|
Post by Seeker on Dec 8, 2004 13:37:39 GMT -5
Hi guys:
I would like to use this section to discuss Wing Chun-specific principles and techniques.
My family branch teaches that Wing Chun is a system of principles, NOT techniques. We learn the underlying principles, which are based on essentially unalterable rules of physics as they apply to combat. ANY technique that is applied must reflect one or more principles, otherwise it is an empty technique.
Their are a host of principles in Wing Chun, but there are five fundamental principles which must all be followed if one's Wing Chun is to be effective:
1) Centerline (guarding yours, taking theirs) 2) Grounding 3) Relaxation 4) Economy of Motion (this includes simultaneous attack/defense) 5) Forward Pressure
There are other intermediate and advanced principles which are fascinating to explore, but which I will save for another time and place. The five principles listed above are sometimes disappointingly simple, and really self-evident. But it is my contention that if one is fighting another trained fighter, and one's appication is lacking even one of the principles above, luck will be the only thing that keeps you from being pummeled. The techniques themselves are inconsequential without all these principles being followed.
Are there other Wing Chuners out there who have a different take on the principle thing? Different principles? I would appreciate all comment by any member, Wing Chun or not.
|
|
|
Post by essence on Dec 8, 2004 21:34:08 GMT -5
Good day Seeker.
Drawing from the little Wing Chun that I know, the most important point would be the economy of motion. Many Wing Chun people that I have had contact with also mentioned the footwork being one of the important principles.
My friend, Wing Chun practitioner under Sifu Ian in Australia, has this way of stepping which takes him sideways while approaching you. However, he mistakenly assumed that it is unique to Wing Chun and applied it to me not knowing that this was the way I was taught to move my Sei Ping Ma in NCK which resulted in a fist in front of his nose.
On hindsight, it was only my reflexes and instinct on watching him move that saved me as he came in with the Wing Chun guard and I rushed him while he was in transition which prompted him to kick with the leg in the air that I anticipated. One of the things I would love to know is, is this the footwork of Wing Chun? To move to the side before moving in? I have seen many Wing Chun demos which stress centreline domination that does not do this.
Another topic of Wing Chun which has been bothering me is that of grounding. According to the little that I know of Wing Chun, the basic stance is the Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma. I do not argue the effective grounding offered by this stance. What has been bothering me is that one of the Wing Chun sifu that I visited here has failed to realise what the Sei Ping Ma offers in terms of grounding, even making fun of the stance. What other methods of grounding is offered by Wing Chun?
Also, the topic of forward pressure. The same Wing Chun sifu made his students do a drill in which they use their toes to drag them forward. Is this normal in Wing Chun? They were literally worming forward with their toes while their feet stayed on the ground.
I apologise in advance if I have sounded blunt and have offended, I do not mean it. Just want to further my knowledge of the fighting arts and do not mean to be offensive.
Warmest regards, Tze Hou
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 9, 2004 11:58:04 GMT -5
Hello Tze Hou: I recall raging debates among my kung fu brothers regarding which principle is the most important. No one ever convincingly made a case for any one being more important than another. The resolution we came up with is that if you're missing even one of those five critical principles in the entire package of your application, then you will be lucky to be effective. If your action holds to all these principles, then it will probably work against the opponent. To us, it is an "all or nothing" package of principles.
The sideways movement is an interesting topic. My system actually prefers a more 45 degree angle in this stepping. We stress this a lot. To step perpendicular to an oncoming opponent allows too much space for the opponent to react and change course. By moving at a 45 Degree angle, in effect flanking the opponent, it simultaneously bridges the gap AND allows us to attack the opponents centerline from the weak side. This raises a critical distinction in the meaning of "Centerline." Most assume that to attack the opponents centerline means to attack them head on. Not true! The centerline is available from any angle, and in fact is better attacked from what we call the "weak side" which is the outside or even inside flank of the opponent. Ling's White Crane calls this "Fourth Door" fighting. I view them as the same principle. Of course, if the back of the opponent is available, this makes an easy task of attacking the centerline as well, but it also puts the opponent in a better position of stability and mobility should he attempt to escape, whereas the "Weak Side" or "Fourth Door" position puts him in a very unbalanced position to be attacked from. So to sum up my Wing Chun's approach, we very rarely step to 90 degrees (sideways) upon being attacked.
On the topic of grounding: we only use the Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma (small horse) stance for training. I cannot stress this point strongly enough. This is the stance seen in our first form, Sil Lum Tao. There are several highly successful commercial Wing Chun families which teach this as a fighting stance to their students and it drives me crazy! To fight in this stance violates our principle of Centerline, which means that we protect and are in control of our own centerline at all times. This means that we can move and make our centerline less available to the opponent (we call this "facing" the centerline). We also use the Sei Ping Ma (regular horse) stance for training. When i say training i mean we use the Sei Ping Ma primarily to train strength, endurance and mental fortitude. The training aspects of Yee Gee Kim Leung Ma are more complicated, but this stance also trains strength and helps the student find his ground. I will make a separate post regarding the stance which we use most for actual fighting.
I will also save for another post in this thread the thing you bring up about the use of toes to drag the feet forward. Not to offend anyone out there, or the school where you saw this, but this does not sound like anything I have seen in the Yip Man curriculum and i am highly sceptical of it.
Your observations of Wing Chun are interesting! I would like to hear more of what you have seen. Thank you Tze Hou!
|
|
|
Post by essence on Dec 10, 2004 8:49:59 GMT -5
Good day Seeker.
Thank you for holding my views in such high regards. I feel very honoured.
To further this discussion, I find, as you say, many schools teaching the Kim Yeung Ma as the fighting stance and many fighters adopt the pigeon toe stance to fight. I do not question the ability to ground through this stance, as we do this in Hung Gar as well, but I do question the mobility of this stance. I am very interested to hear your opinions regarding the fighting stances which you teach.
Also another interesting point is that the Sei Ping Ma is used in your curriculum for strength training. Not meaning to be rude or offensive, and I prefer to leave the Sifu unnamed, as I have posted in another thread on this forum, a particular Wing Chun Sifu made fun of this stance, saying "It is impossible to fight from this stance" accompanied with an awkward squatting position which does not resemble anything of a Sei Ping Ma, something which I find extremely insulting and short-sighted.
Regarding fighting in the 4th door, I totally agree with your views, as attacking the 4th door provides relative safety due to the difficulty in launching a counterattack. Again, I believe GM William Cheung stresses the importance of moving to the "outside" of the opponent before attacking, something which I find is important as well. My Hung Gar Sifu taught me to move myself or block in order to be "outside" the opponent, the reason being attacking while "inside" the opponent opens yourself up to being attacked as well. The very same Wing Chun Sifu threw this concept out of the window, saying it goes against the concept of economy of motion. What are your views on this?
The method of using the toes to inch forward was introduced to me by the same Wing Chun Sifu as well. He made his students inch their way around the room, issuing punches while inching. I am very new to this method, and thus, not able to see if it is effective in anyway. However, I have come across discussions regarding pivoting either on the ball or heel (which I believe are different for the different Wing Chun brances)? What are your views on this again?
Another thing which I need you to clarify for me is does Wing Chun teach the use of the hips/waist for generating power? In what I have seen, there are some Wing Chun practitioners who use the hips/waist and some who don't. The Wing Chun Sifu who I paid a visit to said the waist plays no part in the generation of power but rather, power comes from the feet. I can understand this concept, but my Hung Gar teaches power from feet, through waist and then to bridge. Also, I am a strong believer of Bruce Lee's saying "Power is found in the hips". What are your views on this topic?
One taboo topic which I hope you will be able to shed some light on for me is the fabled One Inch Punch. I know inch power is found within many Southern arts, but it is the Wing Chun One Inch Punch which is famous and known world-wide. Many people say that if you draw back, even another inch or two, that is cheating, but in my opinion, to be able to deliver a crushing blow from 3 inches is still highly effective. What are your thoughts on this? My friend has discussed this a little with me, and according to him, if you drop your back leg in order to generate the power, then it is not pure (completely in his words). Can you explain this a little more to me?
Thank you in advance.
Warmest regards, Tze Hou
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 11, 2004 18:55:14 GMT -5
Tze Hou:
I have broken down some points I saw in your post as:
Stance/mobility Fourth Door (relates to my Centerline interpretation) outside AND inside Inching forward (the fabled Centipede style kung fu?!) Power generation Inch punch
As I have put a great deal of thought into each of these areas (with the exception of Centipede Kung-Fu!), I will post my comments separately in stages.
Thanks
Chas
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 11, 2004 18:58:31 GMT -5
Stances/Mobility The Kim Yeung Ma (small horse), modified with toes turned in more, is our training stance, although, without going into tedious depth, it also trains the practitioner for his fighting stance in that it provides the practitioner with a feel of Òlocking inÓ the lower portion of the body. In relationship to an opponent, however, the classic small horse training stance, if used without shifting to an angle (either side), leaves your centerline exposed, even if guarded by wu sao. The lower body is particularly vulnerable to kicking attacks to the groin in this position. So, in our branch of Wing Chun you see two main stances used in fighting.
The first is what I call (this is just my term for it) Forward Horse stance. This is also called Forward Fighting Stance by some, and it is very close to one of Bruce LeeÕs stances discussed in the Tao of JKD, except that we teach to keep both heels on the ground. While facing an opponent, one foot is fore and one rear. The front toe is angled in slightly, the rear toe is angled in the same direction. (feet are actually parallel to each other) The front knee is also angled in slightly, protecting the groin against a front snap kick. The hips face forward and are tucked to allow kicks (or movement) to be launched faster. This stance has a rear/front weight distribution of anywhere from 60/40 to 80/20, depending on the individual and/or school.
The second stance is what I call the Shifted Horse stance (again, just MY term). Facing the opponent straight on in a training horse stance, shift 45 degrees to either side, including hips and shoulders, yet keeping your head facing the opponent. This serves to shield frontal access to your centerline by the opponent. One usually has one hand as upper gate Wu Sao and the other in lower gate Wu Sao. Weight distribution is 50/50 or can also weight more towards one leg or another, depending on preference. You will notice that this is structurally almost the same as Forward Horse, in that it effectively creates a forward and rear foot. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these stances, which I can go into if youÕd like later.
Mobility. IÕm curious regarding your comment on mobility out of the Kim Yeung Ma stance Ð although we do not use this stance to fight, I find that it is easy from which to move?
I feel that true Wing Chun mobility/footwork/kicking is widely misunderstood and poorly practiced by most schools. This has led many to falsely conclude that Wing Chun is more (or all!) about hand work, and that Wing Chun lacks an effective system of moving and delivering kicks. Not so! Its just that there are very few Wing Chuners out there who are doing it right! I know that Duncan Leung, the head of my Wing Chun family, is well-known for his extremely effective footwork and kicks. This portion of the Wing Chun curriculum is often saved for more advanced students, as it requires a relatively sophisticated understanding of combat principles, as well as more lower body strength and endurance. For this reason, many of the senior students who leave their sifus to start their own schools have not been fully trained in this aspect of Wing Chun. This is just my own theory.
As I said, we use the deep horse stance only to train. I find that having new students hold this stance for something longer than 5 or 10 minutes at a time is a good litmus test to see if theyÕve got what it takes to be in the school. My personal rule of thumb for stances is the wider and deeper the stance, the more stable it is, but the less conducive to rapid movement as well. I think that every fighter finds the Òsweet spotÓ stance that fits their personal physique and style the best.
This is all just my humble opinion Ð I welcome your comments. I will follow with more posts on the other subjects.
Thanks Chas
|
|
|
Post by essence on Dec 11, 2004 20:43:50 GMT -5
Good day Chas.
Thank you for the very informative reply. What I actually meant was that, advancing keeping the pigeon-toed form in the Kim Yeung Ma would be less mobile than say if the person were to assume a natural stance? Of course, I could be very wrong here, and I apologise if I am.
With regards to your forward fighting stance, I believe we do something similar. In Sei Ping Ma, when we turn to the side into a forward stance, we keep the front foot still, only turning the back foot, ending up with the front leg blocking the groin region to the front. We try to keep our feet forming a 90 degree angle, with the front foot pointing across the body and the rear foot pointing in front.However, many people will "pop" their hips, sort of like pushing the hip too far out the side when trying this stance for the first few times.
With regards to kicking, I have heard that Wing Chun only teaches one true kick, which is a heel to the chin at extremely close distance, meaning, the leg goes straight up, is this true?
Once again, thank you so much for your sharing with me your knowledge.
Gratefully, Tze Hou
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 11, 2004 20:53:34 GMT -5
Addendum on stances To help describe the Forward Horse stance, I should add that the front foot is not aligned with the rear. In other words, if the opponent were to draw a straight line from them, past you, the line would pass your front footÕs toes, then your rear foots heel. Just thought this was worth elaboration. Without this spacing, the stance would be very laterally unstable. thanks chas
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 11, 2004 21:03:06 GMT -5
Good day Chas. Thank you for the very informative reply. What I actually meant was that, advancing keeping the pigeon-toed form in the Kim Yeung Ma would be less mobile than say if the person were to assume a natural stance? Of course, I could be very wrong here, and I apologise if I am. With regards to your forward fighting stance, I believe we do something similar. In Sei Ping Ma, when we turn to the side into a forward stance, we keep the front foot still, only turning the back foot, ending up with the front leg blocking the groin region to the front. We try to keep our feet forming a 90 degree angle, with the front foot pointing across the body and the rear foot pointing in front.However, many people will "pop" their hips, sort of like pushing the hip too far out the side when trying this stance for the first few times. With regards to kicking, I have heard that Wing Chun only teaches one true kick, which is a heel to the chin at extremely close distance, meaning, the leg goes straight up, is this true? Once again, thank you so much for your sharing with me your knowledge. Gratefully, Tze Hou Good evening (my time) Tze Hou: thanks for your reply. The short response is that we don't really maintain that same pidgeon-toed position, once we move. In our first form (Sil Lum Tao), this pidgeon-toed thing is a bit exaggerated - again, with the aim of strengthening the legs and helping the student feel how to "lock in" to the stance. I'm curious about your side-turned Sei Ping Ma stance. I just posted an addendum on our Forward Horse and I'm curious if your front foot is actually lined up right in front of your rear. If so, don't you find this laterally unstable? As for the kicking thing, there are eight Wing Chun kicking principles, and eight kicks as well. I would like to talk about our kicks in a later post, but suffice to say that we have far more than one kick, and it never goes as high as the opponent's chin, unless you are trying to look stylish and impress people! Our school never kicks above the groin/waist level. thanks chas
|
|
|
Post by Eric Ling on Dec 11, 2004 21:53:24 GMT -5
Hi Guys, Not sure to post this here or under CKF kicks…<br>Anyway, grabs from a Wing Chun CD showing some Wing Chun kicks. 1. This is a lovely permutation. The defender deflects the punch with his left palm and right elbow attacker face (not shown). Bring attacker’s head down into a rising knee kick and then stomp attacker’s shin/foot. 2. Love this one. Deflect and move to attacker’s 4th door and do a stamping kick/lower kidney palm in one go. 3. Very ordinary hook and kick back technique. This technique is also found in Hung Gar’s Fu-Hoc and many other systems
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 11, 2004 22:14:16 GMT -5
That cd looks like it has some pretty cool stuff - that isnt on the cd's which you had here in the US, is it? thanks chas
|
|
|
Post by essence on Dec 11, 2004 23:18:51 GMT -5
Good day everybody.
Seeker: The straight line goes from rear foot through the front foot's toes. I will try to describe how I do this. In Sei Ping Ma, turn to the left (same on both sides), keeping the left foot stationary. The right foot pivots around into a forward stance, thus, as you said, the line passes through the toes of the left foot.
Regarding the kicks, thank you for clarifying that for me. Indeed, I was under the impression that Wing Chun only had one kick until now as the many Wing Chun exponents whom I have viewed has not demonstrated anything more than a stomp to the knee, with the exception of Bruce Lee.
Eric: Indeed that kick which you said is found in Fu Hoc has been executed on me by my Sifu. The initial scoop alone was enough to throw my balance to floor me, I think the knee break is the icing on the cake.
Warmest regards, Tze Hou
|
|
|
Post by Eric Ling on Dec 12, 2004 0:47:37 GMT -5
That cd looks like it has some pretty cool stuff - that isnt on the cd's which you had here in the US, is it? thanks chas Can't remember now Chas. Got so many in so many different places. I left a bunch of books/CDs with you. Got a mountain in my Singapore's apartment and now a small mountain in Sarawak. Now you understand why I am thinking of storing everything on line? Could access from anywhere with a hook-up. Ah, the beauty of the Internet! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Seeker on Dec 13, 2004 11:26:50 GMT -5
Inching forward (centipede kung fu?)
This is an intriguing drill, this inching forward. Are they imitating inch worms? Are they propelling themselves off the rear foot, and is it really just inches that they move?
There is a drill we do called Short Flat Walk, in which we assume the Forward Horse stance I spoke of earlier. The drill is done with hands on hips (at the beginning stage to help the student keep hips forward) and at later stages, involves punching and kicking. Movement is driven by the rear leg, with the front foot barely raised off the floor. We power forward with the rear foot, advancing about two feet; the front foot reaches its new point, and then the rear foot very rapidly takes its new position in the rear, with a grounding stomp. The drill can be done back and forth across the room, in a line, or you can introduce obstacles that the student needs to angle through. (This will eventually become what we call Shocking Pole drill.) The objective is to teach the student how to move in this basic fighting stance, while grounded and executing techniques. It appears awkward to those uninitiated to Wing Chun mobility, but it really is just a stepping stone to the real stuff.
Regarding the shifting on heels or K1 or ball of the foot Ð my family teaches heel shifting, although I believe that like so many other things, once you learn to effectively shift on the heel, you can break this rule and shift however way you like -- this is called ChasÕ Principle of Rule Breaking in my school! In other words, learn to play by the rules before you break them!
Chas
|
|
|
Post by essence on Dec 14, 2004 11:24:59 GMT -5
Good day Chas.
Hmm, it seems you might have misunderstood me. The toes inching forward was not propelled by the rear foot, which I found funny. It was just that, using the toes to pull the person forward, which led to my questioning the ability to generate power, since movement was limited to the toes and the hips were discounted as a source, where would the power come from? Brute physical strength? I do not think Wing Chun demands that of its practitioners.
Warmest regards, Tze Hou
|
|