Whats your way of punching?

[dippedappe]

"hmm, a student telling the instructor he was wrong.

 

correction.

 

a NEW student telling the instructor he was wrong."

 

Your right ofcause, but at some points, you just have to draw the line.

 

To be a little more precise. He said that his way was the bedst, and that if you stop your punch right before you hurt your arm, you wont penetrate and will only hit the surfes. That was where I corrected him.

 

"he said that you should just throw your Punch without using your shoulders, hips or foots"

 

"this is almost true.

 

the punching motion in wing chun does not rely on the body moving at the same time (kinda... something i'd need to show you in person).

 

it relies on the structure of the body to be correct.

 

the wing chun punch DOES use the shoulder, and hip and foot.

 

in fact it uses, in asending order;

 

ankle, knee, hip, shoulder, elbow and wrist.

 

BUT

 

like i said, the punch is 'performed' independently of the body structure

 

(which is trained to be always 'on': hence independent of the punch)

 

when you combine the punching mechanics with footwork, turning/torquing is added to the mix."

 

Yeah, that sounds more correct. But he didnt do that. He didnt use the body at all. And he through his arm out all the way when punching. I would like to know if thats also the way you guys do it?

 

"except that you said it was wing tsun.

 

as in leung ting/keith kernspecht's organisation.

 

they're not the most respected of wing chun guys out there."

 

I have read in the newspapers that its VERY brutal.

[Drunken Monkey]

i have never extended my punches fully ever.

 

the only time i did, i put my arm out of action for about two weeks.

 

AND

 

the punch is driven by the elbow movement.

 

think piston.

 

and you can't really see if he has body structure behind the punch or not.

 

that's something you can only feel.

 

from the open goat stance, if structure is correct, you won't be able to push him over.

 

it's kinda like a trick but it shows you how to redirect/manipulate forces applied in that direction.

 

i.e something going against the punch.

 

it's that manipulation that lends the wing chun punch to having a 'lifting' effect (or 'dropping' depending on the situation).

 

wing chun is brutal.

 

at least it's intention is to be.

 

at least at it's most extreme it is brutal)

 

at the end of the day, it is something that aims to knock a guy down and make sure he stays down.

 

then again, most martial arts out that have at their core, the same intentions.

[dippedappe]

"think piston."

 

???

 

"and you can't really see if he has body structure behind the punch or not.

 

that's something you can only feel."

 

Okay. But thats not what he told me, and he literally said that I should only punch with my arm completely streched without the body or anything.

 

"from the open goat stance, if structure is correct, you won't be able to push him over.

 

it's kinda like a trick but it shows you how to redirect/manipulate forces applied in that direction.

 

i.e something going against the punch.

 

it's that manipulation that lends the wing chun punch to having a 'lifting' effect (or 'dropping' depending on the situation)."

 

Thats cool. I believe I have read that in a wing chun book by yip mans son. and I saw it in "the big boss". It looked great.

 

"wing chun is brutal.

 

at least it's intention is to be.

 

at least at it's most extreme it is brutal)

 

at the end of the day, it is something that aims to knock a guy down and make sure he stays down."

 

I always thought that it was very relaxing. or so I have been told.

 

"then again, most martial arts out that have at their core, the same intentions."

 

well, yes I suppose.

[Hudson]

LOL Think Piston

 

I don't know how to explain this, but what it means is lets say you have your arm at a 90 degree angle bend, and you want to move your fist straight forward. You must drive from your elbow, pushing it up which will force the fist out. The opposite of this is moving the forearm around, which is bad, no power from this. At least thats what I got from it.

 

You might have learned the same things for thrust kicks both side and front, I know we use that theory in our style.

[dippedappe]

 

No matter.

 

Maybe I will know what you mean after a little while.

 

I think its like a puzzle box(Youl never know wha...). You will know how to open it, when you are ready for it.

[Drunken Monkey]

whoa....

 

did you say that you 'learnt' poon sau from a book?

 

[dippedappe]

whoa....

 

did you say that you 'learnt' poon sau from a book?

 

 

 

Yeah I did.

 

Ofcause I didnt learn it the right way, but since some of the principles of Wing Chun also is in Shaolin. I figured that I could use it anyway(heck, I have already learned the first section of Siu Lim Tao. The first by the Wing Tsun guy, the rest from a book). By that I mean that I know how to parrie and grap and then hit, which its all about in the end. Or atleast I think it is. My point is that if you can get something out of reading a book or see a movie, so much better.

[Drunken Monkey]

.....there aren't many things in wing chun that exist in clasical shaolin.

 

anyway.

 

i'm gonna let this drop now.

 

the guys and gals here know my opinion on people who think they can learn wing chun from a book.

[dippedappe]

Not to argue or anything. But what is the really big difference betwine wing chun and classical gung fu? Theres chi sao in both(well atleast a little). Theres presurepoints in both. blocks, parries, grapes, stances(same stance I mite add), fists, feets, internal power, animal movements(although you concentrate more on crane). The only really gab I see is the philosophy. Am I wrong?

[Drunken Monkey]

what can i say.

 

i'm an easy monkey to fish for.....

 

"Theres chi sao in both(well at least a little)"

 

really?

 

where?

 

what style?

 

"blocks, parries, grapes, stances(same stance I mite add), fists, feets, internal power, animal movements"

 

if you're saying this then either you don't know classical kung fu styles or you don't know wing chun.

 

granted some things like 'blocks' and parries look similar but they way they are done are not the same.

 

here's a little challenge;

 

try to find the three seeds of wing chun in ANY other chinese kung fu style.

 

same stance?

 

again, show me what other chinese style uses the goat stance as the main training stance.

 

punch?

 

classical styles tend to not punch like wing chun.

 

the ones that do tend to be from the same period and even then i can only think of two others off the top of my head.

 

kicks?

 

again, the kicking in wing chun is very idiosyncratic to wing chun (in relation to chinese styles).

 

again, the other styles that have similar methods/reasons for their use are of the same period and again, only two other styles come to mind.

 

internal power?

 

gonna ignore this cos it opens a very big can of very rotten and mushy worms.

 

animal movements?

 

wing chun does not concerntrate on crane movements.

 

wing chun concerntrates on hand movements.

 

it is kinda based PARTLY on old crane essence but that's as far as it goes.

 

more than anything it is about use of structure.

 

only difference being philosphy?

 

if anything, that's one thing that is the same with other chinese styles.

 

so the answer to your question

 

are you wrong?

 

yes.

 

this is what happens when you copy things you see from books.

 

you see pictures of things that look the same but you don't see how they are actually different.

 

just in case you missed it.

 

i asked you where do you see similarities.

 

don't just give general things like 'punch'.

 

tell me where you see a similar punch being done.

 

same for the kicks and stances and everything else you mentioned.

 

and what are you actually training in again?