Wingchun structure

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

What is the right structure? After 5 years or so, I dont know whats the right way to stand. Very much a beginner I guess. LOL. Anyway, looking for some good people to share with me here.

My HK Wingchun Structure taught to me:

  1. Kim Sut(knees press in) 2. Lok Ma(knees/stance press down) 3. Ting Yu(pelvic tilt forward) 4. Dung Tao(head suspended by a thread) and down to the ground) 5. Mai Jiang(elbows in)
    Toes are in, Kua and pelvic region feels tight though

My Malaysian Wingchun Structure taught to me:
Similar to HK except his is really gripping the floor with his toes(he took off his shoes to show me)- Hence goat gripping stance, Toes are pointing forward
Feel really solid and rooted.

My yiquan stance taught to me:

  1. Lift the upper body up like it is held by a clothes hanger and then relax and sink the torso in alignment
  2. Head Aligned held by a string vertically
  3. Head tilted forward with the nose pointing to the belly button
  4. Neck held such that a small ball rest under the chin
  5. Shoulder Scapular open- back of shoulders is flat across
  6. Arms open as if there are two small balls underneath the arm pits
  7. Back Flat with pelvic tilted forward- Whole body structure resting on each body part in alignment
  8. Kua Soft
  9. Knees Soft
  10. Ankles Soft
  11. Feet as if stepping on sponges, small creatures can swim underneath
  12. Feel the grounding of the feet to the ground, the root penetrate beneath.
  13. Weight is 60 back/40 front covering the yongquan
  14. Feet as if inner edge of foot nailed to the floor

Important points- Head, Neck, Shoulders, Arms, Spine, Pelvis, Kua, Knees, Ankles, Feet(Up to down should rest as one integrated unit)

Sorry long post. So questions: 1. Toes in? 2. Toes out? 3. Toes gripping?
Been reading about Kenneth Chung and his rooting, grounding, structure. Anyone practicing with him? Will the tenseness of the structure impede chi flow? Its the best reference point I have to what I have been taught in HK styles. Any diffs?

Chu Sau Lei structure seems interesting too. Cant seen to get a pic of how it looks though. Toes in/out? Like Yiquan, soft and relaxed?

I tried just moving my toes from Yiquan to HK stance from toes front to toes in, the pelvic, kua region became really tight, and the pelvic alignment was shifted

So tension or softness? Toes in or toes out? Any reference to the classics and meridiens on this?

Silly questions, but I am just learning to stand again.
Thanks:)

2

[QUOTE=Shadow_warrior8;723892]What is the right structure? After 5 years or so, I dont know whats the right way to stand. [/QUOTE]

Seriously?

You’ve spent 5 years studying wing chun, and you’re wondering about the structure of your stance in that fine of detail?

That worries me.

At this point you should be able to figure it out based on

  1. How mobile you are. (You can determine this by checking how many times you get hit when sparring because you couldn’t get out of the way quickly enough)
  2. How stable you are. (How many times you get knocked over / taken down / pushed around when sparring because you didn’t root yourself properly)
    And probably a couple of other things I can’t think of.

If neither of these things is an issue, then neither is your stance.

Is it common for wing chun students to be worried about this stuff after 5 years of training?

3

11 leads me to believe someones smoking some funny stuff lol

toes in to stabilize the hips . stand with one foot forwards slightly bent knees with toes straight and have someone push you from the sides…you will feel unstable at the hip.
turn toe of leading foot in [ turning the hip joint in as thi happens] and hey presto stability when pushed again. dont grip anything , slide like air hockey.
chumkil movements to face the flanking line.
if your being taught to fight in a slt stance , keep looking.
imagine you fighting a bull by counter attacking its charge …or attacking it from the sides avoiding the horns…hmmm sounds like I’m smoking something now lol.
p.s . dont get wrapped up in the slt for chi development , this is crap, its a simple method to develop certain attributes for fighting. elbows in…all this head alignment can get so invovled you lose sight of the fighting aspect…balance, elbows in, movement, attacking…

4

Hi Shadow_warrior8,

If you don’t mind my asking, who’s your HK WC instructor? I ask because the 5 guidelines you listed is exactly the same that my teacher is using (Ken Chung). I mean most Wing Chun have those principles, so it’s nothing new, but I haven’t heard those 5, in that order, used outside of our line. It’d be cool to know that another line is using it.

Anyway, as far as the principles go, in my own opinion (and by no means do I speak for anyone else), after having studied with Ken for about 6 years, they are essentially training wheels. At first you rely on them because you have no frame of reference for what structure really means. They are not the reference by themselves (just because you adhere to the 5 principles doesn’t mean you’ll have structure), but they help the student “find” their structure faster and more consistently. Through the course of training in of the forms, dan chi, lap sau, poon sau, chi sau, dummy, weapons, etc., you develop a “feeling” of what true structure really is. In my experience and from what I observed, if you start off with the five principles you find that feeling faster. If you don’t, you find it slower. From the perspective of our Wing Chun training at least. Once you find that feeling, training in the forms, chi sau, dummy, etc., further refines that sense of structure. You get better and better at it.

The goal is the structure, not the training wheels. (Incidently, structure is dynamic, not static, but that is for another discussion). Once you figure out what it is, you can apply it however you wish, within your abilities, under the correct set of circumstances. You don’t always have to have knees in to have structure, and having your elbows out don’t neccessarily indicate a lack of structure. With the correct teacher and training system, you should be able to find structure with any of the 3 training methods you have listed. (We have other reasons for following the 5 principles, but that’s also for another discussion)

Unfortunately, IMO, you will have very little success finding out what structure is on a message board. It’s not something that can be communicated very well with words. Even with video, people won’t be able to see it unless they know what to look for, and even if they know what to look for, they may not necessarily be able to express it with words. And even if they can express it with words, you (not you you, the generic you) probably won’t get it unless you’re using the same frame of reference.

Regards,
Alan

5

Complicated, isn’t it?

I prefer Miyamoto Musashi’s guidelines: make your everyday stance your fighting stance, and your fighting stance your everyday stance.

Don’t just stand there, do something!

6

[QUOTE=anerlich;723982]Complicated, isn’t it?

I prefer Miyamoto Musashi’s guidelines: make your everyday stance your fighting stance, and your fighting stance your everyday stance.

Don’t just stand there, do something![/QUOTE]

As complicated as all that was, I actually agree with you, or Musashi rather. :slight_smile:

7

It is always a good thing to question your structure. It is easy to get comfortable in a stance that may not be the best one for fighting. Sometimes you need someone to point out what is or isn’t right about your stance. After training in Wing Chun for 3 years, I attended a seminar by Robert Chu. He was my Sifus’ Sifu 18 years ago. Sigung Chu had changed quite a few things in his Wing Chun training. After that seminar, many of us students realized that our structure wasn’t that good and we made some adjustents to our stance and now had emphesized proper alignment and more attention to structure. This not only made us more rooted but helped us generate more power in out techniques.

8

Thanks for all the replies.

Think I could spend 20 years and still wonder if I had the optimum structure or if my wingchun is good enough. I have this crazy belief, there is one mountain higher than another, so yes I will always be trying to improve to get optimum results, the way the wingchun structure was meant to be in the kuen kuit.

SLT not for chi development? I find that when I do reverse breathing I am able to direct the chi to the arms and legs. Normal breathing allows me to do the microscopic orbit. Maybe I am just hallucinating the chi…Too much dragon tiger gate by Donnie Yen…Hahaha…I was taught that SLT the second portion is used to develop jing, and that Yip man did the second section for hours.

My instructors, well one of my sigung learned from Leung Shum. One of my sifu is from the Yip Chun lineage. The stance is the same as listed.

Ftgjr, sounds like a good seminar. Is Roberts structure soft like yiquan? Toes in or out? Gonna save up money for Alan Orr’s videos. Looks good…
Thank heaps Alan, that was good info on Kenneth Chung.
Hope to meet them someday.

The structure I am trying to learn is one that allows maximum power and flow of chi, fajing, powering my chung choi and other moves. Otherwise, my punches are just flicky using the localised muscles, at best weight shifts. I would use the same natural structure moving or lying down enabling the Yi/Ni tao, in Sil Nim Tao.
Relaxed like Yiquan or Clamped down structures. Kua soft? Tenseness or softness.

If you can take pressure from the front, does the structure hold up when you are pushed from the back? I find I can root forward pressure, but from the back, its harder. Maybe my mind/body link is not strong enough.

Can I test my structure by pushing against the wall or pulling? Shouldnt it work the same for structural test?

9

the SLT is the only time we train to do the strange ’ elbow in ’ actions of the system slow to build up the endurance to maintain it longer than the next guy who if not has elbows ‘out’ not good…tan sao , jumsao , etc…all striking pre-position for different gate use…but thats another thread :smiley:

10

In my view, the idea of developing structure and alignment and things of that nature statically or by themselves is an illusion – in a fight, you will not have structure and alignment (or the time for structure and alignment), all you will have is the time to (as Andrew N. put so well) “do something”. So instead of being concerned with structure and aligment, concern yourself with moving, with mechanics, with doing something. No one hits harder than boxers, but they don’t spend loads of time “developing structure”, they practice hitting and moving, and the “structurre and alignment” comes from that – not the other way round. Once again, another example of how the theory guys have it ass-backwards. So forget about structure and alignment, they are merely by-products and will come if you are fighting and training to fight.

Terence

11

“No one hits harder than boxers, but they don’t spend loads of time ‘developing structure’, they practice hitting and moving, and the ‘structure and alignment’ comes from that – not the other way round. Once again, another example of how the theory guys have it ass-backwards. So forget about structure and alignment, they are merely by-products and will come if you are fighting and training to fight.” (Terence)

***UMM…DON’T THINK SO. Boxers definitely do train structure and alignment. For example - to develop a good straight stiff lead…boxers are often trained in the following manner:

  1. Push off the rear leg as you step toward the target.
  2. As the lead foot lands - the lead hip turns inward with a crisp twist at the waist.
  3. Followed by the lead shoulder turning inward with a crisp snap.
  4. Followed by the punch then being released.

That’s the sequence. To be practiced hundreds of times against a heavy bag until it’s done smoothly and seamlessly.

And until it’s done without even having to think anymore about any sequence or structural alignment. The final product is a fast and powerful punch.

12

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;724141]“No one hits harder than boxers, but they don’t spend loads of time ‘developing structure’, they practice hitting and moving, and the ‘structure and alignment’ comes from that – not the other way round. Once again, another example of how the theory guys have it ass-backwards. So forget about structure and alignment, they are merely by-products and will come if you are fighting and training to fight.” (Terence)

***UMM…DON’T THINK SO. Boxers definitely do train structure and alignment. For example - to develop a good straight stiff lead…boxers are often trained in the following manner:

  1. Push off the rear leg as you step toward the target.
  2. As the lead foot lands - the lead hip turns inward with a crisp twist at the waist.
  3. Followed by the lead shoulder turning inward with a crisp snap.
  4. Followed by the punch then being released.

That’s the sequence. To be practiced hundreds of times against a heavy bag until it’s done smoothly and seamlessly.

And until it’s done without even having to think anymore about any sequence or structural alignment. The final product is a fast and powerful punch.[/QUOTE]

Focusing on structure from the perspective you describe is vastly different than standing still, making sure your toes are pointed in the right direction. I understand a total beginner worrying about fine details in static positions, but after 5 years of training, a WC prcticioner should be well beyond that level of training, and focus more on the type of structure training that you’re talking about.

13

oh my god ?

Excuse the cliche…but

Dont think…Feel !

As previously stated… spar and see.
Try each of the elements youve listed and feel which one suits you :rolleyes:

Some good points have been put foward here but in reality your body could be totally different than those offering you advice.

How tall are you ? are you in shape ? do you have any injuries ?

One guy ive sparred with had a very strange natural pose when sparring because he had an abnormally shaped knee from a motorbike accident…

I believe you have to be comfortable first and foremost and perhaps the perfect structure on paper isnt that comfortable for “you” in practice…

Also think about the elements of what your teachers consider ‘good stucture’ perhaps you dont have to adhere to each verbatim but rather take the underlying reason ‘why’ and adapt it for yourself - then its your kung fu and not a carbon copy of someone else’s style that doesnt maximise ‘your’ ability.
Think for yourself question authority :cool:

14

[QUOTE=splinter;724155]Focusing on structure from the perspective you describe is vastly different than standing still, making sure your toes are pointed in the right direction. I understand a total beginner worrying about fine details in static positions, but after 5 years of training, a WC prcticioner should be well beyond that level of training, and focus more on the type of structure training that you’re talking about.[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

The point I was making is that structure and alignment is a by-product of the doing – in Victor’s example, of punching. The feedback comes from the result of the action, the movement, the technique, etc.

And, fwiw, it doesn’t matter how many years a person has spent training – the static posture stuff, the focus on structure and alignment, etc. is poor training at any time.

Terence

15

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;724141]boxers are often trained in the following manner:

  1. Push off the rear leg as you step toward the target.
  2. As the lead foot lands - the lead hip turns inward with a crisp twist at the waist.
  3. Followed by the lead shoulder turning inward with a crisp snap.
  4. Followed by the punch then being released.[/QUOTE]
    Compare that with the structure listed in the original post. Much simpler with drilling and sparring able to begin much sooner. Further refinements come from the drilling and sparring that follow the original structural development.
16

[QUOTE=Knifefighter;724628]Compare that with the structure listed in the original post. Much simpler with drilling and sparring able to begin much sooner. Further refinements come from the drilling and sparring that follow the original structural development.[/QUOTE]

***AGREED.

Training the basic wing chun static structures are important to larn rootedness - but training with movement/sparring is waaaaaay more important…and one’s time management needs to be adjusted accordingly.

17

[QUOTE=Knifefighter;724628]Compare that with the structure listed in the original post. Much simpler with drilling and sparring able to begin much sooner. Further refinements come from the drilling and sparring that follow the original structural development.[/QUOTE]

***AGREED.

Training the basic wing chun static structures are important - but training with movement/sparring is waaaaaay more important…and one’s time management needs to be adjusted accordingly.

18

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;724651]***AGREED.

Training the basic wing chun static structures are important - but training with movement/sparring is waaaaaay more important…and one’s time management needs to be adjusted accordingly.[/QUOTE]

I don’t think training the basic wing chun static structures is important; in fact, I think it is counterproductive in many ways (both physically and mentally). We don’t learn or develop dynamic motor skills (in doing something, some action) by practicing being static. Different motor programs. In my view, we simply accept that this is important or valid because that is the way it was taught to us. If you want to learn how to or develop better skill at throwing a ball, for instance – a dynamic motor activity – it isn’t good training to practice static posture, static alignment, static structure, etc.

Terence

19

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;724674]I don’t think training the basic wing chun static structures is important; in fact, I think it is counterproductive in many ways (both physically and mentally). We don’t learn or develop dynamic motor skills (in doing something, some action) by practicing being static. Different motor programs. In my view, we simply accept that this is important or valid because that is the way it was taught to us. If you want to learn how to or develop better skill at throwing a ball, for instance – a dynamic motor activity – it isn’t good training to practice static posture, static alignment, static structure, etc.

Terence[/QUOTE]

I hear what you’re saying, but I see sil lum tao as a way for a total beginner to get a handle on the basic hand techniques… Focusing on things like keeping your elbows in with a Tan, or sinking energy with a chum. I see it as an isolation exercise. Trying to incorporate footwork of any kind would just confuse someone who hasn’t got a basic level of coordination. So, they might as well stand in a way that benefits them in some capacity.

With that said, there might be faster, more efficient ways of getting someone off the ground in this system, and I’d be open to hearing about it, but this is the only way I’ve seen it done.

20

Wow, what I am reading says many are changing the way wingchun was always taught.
Without proper alignment, structure, how to fajing? With movement or motion, structure collapses or is pointless?
I do some Hsing I, the body structures are maintained in Santi and also in the punches- they move as they punch.
Without static stance training how do you build the necessary muscles in the elbows, knees, legs to produce the signature power of wingchun- inch force. Wthout the structure, I think punches ala karate or boxing are more powerful. The isolation of muscles in chung choi without power of the body, structure, root behind, just doesnt make sense. Whats the power behind your strikes? Muscles and bodyweight? Then it makes wingchun the same as any other art.
How does one root oncoming forces? Do you believe in rooting and grounding energy? Taiji guys are famous for rooting forces into the ground and back up to fajing.
Chinese say “power comes from the ground”, just another chinese saying we can do away with?
I was reading Robert Chu, Alan Orr and Kenneth Chung works. Loving it and re reading it for many more nights to come. Seeing clips of Master Chu Shong Ting and his students roots with his arms on a scale, shows me how much more my structure needs work. Looking forward to meeting these masters, much to learn.
I do disagree, respectfully of course. 5 years or 10 years or 20 years, I will always ask yourself what was the ancestors thinking when they designed the kuen kuit. Afterall, to them, fighting was a matter of survival. A dreamer…I am very much so
Well, you are surprised I ask after 5 years of training, I am surprised people dont ask at all. It leads to modifying, discarding or changing what is not understood enough. Any lack of skill or understanding are a reflection of my inability to learn from my sifus of course. LOL.
Just my 1/2 cents worth. Still learning, always learning.

More crazy thoughts,

Why was wingchun stance taught as toes it? Any meridians or accu points linked besides yong quan? And we change stances in chi sao, the toes in changes, yet we still must remain grounding and rooted, so toes in, toes out doesnt matter except in YJKYM?