I thought I’d start this topic instead of hijacking another thread
this question is for those who feel WC cannot handle long range. please explain why you feel that way.
I am not an expert in other’s WC, but from what I have seen some of the fundamental things that could lead to a disadvantage at an open range are
fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance, body upright, flatfooted. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.
not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.
[QUOTE=Pacman;1003282] not turning the body when punching. [/QUOTE]
This is a tradeoff and not weakness. If you don’t turn your body and remain 90 degree angle between your arms and your chest, you can land your “chain punches” many times on your opponent’s face before he knows what has just happened. If you turn your body, you may land a much more powerful punch but just one punch and not many punches.
I don’t know which experience is more scary, your opponent knocks you out by one punch, or your opponent hits your face 7 times and you can’t do anything about it.
[QUOTE=Pacman;1003282]1. fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.[/QUOTE]Who fights like this? Nobody I know.
[QUOTE=Pacman;1003282]I thought I’d start this topic instead of hijacking another thread
I am not an expert in other’s WC, but from what I have seen some of the fundamental things that could lead to a disadvantage at an open range are
fighting in a completely squared off pigeon toed stance. this probably comes from an abuse of the rooting concept and people want to fight like this. this leads to a lack of mobility, lateral and forward, that will put you at a great disadvantage. hard to get in close when you cannot move easily.
not turning the body when punching. again keeping that squared off stance. this leads to a lack of reach.[/QUOTE]
TWC NEVER fights square on for the reasons you mentioned and more.
I can see what you’re saying Pacman. Though I don’t consider either thing a weakness per say. I look at it this way: if someone is looking to hit me he’s got to come close enough to me (and cross the bridge) to do so. Once an attack enters my threat envelope I can use wing chun or any other fighting strategy I want. Because of this, the YJKYM stance wouldn’t be any more a detriment at that range relative to any other range because it won’t be used until the person is close enough to be a threat.
The other thing too, is while in the past many have touched on the ranges of hand-to-hand combat, there really is one range—that is the range by which an attack can reach you and you can be hurt. Once there a person is a threat and should be dealt with. The other ranges that people might discuss (e.g. the kicking, punching, trapping, clinching, and ground fighting) are merely subsets of the overall fighting envelope.
The other idea about punching, I think I see what you’re saying…and I agree that the word trade-off is a better descriptor. But is it the ideal one?
Being balanced and rooted in your techniques will enable one to drive from the ground, whereby the hip is always an inherent component. The wing chun punch to me does use the body—but in a different way than say boxing. Because a major component of body unity deals with mating the shoulders to the hips, the hands to the feet, and the elbows to the knees—wing chun punches should be able to achieve decent power through the (short) movement through full coordination of the joints and movement. I know it’s not the same as my cross (see long drawn out thread on this) but it still has effectiveness.
[QUOTE=Matrix;1003290]Who fights like this? Nobody I know.[/QUOTE]
LOL…
Love it.. Nice and direct Bill.. Couldn’t have said it better..
Using karate (generic) as an example.. They don’t have any ChiSao, nor many fancy drills, most of the forms are passed over, meaning they don’t know what any of it has to do with fighting. . And they just fight.. They also don’t complain that “their art is lacking in X”.. They just do it.
VT folks are too spoiled and depend too much on specific “instructions” instead of just expressing and doing it.
Moreover, it shows the lack of sparring instruction and too much improper focus on the forms and drills.. And of course if you stand there in YJKYM like a statue you should be gently lead off the floor and sent to remedial sparring class.
[QUOTE=Matrix;1003290]Who fights like this? Nobody I know.[/QUOTE]
I don’t think he means standing like this the whole time, but rather starting like this and shooting into a biu ma on attack. Like LT / EBMAS / Wang Zhi Peng and some many others.
I stand that way starting, and use huen ma, chor ma, side facing stances, and shooting / stepping stances where need be. I move with the opponent simply put.
Bas Rutten also advocates a squared stance, although with one foot behind and one foot in front (more like a higher elevation front stance). No one just stands in YJKYM the whole time of course.
I train in the pigeon toe stance, as does most others.
I fight in a fighting stance, one foot forward, toes slightly turned in (if I remember). I am forward facing, shoulders square. It does go to **** sometimes due to me not being very good. But I would never ever fight in the training stance.
[QUOTE=Bully;1003337]I train in the pigeon toe stance, as does most others.
I fight in a fighting stance, one foot forward, toes slightly turned in (if I remember). I am forward facing, shoulders square. It does go to **** sometimes due to me not being very good. But I would never ever fight in the training stance.
Weird thread.[/QUOTE]
so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?
[QUOTE=Bully;1003337]I train in the pigeon toe stance, as does most others.
I fight in a fighting stance, one foot forward, toes slightly turned in (if I remember). I am forward facing, shoulders square. It does go to **** sometimes due to me not being very good. But I would never ever fight in the training stance.
Weird thread.[/QUOTE]
we fight from side stances…lead legs are for a committed line of entry…iow side stances allow shifting pivoting any direction …in a face off for positions…
I was taught to use a lead leg to start before…doesnt work for tactical movement, back and forth…once your committed, we use lead leg or cutting, side entry, like dummy attack movement…lead legs enter from the sides…cutting attacking lines move left to right or vv across the face while cycling attack/defensive actions..in rotation…
our objective isnt to go into the guys strengths…central to both his arms wailing in on us…but for a commitment from them to a side…usually one sided fighters present one leading weaker side…telegraphing attacks also allows us to intuitively maneuver for counters…we try to turn the opponent or cut off their ability to face us.
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;1003295]Thanks Matix. You took the words right out of my mouth.[/QUOTE]No problem Phil. It’s amazing how many people think WC people fight this way. Too much misinformation out there.
[QUOTE=Frost;1003338]so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?[/QUOTE]It’s a beginner’s training stance. What some people refer to as training wheels. Like a child, a beginner must learn to stand, then to walk and finally to run. Some folks I’ve seen on the internet have not learned to walk and yet they want to race (fight).
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1003304]I don’t think he means standing like this the whole time, but rather starting like this and shooting into a biu ma on attack. Like LT / EBMAS / Wang Zhi Peng and some many others. [/QUOTE] I just read the question as it is posed. I don’t know what he thinks he means.
Why would anyone even start in a YJKYM stance?
I stand that way starting, and use huen ma, chor ma, side facing stances, and shooting / stepping stances where need be. I move with the opponent simply put.
I start by starting. Never stand on ceremony.
[QUOTE=Frost;1003338]so the question would be why have a training stance that is different from your fighting stance?[/QUOTE]
we train structure in a basic stance, center fo gravity, control …the hips contain the cog. the axis line from head to spine down…for vt fighting this structure is criticala to our effectiveness.
no leaning forwards, backwards…we can shift , pivot along the balance axis line…
for a beginner we adopt the basic stance simply to focus on structure and train the basic actions of the arms.
we ‘face’ so we can use each arm equally , striking /reaching with either at angles to the target. by adopting this square on drill ‘starting’ point, we re-enforce the facing. As we progress we start to attack with forward entry from either arm attacking randomly…countered with angling responses from left or right randomly..making us move /react to entry from either arm in a basic idea, using the force transfer from contact to develop , further the stances cog, stability in contact/clashes , structure…mobility with balanced attacking attributes…
all has to start somewhere..ergo a basic stance …once you learn fighting drills the basic stance is redundant…we never adopt this during face offs or fighting …
without a systematic system of drilling, training…you might use the beginners basic stance as your main idea :D…I have seen some students of other schools adopt a ‘waddling’ ygkym as they come at me :D:D to funny but they do succeed in defeating me by making me laugh hysterically on the floor…I have to tap myself out so it may be a secret way. humour take that , waddle waddle waddle. and that waddle..
true story…a certain mcwc school taught a woman to block a kick to ‘her groin’ by waddling and closing her knees together as the kick came …she asked me to try to kick her as she waddled forwards…I grinned uncontrolably
[QUOTE=Matrix;1003347]I just read the question as it is posed. I don’t know what he thinks he means.
Why would anyone even start in a YJKYM stance?
I start by starting. Never stand on ceremony.
Bill[/QUOTE]
Well for clarification, we’re not talking deep with 45 deg inward pigeon toed stance here number one. At least I’m not. I’m talking about a more natural stance with toes slightly inward and with knees slightly bent. So more like how you’d be standing normally.
That said, think of it this way…in a situation out in public, if I think an altercation may progress into a fight, I’m not going to get into a side stance with jong sao up and ready. Rather, I’d have a natural stance, perhaps naturally turned 45 deg in relation perhaps not. The hands would be up in a reasonable position of “hey lets calm down”.
Stance in a natural stance–shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start–you’re not going to go back into the “beginning stance” again.
Why would I antagonize the situation (and also make the other person wary) of my martial arts with the fighting stance? Does that make sense?
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1003350]That said, think of it this way…in a situation out in public, if I think an altercation may progress into a fight, I’m not going to get into a side stance with jong sao up and ready. Rather, I’d have a natural stance, perhaps naturally turned 45 deg in relation perhaps not. The hands would be up in a reasonable position of “hey lets calm down”.
Stance in a natural stance–shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start–you’re not going to go back into the “beginning stance” again.
Why would I antagonize the situation (and also make the other person wary) of my martial arts with the fighting stance? Does that make sense? [/QUOTE]Van,
Thanks for clarifying your position. That makes sense to me. I agree. Sounds like we’re on the same page here.
To me, this is very different that what was stated in the original question.
Bill
Added
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1003350]Well for clarification, we’re not talking deep with 45 deg inward pigeon toed stance here number one. At least I’m not. I’m talking about a more natural stance with toes slightly inward and with knees slightly bent. So more like how you’d be standing normally.[/QUOTE] I would stand naturally as well, but would not turn both feet inward. I like to drive off one foot or the other depending on what I need. To do this with maximum speed and power my toes would need more outward to straight, depending on what I feel is required. I could have one foot turned in, but not both. But that would mean that I am already commited to going one way versus the other. It’s a subtle thing, but only my point of view.
[QUOTE=Vankuen;1003350]Well for clarification, we’re not talking deep with 45 deg inward pigeon toed stance here number one. At least I’m not. I’m talking about a more natural stance with toes slightly inward and with knees slightly bent. So more like how you’d be standing normally.
That said, think of it this way…in a situation out in public, if I think an altercation may progress into a fight, I’m not going to get into a side stance with jong sao up and ready. Rather, I’d have a natural stance, perhaps naturally turned 45 deg in relation perhaps not. The hands would be up in a reasonable position of “hey lets calm down”.
Stance in a natural stance–shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start–you’re not going to go back into the “beginning stance” again.
Why would I antagonize the situation (and also make the other person wary) of my martial arts with the fighting stance? Does that make sense?
Stance in a natural stance–shoot in, cut, turn, dissolve as necessary. Obviously once things start–you’re not going to go back into the “beginning stance” again.[/QUOTE]
