your striking methods?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

After recent discussions about fook sau and a thread I saw by Robert Chu relating to CLF’s hands leading their body and Hung Ga’s body leading their hands, I wanted to know what you guys thought of your wing chun and what is optimum striking for you.

For me, personally, I think that my body leads my hands, the majority of the time.

For example; a simple punch with no resistance would be done by my whole body stepping through the opponent. Contact would be made ideally with the elbow still at a fists distance from my body, then the arm would come forward… ordinarily driven by the hip.

Is this standard in wing chun? Am I right in believing this is body leading hands – I believe it is – but am willing to stand corrected…

And I don’t care for anyone to tell me that it isn’t ‘correct’ or ‘right’ for wing chun… this is the way I have been taught, by two entirely separate, but equally well respected lineages and this way works for me. No; not against world champions – but it does work against some decent Thai fighters and sparring with pals and amateur boxers too. It works enough that I trust my methods when it comes to it though.

Just a friendly discussion for everyone :eek:

2

I just hit the way I want to hit and let the mechanics for optimum speed, power, force, etc develop from that.

Most things work themselves this way, I find. To intellectualize this process takes away from its development, IMO. Therefore, I’m unable to comment specifically. My body moves as a unit BUT it can’t all move at the same time or else I’d be a robot.

Best,
CTK

3

WCK kuen kuit: Sen Dai Sao, Sao Dai Sen - The Body lead the hands, the hands lead the body.

The “rub” is in “knowing” when.

4

[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1042286]After recent discussions about fook sau and a thread I saw by Robert Chu relating to CLF’s hands leading their body and Hung Ga’s body leading their hands, I wanted to know what you guys thought of your wing chun and what is optimum striking for you.

For me, personally, I think that my body leads my hands, the majority of the time.

For example; a simple punch with no resistance would be done by my whole body stepping through the opponent. Contact would be made ideally with the elbow still at a fists distance from my body, then the arm would come forward… ordinarily driven by the hip.

Is this standard in wing chun? Am I right in believing this is body leading hands – I believe it is – but am willing to stand corrected…

And I don’t care for anyone to tell me that it isn’t ‘correct’ or ‘right’ for wing chun… this is the way I have been taught, by two entirely separate, but equally well respected lineages and this way works for me. No; not against world champions – but it does work against some decent Thai fighters and sparring with pals and amateur boxers too. It works enough that I trust my methods when it comes to it though.

Just a friendly discussion for everyone :eek:[/QUOTE]

I will try tell you the way I was taught, that is if I understand your question correctly.

I was taught that the hand leads the body. The hand “takes off” to strike or to block, the legs and the body follow, BUT they arrive at the destination, at the same time! That concept was drilled into me, time and again, and I mean time and again, by my sifu, until I got it!

Actually, if I remember correctly, the eyes (the head?) starts the process.

5

With the entire body like a loaded high tensile, high elasticity modulus steel spring. Which means the smallest movement/compression and generating/absorbing the highest amount of force. It’s a whole body thing.

The power is not “pushed” into the opponent but “released” into the opponent.

6

I dont like to think of either leading.

everything should be coordinated.

The waist controls and determines everything, from facing to motility to punching.

7

[QUOTE=shawchemical;1042517]I dont like to think of either leading.

everything should be coordinated…
[/QUOTE]

Coordination is given. In my lineage, the hand leads, the legs/body follow, but arrive at the same time, at impact point. So, one needs coordination for that.:slight_smile:

8

Yo!

Just like there is an general misunderstanding of the difference between alignment and structure. I think there is a misunderstanding about the Hand - Body/ Body - Hand thing.
It has less to do with punch mechanics and more about dynamic application of structure and force.

9

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1042310]WCK kuen kuit: Sen Dai Sao, Sao Dai Sen - The Body lead the hands, the hands lead the body.

The “rub” is in “knowing” when.[/QUOTE]

Nice,

In HFY our Kuen Kuit goes: Yi Sau Dai Gerk / Yi Gerk Dai Sao (Hands follow feet/ feet follow hands)

Knowing when depends upon Gee Ng Kiu, or the energy on the bridge.

10

[QUOTE=duende;1042805]Nice,

In HFY our Kuen Kuit goes: Yi Sau Dai Gerk / Yi Gerk Dai Sao (Hands follow feet/ feet follow hands)

Knowing when depends upon Gee Ng Kiu, or the energy on the bridge.[/QUOTE]

good point, well made…

i step back a lot in wing chun, or off at an angle - im going to get flamed for that comment but i dont care!

its not something that was taught to me per say but its something that developed from sparring guys inside and outside training

our training is almost exclusively wing chun v. wing chun and as such you sometimes need a reality check.

my instructior once said something that made perfect sense to me, personally… if your arms are crossed/gum’ed? by your opponent many wck guys see this as a fight ender. it can be i guess if you stay there - no hands to protect yourself will get you ktfo…

although… you could always… da dada da daaaa… STEP BACK :eek:

then re-engage.

ties in with the quote above - too much energy in the bridges (i.e. you are overcome) then act accordingly…

if i engage someone and my bridges are taken and destroyed/penetrated then i dis-engage and come right back in. we DONT trade hits.

the right wck guys can hit. HARD. and tbh i dont want to be the guy that they hit :o

it also f*cks with a lot of wck’s guys timing, as they are used to being pressed forward at all times

11

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1042310]WCK kuen kuit: Sen Dai Sao, Sao Dai Sen - The Body lead the hands, the hands lead the body.

The “rub” is in “knowing” when.[/QUOTE]

Excellent post, it is impossible to classify one system as doing “only” one thing.

In any system of martial art, say delivering a punch.

In CLF, we have strikes where the hand leads the body, and strikes where the body leads the hand.

I would even go as far as to say it is erroneous to say that something either has the hands or body leading the other.

We must look at the human body as one unit and everything must work in cohesion, a complete frame or structure, everything function as parts of a single unit.

12

[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1042286]After recent discussions about fook sau and a thread I saw by Robert Chu relating to CLFs hands leading their body and Hung Gas body leading their hands, I wanted to know what you guys thought of your wing chun and what is optimum striking for you.

For me, personally, I think that my body leads my hands, the majority of the time.

For example; a simple punch with no resistance would be done by my whole body stepping through the opponent. Contact would be made ideally with the elbow still at a fists distance from my body, then the arm would come forward… ordinarily driven by the hip.

Is this standard in wing chun? Am I right in believing this is body leading hands I believe it is but am willing to stand corrected…[/QUOTE]

I wouldn’t dare say that there are ANY standards in Wing Chun these days! :D:eek: But your methods seem to make sense to me.

The hand before leg/body etc etc really is a mobility, and even heigung, theory and originates from within weaponry training as far as I know. But it isn’t explained how I’ve seen here, but that’s standards for ya eh!?

For me personally, striking requires three things; speed, accuracy and power. Then it’s about your determination and courage to actually MOVE IN! Coming from a traditionally trained Sifu, I have always been a great advocate of using the 5 elements to train power. In layman terms, we call these five arrivals. This relates directly to your comment about the whole body being behind a strike. Moving as one unit :wink:

Every strike will have its own power signature, depending on many varied points! But it is generally understood that a strike using little or no effort in one of the arrivals is a weak strike. Max effort in all five arrivals is a most powerful strike. :smiley:

Hope this helps the discussion…

13

[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1042950]
i step back a lot in wing chun, or off at an angle - im going to get flamed for that comment but i dont care!

its not something that was taught to me per say but its something that developed from sparring guys inside and outside training
[/QUOTE]

Sparring is absolutely necessary to develop WCK skill (fighting skill with WCK), BUT – and here’s the HUGE but – it is a waste of time if you are not using WCK’s method and movement/actions in your sparring. Because we only get good doing what we practice doing.

Backing up, moving away from, dodging, etc. are all ALMOST always the signs of poor, low level WCK. Why? Because you can’t control your opponent by moving away from him, by not engaging, etc. Opening range, particularly once you have engaged is even worse – since you move out of WCK operative range (our tools only work in the phone booth, so why move out of the booth?) and into their operative range.

our training is almost exclusively wing chun v. wing chun and as such you sometimes need a reality check.

my instructior once said something that made perfect sense to me, personally… if your arms are crossed/gum’ed? by your opponent many wck guys see this as a fight ender. it can be i guess if you stay there - no hands to protect yourself will get you ktfo…

It’s not a “fight ender”, and WCK provides tools to deal with it. You don’t want to move away as he can then completely destroy your body structure and get even more control, you open up his “offensive space”. i.e., give him room to punch, etc. You want to instead move into him, to crowd him, to smother him, etc.

although… you could always… da dada da daaaa… STEP BACK :eek:

then re-engage.

You won’t be able to against anyone who knows what they are doing.

ties in with the quote above - too much energy in the bridges (i.e. you are overcome) then act accordingly…

if i engage someone and my bridges are taken and destroyed/penetrated then i dis-engage and come right back in. we DONT trade hits.

Of course you don’t want to trade, but trying to move away is only going to make things worse.

14

I strive for body unity as one unit though at times in a heavy sparring session I may catch myself reaching a little bit at times which is just lack of foot work/ stepping up and the want to land the strike too much…though I am working on improving this.

15

Thanks guys,

Although in regards to movement, I must say that I’m in agreement with Terence.

The only time we step back is to create space for our structure rather than be overwhelmed by oncoming energy on the bridge. With a strong emphasis on maintaining proper range. In our energy understandings, this would a form of nuetralizing the energy or what we call FA.

It is VERY different than just simply stepping back or “running away” from the force. Which can be very easily traced by an opponent and still give you trouble.

Instead we are taught to engage, and take our medicine straight away and not try to prolong the attack, but instead intercept and cut it off.

Nice discussion.

16

[QUOTE=duende;1043420]Thanks guys,

Although in regards to movement, I must say that I’m in agreement with Terence.

The only time we step back is to create space for our structure rather than be overwhelmed by oncoming energy on the bridge. With a strong emphasis on maintaining proper range. In our energy understandings, this would a form of nuetralizing the energy or what we call FA.

It is VERY different than just simply stepping back or “running away” from the force. Which can be very easily traced by an opponent and still give you trouble.

Instead we are taught to engage, and take our medicine straight away and not try to prolong the attack, but instead intercept and cut it off.

Nice discussion.[/QUOTE]

Not moving back is not just a Wing Chun concept, but a kung fu one, with a few possible exceptions, of course.

Keep this concept in mind when you see the next so called “kung fu” man fight in a contact competition…

17

[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1043457]Not moving back is not just a Wing Chun concept, but a kung fu one, with a few possible exceptions, of course.

Keep this concept in mind when you see the next so called “kung fu” man fight in a contact competition…[/QUOTE]

i promised myself I’d not respond to you again, but really its not just a kung fu concept its a principle of fighting full stop you never want to move backwards and not in a straight line if you can help it.

But like all principles its not ingrained in law and when under pressure you sometimes fail and retreat away from the heat of battle.

Perhaps you could link to a few fights which you consider good kung fu men in action?

18

[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1043457]Not moving back is not just a Wing Chun concept, but a kung fu one, with a few possible exceptions, of course.

Keep this concept in mind when you see the next so called “kung fu” man fight in a contact competition…[/QUOTE]

i disagree, your instructor stepped back a lot when i met him. not a problem or a bad point. it just ‘is’.

[QUOTE=Frost;1043485]i promised myself I’d not respond to you again, but really its not just a kung fu concept its a principle of fighting full stop you never want to move backwards and not in a straight line if you can help it.

But like all principles its not ingrained in law and when under pressure you sometimes fail and retreat away from the heat of battle.

Perhaps you could link to a few fights which you consider good kung fu men in action?[/QUOTE]

Chuck liddel never did too badly from stepping back…

its a certain skill set, granted, but its crtainly l;egitimate…

think of a boxers jab. he flies in with it then springs back.

19

[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1043490]
Chuck liddel never did too badly from stepping back…

its a certain skill set, granted, but its crtainly l;egitimate…

think of a boxers jab. he flies in with it then springs back.[/QUOTE]

Of course boxers, kickboxers, etc. using stepping in and out all the time – that’s not the point. The point is that this is not WCK’s method, it is a different method.

WCK’s approach is to control the opponent while striking him. So, you need to look at everything in THAT context. Ask yourself: is what I am doing providing greater control over my opponent (or reducing my control) – and that includes lessening the opponent’s control. Does moving away, backing up, etc. provide more control? No. Generally, it reduces our ability to control our opponent and makes it easier for our opponent to control us. When we move away we can’t use body leverage against our opponent.

20

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1043505]Of course boxers, kickboxers, etc. using stepping in and out all the time – that’s not the point. The point is that this is not WCK’s method, it is a different method.

WCK’s approach is to control the opponent while striking him. So, you need to look at everything in THAT context. Ask yourself: is what I am doing providing greater control over my opponent (or reducing my control) – and that includes lessening the opponent’s control. Does moving away, backing up, etc. provide more control? No. Generally, it reduces our ability to control our opponent and makes it easier for our opponent to control us. When we move away we can’t use body leverage against our opponent.[/QUOTE]

I think everyone is forgetting one simple thing, and just entertain me here for a moment:

Yim Wing Chun was a woman. Stepping back is not the same as retreating, as retreating implies that you have a strategy. Retreating draws the opponent into your trap. This is fundamental to Wing Chun imho especially when dealing with a stronger and maybe more capable opponent.

So, for once T I disagree this week! :smiley: Does moving away, backing up (retreating) provide more control? YES.