similar names.
The short/long power thing- I go with the ’ force over time’ (not the force as in Newtons, btw, force as in colloquial usage) description. Long power, as I understand it, is exerted smoothly and through the body acted upon. Short power is exerted for a shorter time, either by briefly exerting long power then ceasing to do so, or by briefly exerting long power then ‘cracking the whip’ by contracting in the opposite direction. There seem to be a number of ways to do this both locally and globally.
Teazer,
I see what you’re saying- the angle is much more acute. Still, I can give a decent little shoulder strike at the same distance (nothing great, but a meaningful shot), and hence with the same angle. Walking is basically practicing this in the air. . .
What I was getting at, and dunno if is right or not, is that to practice that close hit midair without going to extension, pretty much seems to require that ‘contraction’ thing to decellerate it, particularily muscle local to the arm, instead of letting connective tissue, various stabilizer and core muscles, and a variety of stretch reflexes to provide the decelleration. When hitting a body, the arm can stay relaxed, and the ‘contraction’ element can be performed either by the shoulder girdle alone, or using the shoulder girdle as a connector to torso action.
Again, please don’t take this seriously, these ideas are not in any way polished, well tested, or well understood by me at the moment. Just stuff I’m playing with.
Andrew
Originally posted by AndrewS
[B]Kathy,
our branches of the family seem to use fairly different terminology for long/short bridge, as I understand things.
[/B]
This is my general assumption in conversations until proven otherwise, LOL.
For me, working with a long bridge means working at the outer limit of ‘good’ for my positions (which has some tactical advantages, and refines one’s pressure exquistely). Pressure expressed from the body in this extended position is referred to as ‘long-bridge force’.
That sounds like what we refer to as “long bridge energy” as well, especially in light of your “pressure” comment.
I tend to think of “long bridge” as a relative position, and “long bridge energy” as more of a quality. But I might be the only one who thinks of it that way, LOL. If any of my seniors lurking here would speak up more often, then perhaps we’d know. <hint hint>
From what I’ve heard, y’all like to keep the arms way tight to the body and work what I’d consider a very short bridge (near the inner tolerance of good position, and aren’t fans of positions further out than that.
All kidding aside, I never heard that before. Indeed, we do practice to be comfortable and functional at positions where our own bridge and elbow is close to the body as may be appropriate, necessary, or forced upon us. However, our nominal/central position is with elbow about a fist distance from rib cage, which I think is fairly typical, at least in conversation, if not in practice. We very much enjoy extending through the longer bridges when and as appropriate (with due caution of course); at least I do.
We also enjoy being very close to the partner/opponent, and with a shorter mutual bridge than many folks seem to prefer. I think that could easily be a point of confusion in dialogs such as these.
I’ve heard the same term used by other lines to describe segmental power from the arm, so, yeah, I think we (Wing Chun in general) often talk about different things here under similar names.
Yeah. And on that account there’s a fair to middling chance we’re all still talking past each other, LOL.
The short/long power thing- I go with the ’ force over time’ (not the force as in Newtons, btw, force as in colloquial usage) description. Long power, as I understand it, is exerted smoothly and through the body acted upon. Short power is exerted for a shorter time, either by briefly exerting long power then ceasing to do so, or by briefly exerting long power then ‘cracking the whip’ by contracting in the opposite direction. There seem to be a number of ways to do this both locally and globally.
What you are describing as “long power” sounds very much like our preferred “long bridge energy” and for which we also say “long and lasting.” What you are describing as “short power” sounds more like what we would call “short bridge energy,” and is something we don’t much go for, at least not for striking. I can’t even relate to the notion of “contracting in the opposite direction” anymore.
Having said all of that, I realize and regret I still haven’t been able to contribute to your query.
Regards,
- Kathy Jo
Andrew S’s post:Dunno where this leads, but it seems a number of traditions Wing Chun and otherwise, seem to claim to develop power primarily from striking air. The one’s I believe generally seem to hit the air with something pretty heavy, but I’m generally of such a mind that I have great difficulty believing in power that doesn’t come strongly linked to hitting stuff.
I think only bits can be trained without a target, and some bits are less suited to that training than others (i.e. hitting short at positions less than extended).
Agree, disagree. . .
Anyone. . . anyone. . . anyone. . . Bueller. . .?
I am not Bueller. But FWIW I think that proper air punching develops both long and short power. Proper is the key word.
What hitting something like a bag does is to help prevent injury to the joints from the contact.
In non WC- Ali had the power needed for getting the job done-
not just Foreman but the so called invisible punch that got Liston.
He spent more time in airpunching and shadow boxing than in
all out punching of the heavy bag.
joy chaudhuri
Hey Joy,
‘proper air punching develops power’- I can see types of power where this would be the case. Do you think this is the case for the very close shots I was describing?
Dunno if Ali’s training is good argument here. He definitely put some time in hitting stuff, but was definitely not a power puncher in the league of Foreman, Joe Lewis, Marciano, or Tyson. Ali did what he did on speed, saavy, and timing (and more heart than was good for him).
Hey Kathy,
from what I’ve heard in WT circles, our branches of the family have similar mechanics and feel, as opposed to other branches of Wing Chun which seem to do things quite differently.
The bridge-length thing- y’all’s poon sao is at roughly the distance of one extended arm from person to person- that’s the impression I have? Correct? Incorrect? This is the shorter mutual bridge you’re talking about? If so, why do you work there?
Long and short power- hmm, on a simple strike will every shot go through with long force- kinda getting hit with a very big wet towel? If long force is the wet towel, the short power is like hitting with a rat-tail with the same towel. Does this fit with anything you do?
‘Contracting in the opposite direction’ - at full extension of the punch in the first form, the body stays stable, and the shoulder shouldn’t come forward. A tight upper back would, I think, interfere with transmission of power from the body, yet at the end of the strike the shoulder doesn’t come forward. Why doesn’t the body rock forward- things stabilize it. Make sense?
Quick retraction on a jab in boxing is supposed to add to its ‘snap’- (again this gets into force over time, which I think has some importance in the effects of a strike on the human body). Does the force at the end of the punch end any less quickly?
FWIW- I challenge a lot of conventional Wing Chun thinking on 'relaxation. I think the actual physiology is very different than the imagery we use to access it.
I’m kicking around ideas here, dunno if I’ll agree with this stuff tommorrow, next year, or in a decade, but this is the direction some of my present thinking and training has taken.
Take care,
Andrew
Originally posted by AndrewS
Hey Kathy,
Mornin’ and hey, back at ya.
from what I’ve heard in WT circles, our branches of the family have similar mechanics and feel, as opposed to other branches of Wing Chun which seem to do things quite differently.
From what I hear and read, it seems so to me as well. From you and a few other similarly analytical WT folks, at least. At a minimum, we seem to share some common features not so typical of other family-groups.
For the most part though, what I’ve seen on WT videos couldn’t seem much farther from the premises of our [me and mine] practice. I continue to contemplate, in an effort to understand the seeming inconsistency. Maybe promotional elements are a factor, or maybe proximity or attunement to Leung Ting versus those farther fanned out in the organization. Or maybe it’s a combination of other things. Dunno yet, and still thinking on it.
Of course in practice most of us [the general us] probably don’t hold to or resemble our talk to the degree we should, me included. But I’m working on it. 
The bridge-length thing- y’all’s poon sao is at roughly the distance of one extended arm from person to person- that’s the impression I have? Correct? Incorrect? This is the shorter mutual bridge you’re talking about?
Yes, this is what I’m talking about. In routine practice, the distance depends on the partners (i.e., partners with similar bridge length vs. partners with very different arm lengths). Nominally, I am practicing at a distance close enough to my partner for penetrating a solid strike. With my “long and lasting,” “girl hand,” “long bridge energy.” Same or similar to my distance when tapping the sandbag.
If so, why do you work there?
Lots of reasons. Here are a few easy ones …
- Learn not to be afraid at close range (consistent with a predilection for the inside position).
- Learn my own distance for penetrating strikes.
- Better able to hit my partner.
- Better to learn positioning and neutralizing, lest my partner hit me. Sensitivity, timing, and responsiveness are also byproducts; there is no time for dallying when the strike is virtually already there.
- Psychological and physical intimidation. We typically look 'em square through the eye without blinking too, LOL.
- Maximize use of the full forearm for bridging, sticking, control and sensitivity. Not just hands and wrist.
- Really works the horse!
[FWIW, I realize “preference” or predilection is a politically incorrect concept these days. However, I give myself permission for the terms, as I do indeed have distinct preferences in practice and strategy. Otherwise anything goes; and I don’t go for that. At least not when I’m calling it Wing Chun.]
Long and short power- hmm, on a simple strike will every shot go through with long force- kinda getting hit with a very big wet towel?
Wet towel is a good analogy. I like wet noodle even better because of the “sticky” nuance. Al dente, LOL. But they are great big noodles, big as your arm, not some flimsy dinner spaghetti.
If long force is the wet towel, the short power is like hitting with a rat-tail with the same towel. Does this fit with anything you do?
I can’t relate to rat tails. Are they good to eat?
‘Contracting in the opposite direction’ - at full extension of the punch in the first form, the body stays stable, and the shoulder shouldn’t come forward.
Okay, I can agree with this description. I still don’t know about the contraction part; I sure don’t “think” of it that way, but will try to be more cognizant about the degree to which that may indeed occur. With my mere lay person’s awareness, it “feels” like more of a stretch than a contraction.
A tight upper back would, I think, interfere with transmission of power from the body, yet at the end of the strike the shoulder doesn’t come forward. Why doesn’t the body rock forward- things stabilize it. Make sense?
I think it makes sense, but you never know for sure! LOL. I do follow and relate about the sensation in the upper back.
Yes, I do see this as a factor in whether or not force/power/energy (in the colloquial sense) is fully expressed. But a factor that seems to lesson over time with development and practice, and as the body learns and is better able to “settle” in all respects. It seems so to me thus far anyway; I’ll get back to you in a few more years to confirm or refute the trend.
Quick retraction on a jab in boxing is supposed to add to its ‘snap’- (again this gets into force over time, which I think has some importance in the effects of a strike on the human body). Does the force at the end of the punch end any less quickly?
Not sure the answer to your question about force at the end of the punch. But you can be sure I’ll be considering it for the next few years of practice, LOL. However, I do know I am not concerned about snapping a punch. When I strike, I want it to be long, lasting, and penetrating. I sound like a broken record on that, I know.
FWIW- I challenge a lot of conventional Wing Chun thinking on 'relaxation. I think the actual physiology is very different than the imagery we use to access it.
ROFLOL. Relaxation in this sense is one of the most strenuous activities I routinely engage in. 
I tend to prefer the word “settle” though even that doesn’t hint at how much work it is, at least for us mere mortals. And such benign terms don’t begin to explain the resulting pool of perspiration, LOL.
My way of practice is admittedly and distinctly counter-intuitive in some ways.
I’m kicking around ideas here, dunno if I’ll agree with this stuff tommorrow, next year, or in a decade, but this is the direction some of my present thinking and training has taken.
Same here. If I fully agree with myself next year or next decade, I figure I’ll have done something very wrong or quite miraculous to achieve such a state of stagnation.
Regards,
- Kathy Jo
Andrew S. posts:‘proper air punching develops power’- I can see types of power where this would be the case. Do you think this is the case for the very close shots I was describing?
((Andrew- I do think so and have seen empirical examples. When
relaxed but steady( not slow) airpunching is done-the proper alignments are worked out and smoothened again and again and one can deliver anywhere along the path.))
Dunno if Ali’s training is good argument here. He definitely put some time in hitting stuff, but was definitely not a power puncher in the league of Foreman, Joe Lewis, Marciano, or Tyson. Ali did what he did on speed, saavy, and timing (and more heart than was good for him).
((he did hit heavy bags and of course the speed bags… but his heavy bag hitting was deliberately more of the “tapping” kind when compared to Foreman. IMO- he had plenty of power but he worked on both the warhead and the missile development.
Power is not useful if it cannot be delivered.Enough power to knock out Shavers, Foreman, Moore, and lots of other good strong folks. On the last item- heart he had and has, Sadly, like many he didnt quit the game early enough.((He had early training camp in Northern Arizona for one of his fights)) Foreman does have greater power but he has to crank to get it out…specially aginst folks that moved around…not only Ali but he lost to another who also moved- I forget his name. The issue is one of usable power.
Tua hasa dynamite left hook— couldnt get it to land on Lewis.
Tyson now has similar problems against folks who dont just stand there. Lewis and Marciano’s power was good in their time but both were on the lower end of the heavyweight class in weights.))
Joy
Andrew & KJ - I’m not sure if ‘Long Bridge Power’ is a compound term or not, but IMHO, length of bridge is separate from quality of power (you could have short bridge long bridge, long power short bridge, long power long bridge, short power short bridge, and other types). To me, persistance of power (what I think is being referred to?) is an application oriented question, and use of it depends on what you want to do to an opponent (or in some cases what they allow you to do to them if they are of skill). Long power, while probably more of an intermediate skill (haven’t seen many beginners with it) is also sort of merciful in my experience, sort of like turning a fire hose on. Its very unpleasent, and can cause impact trauma, but it’s not a destructive as other types that put power into very specific places (note: I’ve only ever seen Wujia Taiji do this in a similar manner to WCK, though I’d guess more arts do as well).
As to ‘bite’, yes my experience is thusfar the same. I find that stuff like very fine chocolate. It’s just amazing to experience. I’ve had some good folks do it to me and the subtleness of their movements when doing it where as cool as the results were unpleasent.
I sometimes wonder if punching in the air allows less brain interference than punching a target. I find myself really able to let loose in the air, and also on the dummy, but when a human being is on the other end, there’s so much mental baggage about being careful that my technique seems to suffer along with the purity of power expression.
RR
Hi Rene.
Originally posted by reneritchie
Andrew & KJ - I’m not sure if ‘Long Bridge Power’ is a compound term or not, but IMHO, length of bridge is separate from quality of power (you could have short bridge long bridge, long power short bridge, long power long bridge, short power short bridge, and other types).
I’ll remain conservative about assuming a common language even now, LOL.
My earlier comment about viewing “long bridge energy” as more of a quality than a position seems consistent with your assertion here. I was intentionally reserved about mentioning it for fear of leading the conversation astray, but indeed I do also [try] to apply “long bridge energy” even when my bridge has been foreshortened. I try to retain the same general quality regardless of hand/elbow/bridge position or length.
To me, persistance of power (what I think is being referred to?) is an application oriented question, and use of it depends on what you want to do to an opponent (or in some cases what they allow you to do to them if they are of skill). Long power, while probably more of an intermediate skill (haven’t seen many beginners with it) is also sort of merciful in my experience, sort of like turning a fire hose on. Its very unpleasent, and can cause impact trauma, but it’s not a destructive as other types that put power into very specific places (note: I’ve only ever seen Wujia Taiji do this in a similar manner to WCK, though I’d guess more arts do as well).
Regretfully, I am totally unqualified to comment on the Wu/Wujia Taiji thing.
In my personal experience, long bridge energy has the potential for trauma and destruction to a frightening degree. I realize everything has advantages and disadvantages, and all kinds of people can make all kinds of things work, especially if they work the thing enough. So I’m not holding this out as a “my damage is better than your damage” kind of thing.
At the extremes, I’d rather have my skull cracked than my innards imploded. I know that’s the wrong word, but I’m looking for visuals here, LOL. Seriously though, I’d rather risk broken bones any day over damage to internal organs. That is not to say the primary purpose of long bridge energy is internal organ damage; I don’t believe it is, rather a potential and potentially convenient by-product. It is dramatic disruption and control we’re initially after, IMHO; the rest is icing on the cake.
But even at far lesser magnitudes, which is where (at risk of offending some sensibilities) I think most of us are at, long bridge energy combined with proper neutralization and control can be quite effective and useful. Especially considering that even tiny and otherwise non-athletic people can develop those skills.
When it comes to actually breaking things, it doesn’t take that much force to break at least some things … a nose, a rib, or the tip of a sternum, or get the opponent’s attention through some other centrally located features once the opportunity presents itself. Again, even a tiny person can learn and develop to do this much, even if it has a firehose type of quality. Is it foolproof? Nope, not in my estimation. Then again, neither is anything else. We all pays our money and takes our chances.
As to ‘bite’, yes my experience is thusfar the same. I find that stuff like very fine chocolate. It’s just amazing to experience. I’ve had some good folks do it to me and the subtleness of their movements when doing it where as cool as the results were unpleasent.
Yes, that too. This is where it becomes worthwhile even if it were only for the “art.” But why stop at art, LOL.
I sometimes wonder if punching in the air allows less brain interference than punching a target. I find myself really able to let loose in the air, and also on the dummy, but when a human being is on the other end, there’s so much mental baggage about being careful that my technique seems to suffer along with the purity of power expression.
In observing myself and many other learners, I have noted that there is less interference from the brain in at least one significant way: Without touching a physical target we can focus more on “allowing” proper positioning, placement, and movement. Whereas with striking a physical target, we often have a natural tendency to “try” hitting which carries us in the wrong training direction.
It’s the same darn “Don’t be greedy; don’t be afraid” dilemma we constantly face. Soon as we get a person or an object in front of us, our natural tendency kicks in whereby we want to feel and hear the “power!”. Unfortunately, this conflicts with the necessary patience to “allow” this particular type of power to naturally develop. Our preferred strikes are “placed” not “forced” when executed properly, whether in air practice and on physical targets (which I do believe is also necessary and appropriate at the right times). It takes a lot of practice.
This in part hearkens back to my “non-intuitive” comment earlier. At least this is a typical problem at earlier phases of learning and development, which we (in my group and some others) proactively work to alleviate.
That is all just from my current perspective of course. I full well realize others MMV.
Regards,
- Kathy Jo